HomeMy WebLinkAbout1990-02-06; City Council; 10479; APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION APPROVING SDP 89-02 AND STANDARDS VARIANCE 89-02 (PACIFIC POINT)R w
-5-- APPEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT
PACIFIC POINT
AB#m TITLE:
MTG. 2/6/90 PLAN 89-2 AND STANDARDS VARIANCE 89-2
DEPT. PLN
DEP
CIT'
CIT'
6% 4
a a,
d .rl w
su *u
4 P
uc o(d w
a a,$ =Ju
G .d
L9
b(d
@a
u m
p
a
d
6.d
-J s uu
03 c)
LC gs
-I
Qa,
@a ard E
SF- E+
4
0
a' om 'rn
Qri
" 1.
.. z o F 0 a
5 A
z 3 0 0
CI~OF CARLSBAD - AGEN~ILL
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
The Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council A[
UPHOLDING the Planning Commission decision to Amrove SDP 89-2 and !
Variance 89-2.
Councj 1 Resol uti on No. G[ .-A/?-. , APPROVIFrG the Negative Dechra
ITEM EXPLANATION
On January 3, 1990 the Planning Commission approved Site Development Plar construct a multi-tenant office/warehouse/manufacturing center consist
buildings totalling 73,715 square feet on 5.98 acres. Also approved was ! Variance 89-2 deleting the five-foot parkway requirements along Avenid; from Palomar Airport Road to approximately 2,000 feet north thereof Development Plan 89-2, Pacific Point, is located on the west side 01 Encinas, north of Palomar Airport Road. The appellants' property is on side of Avenida Encinas from Palomar Airport Road extending approximatl feet to the north.
As part of the Pacific Point project an alignment plan (reference conditi 45 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 2943) has been prepared to illus ultimate improvements for this section of Avenida Encinas. This align] also incorporates the approved Standards Variance which reduces the rig
dedication on both sides of this arterial - The alignment on the west side Floral Trade Center, Pacific Point) requires additional dedication of 9. 2.5 feet, north to south respectively. The alignment on the east sid Development) requires additional dedication of 0 feet to 2.5 feet, north respectively.
The appellant stated in their appeal that they desire the widening o Encinas to take place entirely on the west side of the street. It is furtt in the appeal that a requirement to dedicate additional right-of-way on side of the street fronting the Grosse Development Companys' property wc an unfair burden on the appellants' property. It should be noted requirement for dedication or improvements on the east side of Avenida Er required with the approval of Pacific Point (SDP 89-2) or Carltas Flc Center (MS-800, PIP 89-8). The alignment plan provided by the Carltas a
Point projects will be used when development is proposed for the eas Avenida Encinas. Development of the vacant property will require di st
approval, at which time dedication and improvements on the east side ( Encinas will be required.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On January 3, 1990 the Planning Commission approved the Negative Declarat by the Planning Director dated September 15, 1989.
I
e e *
~ Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. /e79
< FISCAL IMPACT
None
EXHIBITS
1) City Council Resolution No. $7/ .*a2
2) Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2942, 2943, and 2970 3) Excerpts from Planning Commission Minutes dated January 3, 1990 4) Staff Report dated January 3, 1990, with attachments 5) Letter of Appeal
c
rl 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19
20
l8
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
90-22 RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND UPHOLDING A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE
OFFICE/WAREHOUSE/MANUFACTURING CENTER LOCATED ON THE
WEST SIDE OF AVENIDA ENCINAS NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT
PARKWAY ALONG A SECTION OF AVENIDA ENCINAS.
A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-TENANT
ROAD AND A STANDARDS VARIANCE TO DELETE THE FIVE-FOOT
SDP 89-2/SV 89-2 - PACIFIC POINT (APPEAL)
WHEREAS, on January 3, 1990, the Carlsbad Planning (
adopted Resolution Nos, 2942, 2943, and 2970 approving the Negative De(
Site Development Plan 89-2, and Standards Variance 89-2; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on Ft
1990 considered an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to apprc
2/SV 89-2; and
WHEREAS, upon considering the request, the City Council
all factors relating to the Site Development Plan/Standards Variance
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Coun
City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1.
2. That the findings and conditions of the Planning Con
That the above recitations are true and correct.
Resolution Nos. 2942, 2943, and 2970 on file with the City
incorporated herein by reference constitute the findings of the City
this matter. /
I
....
....
/ ....
, -...
***'
....
I
m 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
g
10
11
l2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting 01
Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the day of __
1990 by the following vate, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT t
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
i
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
c
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
I.8
EXHIBIT 2 0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2942
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-TENANT OFFICE/ WAREHOUSE/MANUFACTURING CENTER CONSISTING OF 6 BUILDINGS TOTALLING 73,715 SQUARE FEET.
CASE NAME: PACIFIC POINT CASE NO.: SDP 89-2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 15th day of
1989 and the 3rd day of January, 1990, hold a duly noticed public
prescribed by law to consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and consi
testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the i
submitted by staff, and considering any writtien comments received, tt
Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declarat
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Con
fol 1 ows :
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, tb Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative C according to Exhibit "ND", dated September 15, 1989 and "P September 6, 1989, attached hereto and made a part hereof, ba following findings: 1 Findinqs:
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
~ I 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidencr project may have a significant impact on the environment.
2. The site has been previously disturbed and is presently deve paved parking lotn
3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generat proposed project with the improvements which are required to Avenida Encinas.
4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located sc
~
significantly impacted by this project.
....
....
4 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tt
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd day 1
1990, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES : Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, S Erwin, McFadden & Marcus.
Commi ssi oner Holmes. NOES :
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISS
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLBIILLEW PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 2942 -2-
'
0 Exhibit "ND"
%
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATJON; South of 5600 Avenida Encinas/west side of Ave
Encinas north of Palomar Airport Road.
PROJECT DESCR I PT ION : Pacific Point - A multi-tenant office/wareho
manufacturing center consisting of 6 buildings total1 ing 73,715 square fee
5.98 acres.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above descr project pursuant to the Guide1 ines for Implementation of the Cal ifc
Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the
of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declari
that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is ht
issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file ii P1 anni ng Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file ii
Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comr
Department within thirty (30) days of date of issuance. from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Plai
DATED: September 15, 1989 4ua.lad
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER' CASE NO: SDP 89-2 P1 anning Director
APPLICANT: Ware & Malcomb Architects
PUBLISH DATE: September 15, 1989
DN:af
2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 * (619) 43t
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-OFFICE OF THE GOVEeL 0 SEC9Gi
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
1400 TENTH STREET
ACRAMENTO, CA 95814
Don Neu October 13, 198
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Subject: Pacific Pointe - SDP 89-2, SCH# 89091321
Dear Mr. Neu:
The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental do
selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed a
the state agencies have comments. This letter acknowledges that
complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements
environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Qua
Please call Garrett Ashley at (916) 445-0613 if you have any
regarding the environmental review process. When contacting the Cle
in this matter, please use the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number
we my respond promptly.
Sincerely, p-,-pL L
David C. Nunenkamp
Office of Permit Assistance
Chi e f
0 e
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(TO BE COMPETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) c
CASE NO. SDP 89-2
DATE : September 6, 19E
I. BACKGROUND
1. APPLICANT: Ware & Malcomb Architects
2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 9868 Scranton Rd., Si
San Dieso, CA 92121
(619) 546-1121
3. DATE CHECK LIST SUBMITTED: May 23, 1989
11. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all Affirmative Answers are to be written under Section I11 - Discussion of Environmental Evaluation)
YES MAY BE
1. Earth - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures?
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil?
c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features?
d. The destruction, covering of modification of any unique geologic or physical features?
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site?
f. Changes in deposition or erosion
of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channel or a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
a a
YES MAYBE
-2. U - Will the proposal have
significant results in:
a. Air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality? -
odors? -
b. The creation of objectionable
c. Alteration of air movement,
moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally?
3. Water - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patters, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface
e. Discharge into surface waters,
water in any water body?
or in any alteration of surface
limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
water quality, including but not
f. Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
h. Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public water supplies?
-2-
0
YES MAY BE
-4. Plant Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants
(including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants?
c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species?
agricultural crop?
5. Animal Life - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals
(birds, land animals including reptiles,
fish and shellfish, benthic organisms,
insects or microfauna)?
d. Reduction in acreage of any
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
rare or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier
to the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat?
6. Noise - Will the proposal significantly
7. Liaht and Glare - Will the proposal sig-
increase existing noise levels?
nificantly produce new light or glare?
Land Use - Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area?
8.
-3-
0 0
YES MAY BE
-9. Natural Resources - Will the proposal
have significant results in:
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources?
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural resource?
10. Risk of UDset - Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions?
11. Population - Will the proposal signif-
' icantly alter the location, distribu- tion, density, or growth rate of the
human population of an area?
Housinq - Will the proposal signif-
create a demand for additional housing?
13. Transportation/Circulation - Will the proposal have significant results in:
12.
icantly affect existing housing, or
a. Generation of additional vehicular movement?
b. Effects on existing parking facili- ties, or demand for new parking?
c. Impact upon existing transportation
d. Alterations to present patterns of
systems?
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods?
air traffic? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
-4-
MAY BE
e YES a
14. Public Services - Will the proposal have . a significant effect upon, or have signif-
icant results in the need for new or
altered governmental services in any of the following areas:
a. Fire protection?
b. Police protection? --
c. Schools? --
d. Parks or other recreational
facilities? -
including roads? -
f. Other governmental services? -
e. Maintenance of public facilities,
15. Enerqv - Will the proposal have significant results in:
a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
energy, or require the development of new sources of energy?
b. Demand upon existing sources of
16. Utilities - Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities:
a. Power or natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer or septic tanks?
e. Storm water drainage?
f. Solid waste and disposal?
17. Human Health - Will the proposal have significant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazard (excluding mental health)?
-5-
0
YES MAYBE
0
.i8. Aesthetics - Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruction of any scenic Vista or view open to the
public, or will the proposal result in creation of an aesthetically offensive public view?
19. Recreation - Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
20. Archeoloaical/Historical/Paleontolouical - Will the proposal have significant
results in the alteration of a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure, object or building?
Analyze viable alternatives to the DroDosed Droiect such as:
a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site desigi c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the I e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alter- nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project proposes development of a n
tenant office/warehouse/manufacturing center on 5.98 acres. The building area proposed is 73,715 square feet contained in 6 sey buildings. A total of 247 parking spaces will be provided which e,
the minimum required by the zoning ordinance. The site is cove1 a paved parking lot built for the office/industrial building t
north. That building has since been converted to a different US requiring parking located on the project site. The site is flat a slope of approximately .6% to the west. To the north is the CE Floral Trade Center building which the project will share a dr: with as a second access point. To the south is a 3-story ( building. To the east is Avenida Encinas, a secondary arterial, 2-story office building on the opposite side of the street. To thl is the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way anc line.
a) Phasing of the project would not be a significantly environmei superior alternative as the site is presently developed as a pl
lot and construction of portions of the project at a futurc would create conflicts with any portion of the project OCI initially.
21.
No significant natural resources exist onsite.
-6-
0 m
21 Continued - b) Alternate site designs have been considered including the origi proposal which contained one building less but approximately same square footage. The present design appears to be prefera as loading doors are screened from property to the west of
site and a greater percentage of landscaping has been provid The project complies with all City requirements.
c) The present scale of development proposed is less than original proposal as a single 32,150 square foot building
the project by providing an additional north-south corri through the site.
d) Alternate uses for the site would consist of other plan industrial developments either as a large single structure o variation to the multiple structure project proposed. The pro] has a building coverage of 28% while the zone would allow up
50% coverage.
e) Development at some future time rather than now would continue paved parking lot which appears to be used as storage for cars by dealerships in car country. The proposed multi-ten project is a preferable use for the site given the exist General Plan and Zoning designations of Planned Industrial.
f) Alternate sites for the proposed multi-tenant office/warehou
been made into two buildings which visually reduces the scale
manufacturing center can be found within the City, however, t
site which is located adjacent to the rail line and within
airport influence ares is presently developed and is designa for Planned Industrial Development.
g) The no project alternative would retain the existing parking which is inconsistent with the General Plan and Zon
designations for the site.
-7-
MAYBE
m
- YES
22. Mandatorv findinas of siqnificance -
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wild-
life species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or en-
dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory.
b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of
time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.)
c. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? (g*Cumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
1. Earth - The site is presently developed as a paved parking lot is relatively level with a slope of approximately .6% to the we Development of the site will decrease the amount of impervi surface as 18.4% of the site will be landscaped.
Rev. 12/88
-8-
e 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
2. Air - The project is required to comply with the performanc
standards of the P-M (Planned Industrial) Zone. All uses a: required to be operated so as not to emit matter causii
unpleasant odors as well as meet the air quality standards of tl San Diego County Air Quality Control Board. The building heigl
of 19 feet for the project and separation between buildings wi not significantly disturb air flow.
reducing the amount of impervious surface on the site a providing a storm drain system for the project.
4. Plant Life - The only existing plant life on site is perimet landscaping which will be maintained where warranted, such as f
the mature trees that exist in those areas.
Animal Life - Due to the disturbed nature of the site as well
3. Water - The project will positively change absorption rates
5, its location adjacent to major transportation corridors a surrounding development, little animal life exists onsite.
6. Noise - The project is outside the 60 CNEL noise contour 1 Palomar Airport. Buildings will be setback a considerak distance from property lines and the proposed land use is r extremely noise sensitive.
7. Liaht & Glare - A lighting plan has been prepared. The proje will not significantly produce new light and glare as light: proposed is not excessive and will be directed away from adjacc properties.
Land Use - The project is in conformance with the General Plan i Zoning Ordinance designations of Planned Industrial for the si1
9. Natural Resources - The site is presently developed as a park.
8.
lot.
10. Risk of Upset - The project has the potential of having tenai
that may utilize hazardous substances. All operations ( required to be conducted in an enclosed building and hazard1
substances must be stored in accordance with the requirements the Uniform Fire Code.
No natural resources exist onsite.
11. PoDulation - The proposal will provide additional employrr opportunities primarily of a local nature and will, therefc not significantly effect the human population of the area.
12. Housinq - The proposal will not significantly effect exist
housing as it will not create a substantial number of new jol
-9-
e 0 DI-SCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued)
13. TransDortation/Circulation - The proposal will generz
to comply with the special conditions of Local Facilitj Management Zone 3 which requires the project to pay Traffic Imp; Fees, Public Facilities Fees and participate in the Bridge ; Thoroughfare Benefit District. Also, additional right-of-\ dedication and improvements will be required along the project frontage .
14. Public Services - The project is located in Local Facilit: Management Zone 3. Services will be provided through I
* approximately 613 average daily trips. The project is requii
implementation of that zone plan.
15. Enercrv - The project will not use substantial amounts of fuel
energy given the relatively small size of the individual ten: spaces available. In addition, the project is located in clc proximity to Interstate 5 which reduces the length of surfl street vehicle trips required by persons utilizing the facili.
16. Utilities - At the present time utilities are available to .
site and are located within the Avenida Encinas right-of-way along the western portion of the site.
Human Health - The proposal will not create any health hazard the project is outside the 60 CNEL noise contour for Palo Airport and all operations will be conducted in entirely enclo buildings.
Aesthetics - The project's architectural and landscape site des
compatible with surrounding projects.
screened from the public right-of-way.
Recreation - The project will not reduce the quality or quant of existing recreational opportunities as it is an industr project not requiring additional park area.
20. Archeoloaical/Historical/Paleontolo~ical - There is no evide of significance on this site as it has been previously graded developed with a paved parking lot.
17.
18. results in a sensitive aesthetic treatment of the site which Proposed loading doors
19.
-10-
0 0 IV. DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planniny Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a signific effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effec
sheet have been added to the project.
Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on th environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
x
this case because the mitigation measures described on an attacl A Conditional Negative
9-G;- m &% Date Signature
q] I\ /@J?
‘Date
V. MITIGATING MEASURES (If Applicable)
-11-
0
MITIGATING MEASURES (Continued)
VI. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAW3 REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING ME.
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
DN:af
-12-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I) e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2943
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
WAREHOUSE/MANUFACTURING CENTER CONSISTINGOF 6 BUILDINGS
TOTALLING 73,715 SQUARE FEET ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AVENIDA ENCINAS, NORTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD.
CASE NAME: PACIFIC POINT
NO. SDP 89-2 TO CONSTRUCT A MULTI-TENANT OFFICE/
CASE NO: SDP 89-2
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with tt
Carlsbad afid refewed to the Planning Commission: and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request i
by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; aind
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal
Planning Commission did, on the 15th of November, 1989 and on the
January, 1990, consider said request on property described as:
The southerly 440 feet of Parcel 1 of Parcel Map Number
14009, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of
California, recorded November 1, 1985 .
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and cons
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be I
Commission considered all factors relating to SDP 89-2.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Cc I l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1 the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, thl
APPROVED SDP 89-2, based on the following findings and sub following conditions:
Fi ndi nqs :
1. The project is consistent with all the requirements of the G(
Zone, Airport Land Use Plan, Draft Design Standards for I Industrial Buildings, Scenic Corridor Guide1 ines, the Mello I
the Local Coastal Program, and the Local Facilities Managem
Zone 3.
1
2
3
4
5
6
0 0
2. The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an appropriate cor this project, ensured building permits will not be issued for tt unless the City Engineer determines that sewer service is avail building cannot occur within the project unless sewer servic available, and the Planning Commission is satisfied that the rec of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been mt as they apply to sewer service for this project.
All necessary public improvements have been provided or will bc
4. The applicant has agreed and is required by the inclusi appropriate condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performan
3.
as conditions of approval.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
contract and payment of the fee will enable this body to find t facilities will be available concurrent with need as requir General P1 an.
5. Assurances have been given that adequate sewer for the projel provided by the City of Carlsbad.
6. The proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future since surrounding properties are designated for Planned development on the General Plan.
7. This project will not cause any significant environmental imp Negative Declaration has been issued by the Planning Director or 15, 1989 and approved by the Planning Commission on January 3, approving this Negative Declaration the Planning Commission has the initial study, the staff analysis, all required mitigatic and any written comments received regarding the significant e. project could have on the environment.
8. The applicant is by condition, required to pay any increase facility fee, or new construction tax, or development fees, and to abide by any additional requirements established by a Local Management Plan prepared pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of th Municipal Code. This will ensure continued availability facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts creal 19
20
21
22
23
24
25 z:
28
I project . I
9. This project is consistent with the City's Growth Management 0 it has been conditioned to comply with any requirement appro of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3.
Conditions :
1. Approval is granted for SDP 89-2, as shown on Exhibits "A" - November 15, 1989, incorporated by reference and on file in t Department. Development shall occur substanti a1 ly as SI otherwise noted in these conditions. I 1 Pi'RESO NO. 2943 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
0 0
2. The developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24" x : copy of the site plan as approved by the Planning Commission. plan shall reflect the conditions of approval by the City. The shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of
permits or improvement plan submittal, whichever occurs first.
This project is approved upon the express condition that buildii will not be issued for development of the subject property unles Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at th application for such sewer permits and will continue to be avail time of occupancy.
4, This project is also approved under the express condition applicant pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City July 28, 1987 and as amended from time to time, and any devela established by the City Council pursuant, to Chapter 21.90 of tt Municipal Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth system or facilities and improvement plan and to fulfill the su agreement to pay the public facilities fee dated May 23, 1989, which is on file with the City Cleirk and is incorporate reference. If the fees are not paid this application wi
void.
3.
consistent with the General Plan and approval for this proje
5. Water shall be provided to this project pursuant to the Mal agreement between the City of Carlsbad and the Carlsbad Munic District, dated May 25, 1983.
6. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigatic which may be required as part of the Zone 3 Local Facilities Plan and any amendments made to that Plan prior to the i building permits.
7. If any condition for construction of any public impro facilities, or the payment of any fees in lieu thereof, imp01 approval or imposed by law on this project are challenged th shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 6591
19
I.8
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall unless the City Council determines that the project without tt I I complies with all requirements of law,
I 8. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinance at time of building permit issuance.
9. This approval shall become null and void if building perm issued for this project within one year from the date of projec Any extension to this provision must be approved by t' Commission.
1 ....
....
PC RES0 NO. 2943 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
W a
10. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a six-foot high m( with gates pursuant to City standards. Location of said recept be as shown on Exhibit "A". Enclosure shall be of similar co materials to the project to the satisfaction of the Planning I
architecturally integrated and concealed from view and the sou from adjacent properties and streets, pursuant to Building Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the Directors of P' Bui 1 ding.
12. Compact parking spaces shall be located in large groups in 1
the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
Aisles for compact car spaces shall be (clearly marked with per signs denoting the areas for "compact cars only" prior to occul
word "Compact" clearly marked and maintained.
14. Handicapped parking spaces shall be striped and provided w prior to occupancy of the building.
15. An exterior lighting plan including parking areas shall be su Planning Director approval. All lighting shall be designed downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property.
16. No outdoor storage of material shall occur onsite unless reqL Fire Chief. In such instance a storage plan will be su approval by the Fire Chief and the Planning Director.
17. The applicant shall provide tables, chairs, and trash receptz the outdoor employee eating areas shown on Exhibit "A". employee eating areas shall be constructed concurrently with 1 buildings and be completed prior to occupancy.
18. All uses established in the structures shall conform to Exhibi and be consistent with Section 21.34.020 (Permitted Uses) of 1 Municipal Code. The uses are predominately office, war manufacturing.
11. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners,
13.
building. Each compact parking space shall have a pavement si
,I
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19. In accordance with the parking standards of the Zoning Or designated proportion of uses (office, warehouse, and manufacti be maintained on the property as shown on Exhibit "A" of SDP 1 other uses creating a need for additional parking will be perm adequate parking area is provided to meet City standards for
20. Prior to issuance of tenant improvements and/or business 1 interior building space within this project whichever comes proportion of office, warehouse, and manufacturing uses for ' must conform to the approved proportion of use listed in Ext as to not increase parking demand according to City codes unli parking area is provided to meet City standards.
I
PC RES0 NO. 2943 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
w 0
21. No storage of inflamnables, explosives, or corrosives shall b as the project site is located under Palomar Airport's wester1 path.
CC&R's shall be provided for review and approval by the Plannir The CC&R's shall include provisions for enforcement by the indt owner or manager. shall do an inspection of each multi-tenant project and prepa on any instances of outdoor storage or operation. Said repa submitted to the Planning Director and Code Enforcement ( review. If violations regarding outdoor storage or operati
corrected within 30 days from the filing of the report, the ow
22.
On a yearly basis, the owner or manager
agrees to cancel the lease with the operator.
23. The applicant shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigatioi shall be submitted to and approved by the Planning Director p issuance of grading or building permits, whichever occurs fir
24. All parking lot trees shall be a minimum of 15 gallons in si2
25. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy ai condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris.
26. Existing onsite trees shall be retained wherever possible ai trimmed and/or topped. Dead, decaying or potentially dangl shall be approved for removal at the discretion of the Plannins during the review of a Master Plan submitted showing exis trees. Those trees which are approved for removal shall be a tree-for-tree basis as required by the Planning Department.
27. The developer shall install street trees at the equivalent intervals along all public street frontages in conformance w Carlsbad standards. The trees shall be of a variety select1 approved Street Tree List.
Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be
conformance with the City's Sign Ordinance and shall require approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of su
29. A uniform sign program for this development shall be submit Planning Director for his review and approval prior to occup' bui 1 di ng .
30. Building identification and/or addresses shall be placed on ' existing buildings so as to be plainly visible from the stree road; color of identification and/or addresses shall contra:
28.
I
background col or.
....
.... I(
27
28
PC RES0 NO. 2943 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
I'i'
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e e
31. The applicant shall obtain all necessary permits from the Coastal Comnission. Said permits shall be in substantial confo this approval; otherwise, this Site Development Plan must t Proof that permits have been obtained shall be submitted to ' Carlsbad prior to issuance of building permits.
applicant shall include a reduced version of the approving re a 24" x 36" blueline drawing. Said blueline drawing(s) shall a
a copy of any applicable Coastal Development Permit and signe site plan.
Enqineerinq Conditions:
33. This project is subject to the conditions of Minor Subdivision October 17, 1989.
34. Prior to issuance of a grading or building permit, the deve receive approval of an encroachment agreement for the western this development which lies within a sewer easement.
32. As part of the plans submitted for building permit plan
35. Additional drainage easements and drainage structures shall or installed as may be required by the City Engineer.
36. The owner of the subject property shall execute a hold harmles regarding drainage across the adjacent property prior to the any grading or building permit for this project.
Runoff from this project is conveyed to environmentally sensi The developer shall provide adequate means of eliminating grei from drainage prior to discharge. Plans for such improvemen approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permit .
The developer shall make an offer of dedication to the City foi streets and easements required by these conditions or shown development plan. The offer shall be made prior to issui building permit for this project. All land so offered shall to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and \ to the City. Streets that are already public are not req
rededicated.
39. The developer shall obtain the City Engineer's approval of
37.
38.
improvement plans and enter into a secured agreement with t completion of said improvements prior to issuance of any bui' within this project. The improvements shall be constructed i for maintenance by the City Council prior to issuance of a Cei Occupancy for any unit within the project. The improvements
A. Half street improvements to Avenida Encinas along the Minor Subdivision 800 and extending approximately 250 f this project.
PC RES0 NO. 2943 -6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
a 0
40. The developer shall comply with all the rules, regulations E requirements of the respective sewer and water agencies regardint to the project.
41. The developer shall be responsible for coordination with . Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities.
42. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall detailed drainage plan. This plan shall be reviewed for confor City standards.
property which neither the City nor the developer has sufficiei interest to permit the improvements to be made without acqu
title or interest. The developer shall conform to Section 2( the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
44. This project shall be responsible for the design and constru median along the frontage of this project. The median sh constructed until such time as directed to do so by the Citj Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete design and i security shall be provided to guarantee this condition.
One of the two driveways serving this project shall be right- out, at such time as the median in Avenida Encinas is constrr City Engineer shall approve an alignment plan that specif points.
46. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall easement or a covenant of easement for reciprocal access acro serving the adjacent development to the south. The location, wording of the reciprocal access easement shall be approved
Engineer .
47. Additional onsite fire hydrants are required for this pro developer shall prepare water system improvement plans and a p easement to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Wat Engineer prior to the issuance of a building permit for t
43. Some improvements required by these conditions are 1 ocated
45.
j
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Appropriate plan check fees shall be paid and securities post
The developer shall enter into an agreement to pay fees for unc of all existing overhead utility lines along the boundary of prior to grading or building permit issuance.
48.
-*-*
**.*
--.-
**-*
PC RES0 NO. 2943 -7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
Carlsbad MuniciDal Water District:
49. The entire water system for subject project be evaluated in ensure that adequate capacity for domestic, landscaping and demands are met.
50. The developer's engineer shall schedule a meeting with tt Engineer and the City Fire Marshal and review the preliminary w layout prior to preparation of the water system improvement p
The developer will be responsible for all fees and deposits pli facility charge which will be collecteld at time of issuance permit .
51.
Fire Conditions:
52. Prior to the issuance of building perm'its, complete building be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department.
53. Additional public and/or onsite fire hydrants shall be provide necessary by the Fire Marshal.
54. The applicant shall submit two (2) copies of a site plan showir of existing and proposed fire hydrants and onsite roads and dr
Fire Marshal for approval.
55. All required fire hydrants, water mains and appurtenance operational prior to combustible building materials being loc project site.
All private driveways shall be kept clear of parked vehicles a. and shall have posted "No Parking/Fire Lane - Tow Away Zone" Section 17.04.040, Carlsbad Municipal Code.
57. All fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, extinguishing systems sprinklers, and other systems pertinent to the project shall t to the Fire Department for approval prior to construction.
1 58. Building exceeding 10,000 sq. ft. aggregate floor arei sprinklered or have four-hour fire walls with no openings tt shall split the building into 10,000 sq. ft. (or less) areas
56.
59. Provide approved key box for exterior of building wit1 spri nkl ers.
....
....
....
....
PC RES0 NO. 2943 -8-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
w 0
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tt
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd day (
1990, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES : Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, S
NOES: Commi ssi oner Holmes .
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
Erwin, McFadden & Marcus.
mA Ah?
MATTHEW HALL, Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
: PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 2943 -9-
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2o
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
w a
- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2970
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY 0
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, GRANTING A STANDARDS VARIANCE FO AVENIDA ENCINAS BETWEEN PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AND CANNO ROAD.
CASE NAME: PACIFIC POINTE CASE NO.: SV 89-2
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested approval of Standa
for deletion of five-foot parkway requirements along Avenida Enci
WHEREAS, staff has reviewed said request and can make t
findings for a Standards Variance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed said req
make the necessary findings.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning C
the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
B)
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That the Planning Commission grants SV 89-2 approving deletiot
five-foot parkway requirements along Avenida Encinas from
Airport Road to approximately 2,000 feet north thereof.
That SV 89-2 is granted based on the following findings:
1. The circumstances or conditions applicable to this 5
unusual. The existing street section and adjacent de1
otherwise substandard roadway system.
C)
less than current standard. The proposed request wil'
I 2. No drainage problems will occur. I 3. The proposed variance will not conflict with existin
traffic, parking, pedestrian or bicycle demands.
4. The public welfare or private property rights are not or in juri ous.
5. The proposed variance will not adversely affect the cc
General P1 an.
I
....
....
**'*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
19 I.8
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tt
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd day
1990, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairman Hall, Commissioners: Schlehuber, S
Erwin, McFadden & Marcus.
NOES: Commi ss i oner Holmes .
ABSENT: None.
ABSTA I N : None.
- MATT I- W HALL, Chairman CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISS
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HONILLEW PLANNING DIRECTOR
i
'
PC RES0 NO. 2970 2
EXHIBI- W MI NUT!^
CONTINUED PUBLIC WING ITEMS:
1) SDP 89-2/SV 89-2 - PACIFIC POINT - Request for approval
of a Site Development Plan to construct a multi-tenant
buildings totaling 73,715 square feet on 5.98 acres,
located on the west side of Avenida Encinas north of
Palomar Airport Road, in the P-M Zone, and in Local
Facilities Management Zone 3, and a Standards Variance
to reduce the right-of-way width from 87 feet to 74 feet
on Avenida Encinas.
office/warehouse/manufacturing center consisting of six
Gary Wayne, Assistant Planning Director, reviewed the
background of the request and showed slides of the 5 acre
site located in the old Burroughs parking lot on the west
side of Avenida Encinas, north of Palomar Airport Road, where
the applicant is proposing to construct an industrial complex
consisting of six structures, comprising 73,715 s.f. The
site is zoned Planned Industrial (P-M) and is located in
Local Facilities Hanagement Plan Zone 3.
Plan is required because the property is located within the Palomar Airport influence area which is a special treatment
zone. The applicant has requested an Engineering Standards
Variance to reduce the right-of-way of the adjacent Avenida
Encinas from 84 ft. for a secondary arterial to 74 ft. and
noted that there is no request for a reduction in roadway
width.
Mr. Wayne stated that the project would be constructed of
precast tilt-up concrete with painted reveals, accent glass,
and recessed accent squares.
would be primarily office buildings and the other three
buildings would be mixed multi-tenant.
pavilion which would function as an architectural detail as
well as part of the outdoor employee eating area. The
building coverage is 28% which is less than the 50%
allowable. The project is proposing in excess of 18%
landscaping, 12% of which would be in the parking areas (the
P-M Zone requires a minimum of 10%). He noted that loading
areas would be screened by walls and landscaping and that a
condition has been added to prohibit storage of flammables on
site due to its location in the airport's westerly departure
path. The project complies with the guidelines of
multi-tenant use and the requirements of growth management
and staff recommends approval of the Site Development Plan.
Bob Wojcik, Principal Civil Engineer, reviewed the request
for a standards variance to reduce the required right-of-way
from 84 ft. to 74 ft. and noted that most buildings in the
area were built with a 70 ft. right-of-way and 50 ft.
curb-to-curb roadway which has a capacity of 10,000 ADT. current usage is estimated to be 4,500 MT.
approval of the Engineering Standards Variance.
Mr. Wayne noted a correction to the Negative Declaration
which shouid read approximately 850 ADT's for this project
instead of the 600 ADT's referred to. The increase in ADT's
still meets the test of insignificance.
Commissioner YcFadden inquired if a traffic study had been
done. Mr. Wayne replied that a traffic study was not
submitted by the applicant however a traffic review was made
by the Engineering Department. Mr. Wojcik reviewed the ADT's and noted that the estimated traffic for this project is
approximately half of that which was projected for the
Medieval Times. More importantly, the peak hour traffic
A Site Development
Three of the six buildings
There would also be a
The
Staff recornends
0 MI NUT^
\
COMMISSIONEF January 3, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3
generated by this project would be approximately 25 percent
of that generated by the proposed Medieval Times.
Commissioner McFadden inquired when the project is scheduled
for completion. Mr. Wayne replied that the buildings should
be operable within one year.
Commissioner Erwin would like to see more standard parking
spaces rather than compact spaces. Mr. Wayne replied that
planning procedures call for a compact spaces to comprise 252
of the total.
Chairman Hall opened the public testimony and issued the
invitation to speak.
Steve Ziegler, Ware and Malcomb Architects, 9868 Scranton
Road, Suite 200, San Diego, agent for the applicant,
addressed the Commission and stated that he has worked very
closely with staff and feels they have a superior project.
He requested approval of the project.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if the standard parking spaces
would all have overhangs. Mr. Ziegler replied that the
spaces are 8.5 ft. with a 2.5 ft. overhang.
Commissioner Holmes has a problem with the handicapped
parking and feels it could be improved. He feels that
Building A has a definite problem but would like the
handicapped parking improved throughout the project and
increased, if possible.
At the request of Chairman Hall, Mr. Ziegler reviewed the
circulation and stated that the turning radius meets the
CALTRANS standard.
There being no other persons desiring to address the
Commission on this topic, Chairman Hall declared the public
testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the
Comission members.
Commissioner McFadden inquired if the drainage to the vest of
the site is covered. Mr. Wojcik replied that the drainage to
the west of the floral center is an open ditch but is covered
adjacent to this project site.
loading area and traffic impacts to Palomar Airport Road but
she can accept the staff explanation.
Commissioner Erwin is concerned about the ADT's due to the recent denial of Medieval Times.
compact parking spaces but will accept the staff recommendation.
Commissioner Holmes believes the site has traffic problems
and noted that this project was denied on October 4, 1989 for
traffic problems. He feels there are significant traffic
impacts which will not be alleviated until Palomar Airport
Road is widened.
Commissioner Schrm had problems with the traffic and
parking but feels that the staff report has answered her
questions.
Her major concern was the
He is not happy about the
W MINUT~
Page 4 COMMlSSlONEl January 3, 1990 PLANNING COMMISSION
Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2912 approving the
Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and
adopt Planning Commission Resolution No 2913 and 2970
approving SDP 89-2 and SV 89-2 based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
CUP 88-21/SUP 89-5 - AYRES SENIOR CENT= - Request
approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a 173 unit
sidential care uni
located at the est corner of El C
Road in the RD . Residential car
allowed in the one with a Conditi
showed a slide tation of the proj
there is a 100 de SXM easement
will also be a He stated that
alking course, and
parking spaces. A
handicap ramp will pr
elevators will be pro
facilitate ease of mo e individual units
will not have kitchen
meets all growth manageme ements and the usage will
Commissioner Mc 11 is not shown
on the plans.
volunteered to
approval but ca ded, if the Comm
its do not have kitchens, Commission whether the project will comply wit
t should it fail as a residential ca
at the density would be. Mr. Neu re
issioner McFadden feels that with the heavy commerc
tXHlBl I 4
AP w .CATION COMPLETE AUGUST 8, 1989
STAFF REPORT
DATE : JANUARY 3, 1990
TO : PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: SDP 89-2/SV 89-2 - PACIFIC POINT - Request for approval of a
Development P1 an to construct a multi -tenant office/waret
manufacturing center consisting of 6 buildings totalling 7 square feet on 5.98 acres, located on the west side of A\ Encinas north of Palomar Airport Road, in the P-M Zone, and in Facilities Management Zone 3, and a Standards Variance to reduc
right-of-way width from 84 feet to 74 feet on Avenida Encina!
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No.
APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2943, and 2964 APPROVING SDP 89-2 and ! 2 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting approval of a Site Development Plan to consti multi-tenant office/warehouse/manufacturing center. The center as prc consists of six buildings totalling 73,715 square feet resulting in a building coverage of 28 percent while the zone allows 50 percent. Buildii 6, and F will contain office, warehouse, and manufacturing uses. The t!
size of a tenant space in building A is 1,580 square feet, 2,400 square fc
building B, and 1,000 square feet in building F. Buildings C, D, and E w used primarily as office space. The Site Development Plan was required ( the project’s location inside the Airport Influence Area for Palomar Ail a designated Special Treatment Area in the General Plan Land Use Element
Site Development Plan utilizes the provisions of the Q-overlay Zone.
The proposed buildings will be constructed of precast tilt-up concretc panels painted white and will be a maximum height of 19 feet. Store froi high performance glass will be used as noted on the plans. Accent glass sqi recessed accent squares, and painted accent reveals are proposed to gil project form and make it aesthetically pleasing. A pavilion is proposed a an architectural feature and as part of the outdoor employee eating area exceeds the minimum development standards. Lighting will be provided . locations noted on the plans through the use of low pressure sodium wall at loading areas, low presslure sodium pole lighting in parking areas,
bollards at pedestrian walk areas, and soffit mounted downlights above all
doors. Landscaping will cover 18.4 percent of the site. The P-M Zone re a minimum of 10 percent of the required parking area to be landscaped whi project proposes landscaping 12 percent, and provides landscaped islands rate of one for every 10 parking spaces.
SDP 89-2/SV 89-2 - PAC,, IC POINT e
JANUARY 3, 1990
PAGE 2 -
The proposed project is subject to the following standards and policies:
a. Planned Industrial (PI) General Plan Designation. b. Planned Industrial (PM) Zone c. Comprehensive Land Use Plan McClellan - Palomar Airport an(
d. Draft design standards for Multi-Tenant Industrial Buildings. e. Scenic Corridor Guide1 ines
f.
g. Local Facilities Management Zone 3
Qual i f i ed Devel opinent Overl ay Zone,
The Mello I1 segment of the Local Coastal Program
Adjacent land uses to the site consist of the Car1ta.s Floral Trade Center t north and a three-story office building to the south. To the east is Av Encinas, an existing office building, and a vacant lot. To the west i Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way. The project site is a parking lot that was previously used in conjunction with the building t north when it was occupied by the Burroughs Corporation. A Minor Subdiv has been approved to create this 5.98 acre parcel. The parking on the pr site was not needed for the Carltas Floral Trade Center which was approv Planned Industrial Permit 89-8 with excess parking on that newly created pa
111. ANALY S IS
P1 anninq Issues
1. Does the proposed project comply with the comprehensive Land Use P1;
McCl el 1 an-Pal omar Ai rport and the Qual i f i ed Development Overl ay lor
Is the project in conformance with the Draft Design Standards for n tenant industrial buildings?
Does the project comply with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines?
Is the proposed project consistent with the Mello I1 segment of Carl: Local Coastal Program?
5. Is the project in conformance with the Local Facilities Managemenl for Zone 3?
6. Can the findings be made to grant a variance to the City Standard I of-way width from 84 feet to 74 feet on Avenida Encinas?
2.
3.
4.
DISCUSS ION
Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport and the Qua Development Overl ay Zone
The proposed project complies with the Palomar Airport C.L.U.P. The proj not located in a flight activity zone and is located outside the 60 CNEL contour. The project has been reviewed by SANDAG staff which serves as to the Airport Land Use Commission. The project was found to be consisten the airport land use plan. Because the project site is located undc
SDP 89-2/SV 89-2 - PAC;, 9 IC POINT m
JANUARY 3, 1990 PAGE 3 -
airport’s westerly departure path, SANDAG is requiring that the applicant store inflammables, explosives, or corrosives. This requirement has been r a condition of approval .
The project meets the intent and purpose of the Qualified Development Ovei Zone. The devel opment wi 11 be compat i bl e with surrounding devel opments airport operations. In addition, the project is properly related to the s surroundings, and environmental setting.
Draft Desiqn Standards for Multi-Tenant Industrial Buildinqs
The City, in conjunction with architects and developers of multi-te
industrial buildings, has developed design standards for this type of land Although the standards have not been formally adopted, they were used guideline for the design of this multi-tenant project. The standards defi multi-tenant industrial building as a building that is proposed to be intern divided into four or more smaller user spaces of 3,000 square feet or less each user space is provided with an individual overhead loading door.
The design standards require parking at the rate of one space for each 335 sc feet of floor area. This would result in the need for 220 parking spaces whf the project proposes 245 spaces. The existing parking requirements of the z( ordinance are as follows:
Office 1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area Warehouse 1 space/1,000 square feet of gross floor area Manufacturing 1 space/400 square feet of gross floor area
This results in the need for 207 parking spaces based on estimated uses.
number of parking spaces provided will allow a greater flexibility in tc sel ect i on.
Loading areas have been provided as parallel side loading areas. Ove- loading doors have been located in pairs so that there is space alon! building between each pair of doors to allow for service/loading areas. loading areas do not project into the driveway widths of 24 feet. Eight wide loading areas are provided for the entire length of the buildings addition, a 44 inch wide pedestrian access lane is provided between the lo area and the building. Where tenant spaces are greater than 24 feet recessed doors are provided and the loading area between pairs of doors minimum length of 40 feet.
All loading doors are screened from view from the public right-of-way. Th accompl i shed by bui 1 ding conf i gurati on and screen wall s. Landscapi ng i s
to compliment physical screening. As a condition of approval, CC&R’s have required to prohibit outdoor storage or operation. The park owner or m:
is required to inspect the project on a yearly basis and submit a report 1
Planning Director and Code Enforcement Officer for review listing any ins1
of outdoor storage or operation. If violations are not corrected in 30 day the filing of the report, the owner/manager agrees to cancel the lease wil operator.
SDP 89-2/SV 89-2 - PACli W IC POINT JANUARY 3, 1990
PAGE 4 -
Scenic Corridor Guidelines
The Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railway is addressed in the Scenic Corr
Guide1 ines. For property adjacent to the corridor right-of-way a predomi theme tree, Pinus Torreyana (Torrey Pine), has been selected. The wes
portion of the project adjacent to the corridor has incorporated the theme
into its proposed landscape plan. Building A, adjacent to the corridor
oriented so that the front of the building faces the right-of-way to proje pleasant building facade for the enjoyment of railroad passengers as recomme by the guidelines.
local Coastal Proqram
The proposed project is consistent with the relevant policies of the Me11 segment of the Local Coastal Program. The project site is presently devel as a paved parking lot. No steep slopes or natural vegetation exist on the c The project will not have drainage impacts on coastal resources.
Growth Manaqement
The subject property is located within Local Facilities Management Plan Zoi
The impacts on public facilities created by the proposed project and compl.
with the adopted performance standards are summarized below:
Facility Impacts Compl i ance with Stat
YES
YES City Administrative N/A
YES Library N/A Wastewater Treatment Capacity 25.23 EDU's YES
YES Parks N/A Drainage 24.30 CFS
Ci rcul at i on 859 ADT "See Discussion Bel
Fire Fire Sta. No. 4 YES
YES
YES
School s N/A Sewer Collection System 25.23 EDU's
Water Distribution System 5,550.6 GPD YES
Open Space N/A YES
Circulation
The Zone 3 Plan, amended in November 1987, called for the widening of o
off ramps at Palomar Airport Road and 1-5 as well as minor improvements t intersection of Palomar Airport Road and Paseo del Norte prior to 1990. All
the City is presently discussing the ramp widening with Caltrans, timing of improvements is at Caltran's discretion. It would be preferable to por the improvements at Paseo del Norte until the improvements at 1-5 are init. The intent of the Zone 3 Plan is still being met because the adopted perfoi standard is still being complied with. Monitoring will determine when the
of service begins to approach the threshold.
The project complies with all applicable standards and is not an intensil for the site. Two driveways are proposed for the project onto Avenida Enc A third access point is provided by a shared reciprocal access drive wil
SDP 89-2/SV 89-2 - PAC,, m IC POINT 0
JANUARY 3, 1990 PAGE 5 -
Carlta5 FloraJ Trade Center to the north. The project has been conditione(
provide for reciprocal access across the site for the adjacent developmen. the south to facilitate vehicle circulation in the area once the mediar Avenida Encinas is constructed.
Standards Variance for Avenida Encinas
The Carltas Company, the applicant for Minor Subdivision Number 800 which conditionally approved to create the project site, is requesting approval Standards Variance. The request is to approve a variance to the City star right-of-way width for a secondary arterial street from 84 feet to 74 feet. request will reduce the parkway from 10 feet to 5 fleet on each side of Ave Encinas, thus placing the property line at back of sidewalk. The Enginec Department is recommending approval of the Standalrds Variance as all c
improvements for a secondary arterial. The Standards Variance is just because the requirement for full right-of-way along Avenida Encinas would CI a series of nonconforming building setbacks and necessitate the acquisitic property from the state. By reducing the right-of-way to 74 feet, staff obtain utility easements where necessary and not create substandard setb The curb to curb width of 64 feet which meets City standards, will enable to create a wider arterial roadway from the Floral Trade Center south to Pa Airport Road. Attached to the staff report is a memo from the City Engine the Planning Commission recommending approval for the Standards Variance resolution containing findings for the Commission to approve the request.
Summary
The project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designation complies with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport Draft Design Standards for Multi-Tenant Industrial Buildings, Scenic Cor
the Standards Variance; therefore, staff recommends approval of SDP 89-2/:
2.
developments in the area have constructed less than current standard s’
Guidelines, Mello 11, Growth Management, and the findings can be made to aF
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that no significant environmental ii will result from this project, and a Negative Declaration was issued on Sep 15, 1989. This decision was based on findings of the Environmental Assessment and a field surve:y by staff. The site is presently develope(
0 e SDP 89-2/SV 89-2 - PACL, IC POIhlT JANUARY 3, 1990
PAGE 6
paved parking lot and had been used in conjunction with the adjacent builc
to the north. The Negative Declaration for the project was sent to the Si Clearinghouse and no comments were received during the public notice perioc
ATTACHMENTS
1.
2.
3.
4. Location Map 5. Background Data Sheet 6. Disclosure Form
7. Local Facilities Impacts Assessment Form 8. 9.
P1 anni ng Commi ssi on Resol uti on No. 2942
Planning Commission Resolution NO. 2943 Planning Commission Resolution No. 2964
Memo to Planning Commission from the City Engineer dated December 18, Reduced copy of site plan (Exhibit "A") 10. Exhibits "A" - ''I", dated November 15, 1989
DN: af October 19, 1989
Pacific Point SDP E
i L
0 0
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: SDP 89-2
CASE NAME: PACIFIC POINT
REQUEST AND LOCATION! A MULTI-TENANT OFFICE/WAREHOC
MANUFACTURING CENTER CONSISTING OF 6 BUILDINGS TOTALLING 73, SQUARE FEET LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF AVENIDA ENCINAS NORTH
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THE SOUTHERLY 440 FEET OF PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL, NO. 14009, CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE
CALIFORNIA, RECORDED NOVEMBER 1, 1985.
APN: 210-090-47
Acres 5.98 Proposed No. of Lots/Units N/A
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation PI
Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed N/A
Existing Zone PM Proposed Zone N/A
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Zoninq Land Use
Site PM PAVED PARKING LOT
North PM FLORAL TRADE CENTER
South PM OFFICE BUILDING
East PM & C-T-0 OFFICE BUILDING &
PROPOSED SITE FOR MEDIEVAL T
West TC RAILROAD
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District CARLSBAD Water CARLSBAD Sewer CARLSBAD
EDU's 25.23Public Facilities Fee Agreement, Date MAY 23, 15
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
X Negative Declaration, issued SEPTEMBER 15. 1989
E.I.R. Certified, dated
Other,
{rn e I__.
DISCLOSURE FORM
APPLICANT: SUDBERRY PROPERTIES (RICH SIMONS)
Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, SY
4350 LA JOLLA VILLAGE DRIVE y SAN DIEGO, c. 92122 Buslness Address
(619) 546-5151
Telephone Number
AGENT: WARE AND MALCOMB ARCHITECTSy INC.
Name
Business Address
Telephone Number
9868 SCRANTON ROAD, SUITE 200 SAN DIEGO, CA. 92121
(619) 546-1121
MEMBERS: ... Name (individual, partner, joint Home Address
venture, corpora tion, syndication)
Business Address
Telephone Number Telephone Number
Name Home Address
Business Address
Telephone Number Telephone Number
(Attach more sheets if necessary)
I
I/We understand that if this project is located in the Coastal Zone, I/we \
for Coastal Commission Approval prior to development.
I/We acknowledge that in the process of reviewing this application, it
members, or City Council members to inspect and enter the property tha
subject of this application.
I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this d
is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be re1
as being true and correct until amended.
necessary for members of City Staff, Planning Commissioners, Design Revit
I/We consent to entry for this purpose.
t
BY Steve Zi egl er, A. I. A.
Aqent, Owner, Pa
w CITY OF CARLSBAD m
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAK
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO.: PACIFIC POINT (SDP 89-2)
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 3 GENERAL PLAN: PI
ZONING: P-M
DEVELOPER'S NAME: WARE & MALCOMB ARCHITECTS, INC.
ADDRESS: 9868 SCRANTON ROAD, SUITE 200
PHONE NO.: 546-1121 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: PORTION OF 210- (FINAL MAP PEN1
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC. , SQ. FT. , DU) : 6 AC, 73,7
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE:
A. city Administrative Facilities; Demand in Square Footage = - 1
B. Library; Demand in Square Footage = - 1
C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) = - 2:
D. Parks; Demand in Acreage = -
E. Drainage; Demand in CFS = i
Identify Drainage Basin = J
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
F. Circulation; Demand in ADTs = - t (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
1 - G. Fire; Served by Fire Station No. =
H. Open Space; Acreage Provided -
I. Schools ;
J. Sewer; Demand in EDUs -
1
1
2
Identify Sub Basin - -
Demand in GPD - '
-
- - (Demands to be determined by staff) -
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
- K. Water;
e a
December 18, 1989
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: CITY ENGINEER
CARLTAS COMPANY REQUEST FOR STANDARDS VARIANCE SV 89-02
The Carltas Company has requested a variance from City Design Standards.
accordance with Section 19 of the Street Design Criteria of the City Standard:
Planning Commission shall have the authority as an administrative act to grant vari
to the City Standards provided the following findings can be met:
1. That there are extraordinary or unusual circumstances or conditions applica the situation or surrounding property necessitating a variance of the Stand
2.
3.
That the granting of such variance will not cause substantial drainage prot
That the granting of such variance will not conflict with existing or future
and parking demands or pedestrian or bicycle use.
That the granting of such variance will not be detrimental to the public v
or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the v;
is granted.
That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the compreh
general plan.
4.
5.
City staff has reviewed the variances requests and is making the recornrnendatio.
follows in this memorandum.
REQUEST: Approve variance to City standard right of way width, from 84’ to 74’.
City standard right of way for a secondary arterial is 84’. The request will
reduce the parkway from 10’ to 5’ on each side of Avenida Encinas, thus
placing property line at back of sidewalk.
I LOCATION: Approximately 600’ south of Palomar Airport Road, on both sides
street to the northern boundary of PIP 89-08, MS 800 known as Floral Center.
REASON: By reducing right of way requirements on Avenida Encinas, the applic,
provide the required street section without loosing developable propeq
reduced right of way (5’ each side) is from parkway behind the required si
If the Commission concurs the findings would be as follows:
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve.
EXPLANATION: All other developments in the area have constructed 16
current standard street improvements for a secondary arterial. W
intent of this arterial exists (2 lanes in each direction), staff woulc create a standard arterial roadway from Burroughs site (now th Trade Center) to Palomar Airport Road. This will incorporate the
e 0
Planning Commission Carltas Company Request for Standards Variance SV 89-02
December 18, 1989 Pa8
and replacement of approximately 3,000 feet of curb, gutter and sidewalk
approving this variance; 1:) The developers on both sides of the roadwaj
dedicate 2.5’ instead of 7.5’ along their frontage; 2) the developers will con:
a standard secondary arterial with the exception of 5’ parkway behind the F
sidewalk; 3) provide for necessary transition of curb, gutter and sidewalk u
needed.
The circumstances or conditions applicable to this situati unusual, The existing street section and adjacent development than current standard. The proposed request will improT
otherwise substandard roadway system.
No drainage problems will occur.
The proposed variance will not conflict with existing or future t
parking, pedestrian or bicycle demands.
The public welfare or private property rights are not detrimen
injurious.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5, The proposed variance will not adversely affect the compreh
general plan.
Od&
*e LLOYD B. HUBBS
City Engineer
LBH:CEW:rp
Exhibit
.- -- . 0 .----~--------------------.-----------------------
I
?
->- /,__c_c
L
b
F 0 3) EXHIBIT 5
RUSSELL W. GROSSE DEVELOPMENT CO., INC.
Phon e -. Ca r I s bad, Ca I I fo r n la 9 2008 5850 Avenida Ericinas Suite A -_
January 11, 1990
V1A MESSENGER
Ms. Lee Rautancranz, City Clerk
City of Carlsbad
1200 Elin Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: PACIFIC POINT SDP 89-2 and SV 89-2
Planning Commission Resolutions #2942, #2943, and #2970
Dear Ms. Rautancranz:
With reference to the above mentioned project approved by
Planning Commission at its regular hearing on January 3rd, 1
the undersigned respectfully requests that the City Cou
appeal Planning Commission Resolutions #2942, #2943, and #297
Palomar & Co. is the owner of property on the east sid Avenida Encinas. Over the past six months, var
representatives of Palomar & Co. have been in contact various members of the staff relative to decisions being regarding the widening of Avenida Encinas. On all occasion were informed that decisions being made would not, in the
run, affect our property. It was stated that the staff wouJ
recommending that widening of Avenida Encinas would no
required at all, and subsequently that if it were to be wid1 it would be widened entirely on the west side of the strePt
representation to this effect was made to us on January
1990. Because of these representations, we have not appear(
the Planning Commission to present opposition regarding
matter. We believe that a requirement that we widen our sic
the street is an unfair burden on our property considerinc
the circumstances, and request an opportunity to present position to the City Council.
We have met on numerous occasions with the developer of the q referred to project and were basically informed that they
do whatever the City required them to do and nothing more.
Contractors License No 378383
, 9
C a e
MS. Lee Raukancranz, City Clerk
City of Carlsbad January 11, 1990
Page 2
On January 4th, after the Planning Commission meeting was ( with, we were informed that the information previously give] us by the staff was incorrect and that while they apologized the incorrect information, there was nothing they could do a it. It was recommended to us that we institute this appeal.
Sincerely yours,
PALOMAR & CO.
By: \7&*~,4 ’ e4 tc- L-L-
Mary E. bkro$+
BG:jh
cc: Marty Orenyak, Community Development Director
Lloyd Hubbs, Engineering Department Matt Hall, Planning Commission Chairman
e e
5850 Avenida Ericinas, Suite A Carlsbad, California 92008
February 13, 1990
in_ 1
-4 -4 Ms. Aletha Rautenkranz, City Clerk
City of Carisbad
1200 Elm Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: PACIFIC POINT SDP 89-2, SV 89-2
I3
Planning Commission Resolutions #2942, #2943, and #297
Dear Ms. Rautenkranz:
Palomar & co.
project as set forth in its letter dated January 11, 1990.
Sincerely yours,
PALOMAR & CO.
hereby withdraws its appeal of the above menti
By : -
rv;F4z : i ).\ J -A cc: Marty Orenyak, Community Development Director
Mike Holzmiller, Planning Department
Lloyd Hubbs, Engineering Department
Contractors License ‘40 338383
r I: Carl&ad JoGmal
Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County
Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to
North Coast Publishers, In,:. corporate offices: P 0. 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 principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general 1
published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California,
newspaper is published for the dissemination of locat news and intelligenceof a general cha
which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had land still has a bona fide subscription lis
subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published ut regular I
the said City of Carisbad, County of Son Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding on
preceding the date of publication of
hereinafter referred to; and that thf
which the annexed is a printed copy
published in each regular and entire i:
newspaper and not in any supplemen
I am over the ageof eighteen years, and not a party toor interested in the above entitl
P-M Zone, and in Local Facili.
5 Management Zone 3 and more
The southerly 440 feet of Parcel 1
‘:arlsbad. County of San Diego.
November 1. 1985. If you have any questions regard- ing this matter, please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. Ifyou challenge the Site Develop- ment Plan and Standards Variance in court. you may be limited to rais- ing only those issues you or some- one else raised at the public hear-
ing described in this notice. or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlshad City Clerks Office at or prior to the public hearing. Appellant: Russell W. Grosse De- velopment Co. CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL rticularly described as:
SDP 89-2iSV 89-2 :if Parcel Map No. 14009, City of
NOTICEISHEREBYGIVENthat State of California. recorded the following dates, tc-wit: the City Council of the City of Carls- bad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlshad, California, at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday, February 6,1990, to consider an appeal ofthe approval of a Site Development Plan to construct a multi-tenant office/warehouse/rnanufacturing
center consisting of 6 buildings tot- alling 73,715 square feet on 5.98 acres, and a Standards Variance to reduce the right-of-way width from 84 feet to 74 feet on Avenida En- cinason property generally located onthe west side of Avenida Encinas north of Palomar Airport Road, in
January 26
...............................
...............................
...............................
...............................
...............................
I certify under penalty of perjury that the foreg
correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San
California on - -a
day of -p&mu r y , 1991 $ ~ _____ -~ .~-~ ~ __~~ _.___- -__-
bier1
#20;
c a 0 .
1200 ELM AVENUE TELF . CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 (619)
Office of the City Clerk artp of anrlabnb
DATE : January 11, 1990
TO : Bobbie Hoder - Planning Dept.
FROM : Karen Kundtz - Clerk's Office
RE : PACIFIC POINT - SDP 89-2 - PC Res. Nos. 2942, 2943, and 2971
THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL.
According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Counc
within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The itc
will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off
all parties.)
Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in
Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call.
___________________-____________________--------------------------------
The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council
Meeting o@</G,k, 3 ,' b /'fydc /
/.2' / ,--- --/ ,,&i+/',Z /-I' y/*%Z< ,i !-- 4- j7fLF
/ Sigg.dur< /' / Date
0 0
I
. 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
Office of the City Clerk aitg of Mnrlsbab
- APPEAL FORM
I (We) appeal the following decision of the PLANNING COMMISSION
to the City CI
Project Name and Number (or subject of appeal): PACIFIC POINT SDP
and SV 89-2
Planning Commission Resolutions #2942, 2943, and 2970
Date of Decision: JANUARY 3, 1990
Reason for Appeal: SEE T.ETTER TO T.RR -N7 PTVV r~gff
FOR ALL PERTWNT TNmATTnN
/ t
L', 7, I-/I-UY 0 j ,// 6, ., "L 1 . [ . , /,..-
Date Signature' L ' '
/ PALOMAR & e0
BY MARY E. GROSSE
Name (Please Print)
5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS, SUITE A
Address
CARLSBAD CA 92008
438-3141
Telephone Number
ATTACHED PLEASE FIND CHECK IN THE AMOUNT OF $450.00 FOR THE
FEE.
c 0 0
RUSSELL W. GROSSE DEVELOPMENT CO., INC.
5850 Avenida Encinas, Suite A __ Carl5bad, Calitornia 92008 .. Phone
January 11, 1990
VIA MESSENGER
Ms. Lee Rautancranz, City Clerk City of Carlsbad
i2gO Eiili Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re; PACIFIC POINT SDP 89-2 and SV 89-2
Planning Commission Resolutions #2942, #2943, and #2970
Dear Ms. Rautancranz:
With reference to the above mentioned project approved by
Planning Commission at its regular hearing on January 3rd, 1
the undersigned respectfully requests that the City Coui appeal Planning Commission Resolutions #2942, #2943, and #297
Palomar & Co. is the owner of property on the east sidc Avenida Encinas. Over the past six months, varj
representatives of Palomar & Co. have been in contact various members of the staff relative to decisions being regarding the widening of Avenida Encinas. On all occasion were informed that decisions being made would not, in the
run, affect our property. It was stated that the staff woul
recommending that widening of Avenida Encinas would not
it would be widened entirely or, the west side of the street
representation to this effect was made to us on January
1990. Because of these representations, we have not appeare
the Planning Commission to present opposition regarding matter. We believe that a requirement that we widen our sid the street is an unfair burden on our property considering the circumstances, and request an opportunity to present position to the City Council.
We have met on numerous occasions with the developer of the a referred to project and were basically informed that they ~n do whatever the City required them to do and nothing more.
required at all, and subsequently that if it were to be wide
Contractors License No 378383
9
0 e 0
Ms. Lee Rautancranz, City Clerk City of Carlsbad January 11, 1990
Page 2
On January 4th, after the Planning Commission meeting was ( with, we were informed that the information previously give] us by the staff was incorrect and that while they apologized the incorrect information, there was nothing they could do a'
it.
Sincerely yours,
PALOMAR & CO.
It was recommended to us that we institute this appeal.
. ./ By: . / / Mary E. Grosse
BG:jh
cc: Marty Orenyak, Community Development Director
Lloyd Hubbs, Engineering Department
Matt Hall, Planning Commission Chairman
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
438-5621
REC’D FROM DATE
RECEIPT NO. TOTAL I
@ 0
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL
-
SDP 89-2/SV 89-2
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hc
public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Cali
at 6:OO P.M., on Tuesday, February 6, 1990, to consider an appeal of the api
of a Site Development Plan to construct a multi-tenant office/warehouse/mani
center consisting of 6 buildings totalling 73,715 square feet on 5.98 acres
a Standards Variance to reduce the right-of-way width from 84 feet to 74 fec
Avenida Encinas on property generally located on the west side of Avenida Er
north of Palomar Airport Road, in the P-M Zone, and in Local Facilities Man<
Zone 3 and more particularly described as:
THE SOUTHERLY 440 FEET OF PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO.
14009, CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, RECORDED NOVEMBER 1, 1985.
1.f you have any questions regarding this matter, please call the Planning D
at 438-1161.
If YOU challenge the Site Development Plan and Standards Variance in court,
may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at t
public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence deliv
the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing.
APPELLANT: Russell W. Grosse Eevelopment Co.
PUBLISH: Januarv 26 ' "92 CARLSBAD CITY COUECIL
VICINITY MAP
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN thdt the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbac
hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Calif(
at 600 p.m. on Wednesday, January 3, 1990, to consider approval of a Site Develop
Plan to construct a multi-tenant officeiwarehousel manufacturing center consisting
buildings totalling 73,715 square fleet on 5.9s acres, and a Standards Variance to rl
the right-of-way width from 84 feet to 74 feet on Avenida Encinas on property gen
located on the west side of Avenida Encinas north of Palomar Airport Road, in t
M Zone, and in Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and inore particularly describi
THE SOUTIIERLY 440 FEET OF PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP NO.
14009, CI‘I’Y OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, RECORDED NOVEMBER 1, 1985.
T. I hose persons wishing to speak on this proposal :ire cordially invited to :Ittond the
hearing. If you have any questions, please call the Planning Department at 438-11
If you challenge the Site Development Plan in court, you may be limited to raisir
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this no
in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the
hearing.
CASE FILE: SDP 89-2/SV (09-2
AP I’LI CAN 1’:
I’UBL1SI-I: Deceinber 22, 1989
PACIFIC POINT
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
(Form A)
0 0
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice -
SDP 89-2 / SV 89-2 - PACIFIC POINT
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of
FEB. 6, 1990
Thank you.
1/22/9
Assistant City Man-- Da -
e 0 dames B. Finney Jr.
5445 Paseo Del Norte
tarlsbadr CA 92008 J
Charles E3- Weselohr Jr, Theodore E Mariarn Blonski , Paul Ecke Sr.
1520 Hunsaker St- J c/o Best Western Rancho Ber. P.O. Box 607
Oceanside , CA 92054 17065 \N. Bernard0 Drive Encinitas, CA 92
San Diego, CA 92127
J Dale & Lynn Clernens Carltas Co.
4401 Manchester / Louis V. Jones 5424 Paeo Del Norte 772 Neptune Ave.
Carlsbad,, CA 92008 Leucadia, CA 92024 Encinitas, Ca 92
-3 pi3 2- 5 2 James & Kristine Logan y
677 Santa Fe Dr. Ray R. Wfinter Trust 1
12123 Candy Lane Saratoga,, CA 95070 Encinitas, CA 92024
\, .,,A+, 1 /2:-&-F , s ---
/ Donald D. Sharp Trust J Dale Gilbert
5411 Avenida Encinas 5490 El Arbol Dr.
tl20 Carlsbad, CA 92008
Carlsbad, CA 92008 (ZJ /- 0.
Louis V. -Jotrle5 --/
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Robert h MA Townsend J Richard Noody
588 Camino Del Rio 1017 N. Frederic Ave.
San Diego, CA 92108 Burbank, Ca 91505
Richard Mathias
Carlsbad, CA 92008 OQ 5500 El Arbol Dr. 5424,I?i&io Del Norte
/
i
6.. Tornothy & rnarian Stallrnan
/f
Louis v./ Y rlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, Ca 92008
eo Del Norte 5520 Los Robles Dr.
J /$:
Carlsbad, CA 92008 flVwv@f
Hoehn Associastes
5566 Paseo Del Norte
SW&@ 435-G LA~JcrcL4~~~oe*.zlO y PROErnE5 1 it:/
%r)lE69, C4 92/2
I &?-Tiv-' A?tctl s/m/ds
W4RE r'/vflm jleff-
q66g :- fl/ ~n.,sr~200 sf?# .d/iFGO, L4 92/z/ m/ * TTFU?z ZlKG&
a rancies n. Weaver e 480 Los Robles Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
I nomas rieper 10947 Barman Ave.
, Culver City, CA 90230
-..
d ly 1 \
Wayne Modesitt 756 Grand Ave. II
Carlsbad, CA 92008 lr
1: I! 23
Florence P. Toscano 5440 Los Robles Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Gary & Juliann Heers
7676 Rancho Destino
Las Vegas, NV 89123
Vincent Toscano
5450 Los Robles Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Ellsworth E Ka Orr
5460 Los Robles Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Joe & Joan Noble
5470 Los Robles Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
.1 q9 *-- :',I e. ,
I(;?,? f-,
f II, ' ii.
If? $! I
I# - i,
"/,I' n ti *I
*('?'/ ~ I
I;, \( .I
*, (qp
i I: ,
(; t
ilii , .. k,) PU v,?
w.,
A .i (P r f7) @
\ i i
3 I; h,
--._-, I- - m-x Box 488
Ericirii tas I CA %m 1455 El Arbol Drive
larl.sbad, CA 92008
I Paul EckeSr. TI
; Encinitas, CA
John & Harriett Gray ' Charles S. Raymond ,451 Los Robles Drive
larlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 92008
' 5491 Los Robles Drive P.0. Box 408
I
I
I Palomar & Compi
5850 Avenida El
~ Carlsfiad, CA 9;
~
uardis Clernens Gary & Vicki Ziesche
41 S- Barrington Ave- PB 5481 Los Robles Drive
os Anyeles, CA 90049 'Carlsbad, CA 92008
I I
Palomar & Compi
5850 Avenida El : Carlsbad, CA !
erri S- Wolder Trust Chandler E. Edwards
460 Carlsbad Blvd, '5471 Los Robles Drive
arlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 92008
& Miriam Blonski %3 mar & COW;
12019 Camin ampana 58%v~Qda El
Thh\ San Diego, CA 92i28 Carlsbad, en-+
Theodore & Miriam Blonski Pa1omv .'\ Cornpi q! 5850 Avenrd
Carlsbad, CA *
12019 Caminto Campana
%? San Diego, CA 92128
Paul Ecke, Sr. Trust Pal \ mar & Compi
P-0. BOX 53 5850 A&=
Car 1 sbad Houstan, TX 77001
1 Palomar & Compi
5850 Avenida El + Center Assoc.
701 Pal3 r Airport Rd-
Suite 2.5- Carlsbad, Ca 9;
La Costa, CA 92U09
I
'acific Center Assoc. Aro Partners (1
701 Palomar Airport Rd- Carlsbad, CA ! juite 250
Ja Costa, CA 92009
&b re h Miriam Blonski Doris Brookin9 7063-o Drive 375 Skyline Dr
;an Diego, 2*27
' P-0. Box 4549
Vista, CA 9201
Vincent 12, Dixc Jalomar- Venture
5962 La1 Place Ct. !I200 5555 Paseo [)el
3arlsbald, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 9;
uu LOS KOUleS I ' a1 sbad, CA 920' I '" 9 El ,Arb01 Drive
I ,arlsbad, CA 92008
,
Ruth F. Davis
5510 Los Robles
Carlsbad, CA 920
Ethel V. Barosh
Carlsbad, CA 92008
/,:.15470 El Arbol Drive
>I I (? 1 4? (;I
@
Robert F. Balfou
5520 Los Robles
Caclsnadl CA 920
I Robert Melendez
5520 El Arbvl Drive
'(Zarlsbad, CA 92001) I?
11,: .. I:, :
%,()I i*,
i
A John H. Shibe
Apartado 5-94 I>,;: 77505 Cancua Q.
;? ('7
i',
Yartin & Dorothy
1223 Clarence DK
Vista, CA 92084
L.'
@
ii ,;;
r?
Brian C. Polley
5515 El Arbol DK
Carlsbad, CA 92C
4
1
6*:;i\ (?;, Lester & Bev. Mi ?)e 67) 5009 Tierra Del
h Carlsbad, CA 92(
t r.
j
it 1
r is+
?, (? , ?\ Donald & Car Kul
5495 El Arbol
%, Carlsbad, CA 92(
0,
I /-3
"/ 41 (F ,1
hi/
'1 i ('l
,I . I1
I<
[ 7- Mark & Eileen LC
I 'i 5485 El Arbol
Carlsbad, CA 921
1 '. ' ;I,
i3
' I>> 1, / 'q,
* I I& hndrew & Stiirle
!L 5475 El Arbol D
Zarlsbad, CA 92 1 .%% x. t? 1: ' h-,
$ph <[,;I a !)avid & Vera 01
La Mesa, CA 92 * 5151 Alzeda Uri
1
* *
The Sun-Gal Trust Richard W. McCluskey
701 8 Street #2020 5450 El Arbol Drive
San Diego, CA 92008 Carlsbad, CA 92008
I
Avenida Encinas Assoc, Charles He Henry
3151 Airway #G-3 5501 Los Roble Drive
Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Carlsbad, CA 92008
Carlsbad Commercial Cecil E. Samuels Trust
P.O. Box 30015 Terminal 5490 Carlsbad Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90030 Carlsbad, Ca 92008
Carlsbad Commercial Louis & MA Brockrnann
P.O. Box 919 5511 Los Robles Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008 Carlsbad, Ca 92008
Doris E. Wilcox George & Aida Awad
3350 Hollydale Drive 5480 Carlsbad Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90039 Carlsbad, CA 92008