Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-01-07; City Council; 11500; La Posada Guadalupe De Carlsbad Appeal\B # &$X2- IITG. I- 3 -9L IEPT. PLN CITY ‘: F CARLSBAD - AGENDl -3lLL d” 3 TITLE: ~ LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD APPEAL (CUP 91-10) IECOMMENDED ACTION: If the City Council concurs, the Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council direct the City's Attorney to prepare documents DENYING the appeal of the Planning Commission's determination to APPROVE CUP 91-10. ITEM EXPLANATION On December 4, 1991, the Planning Commission approved (6-O) a request to allow a temporary emergency shelter for the homeless, located on Impala Drive at Orion Way near the Carlsbad Safety Center. The shelter would be operated by Catholic Charities of San Diego and would provide up to 50 men with housing in modular buildings up to sixty days. The site is zoned for industry with a qualified overlay and it has a planned industrial general plan designation. This use is allowed in this location with a Conditional Use Permit. The target population is the homeless migrant workers of Carlsbad, however the shelter would not exclude other homeless males. The residents would receive two meals per day and also available would be support services such as literacy programs, English classes, and job training. The property is being leased for two years by the applicant, therefore the term of the CUP is two years, with possible extensions. The appeal has been filed by an adjoining Sunny Creek property owner. The issue of compatibility with the residentially designated as yet undeveloped, properties to the north, known as the Sunny Creek Specific Plan area, was raised at the December 4, 1991 Planning Commission public hearings and was the topic of the letter of appeal, copy attached. The appelant states that operation of the emergency shelter at the Impala Drive location for more than two years would be detrimental to the future development of land within the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. In their approval of CUP 91-10, the Planning Commission accepted the findings recommended by staff with regard to compatibility with and lack of material detriment to existing and future uses on the surrounding properties. The subject property is separated from the Sunny Creek Specific Plan by a steep (1.4:1), thickly vegetated slope over 220 feet in height. The modular buildings will be setback 60 feet from the top of slope, preventing any visual impacts. Fencing will surround the property which, when combined with the virtually impassable slope, effectively prevents pedestrian traffic from La Posada to Sunny Creek. -. - PAGE TWO OF AGENDA BILL NO. // 500 The applicant has stated that they expect to move La Posada from the Impala Drive site after the two year lease expires, however extra time may be needed to provide a smooth transition to a more permanent location. Any extension of the Conditional Use Permit will require another public hearing. FNVIRONMENTAL REVIEW On December 4, 1991, the Planning Commission adopted the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director. Since the infill project site has been previously disturbed by grading and the use is temporary, the Planning Director determined that, as conditioned, no significant adverse environmental impacts will result from this proposal. FISCAL IMPACT This action would allow a temporary use on a vacant site and therefore, no fiscal impacts to the City are anticipated. GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS II Facilities Zone ] 5 I II II Local Facilities Manaqement Plan I -15 II II Growth Control Point WA I II II Net Density I 1 WA I II Special Facility Fees BXHIBITS I 1 WA II 1. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3325 and 3326 2. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated December 4, 1991 3. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated December 4, 1991 4. Letter of appeal dated December 11, 1991. 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 - PIANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3325 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY EMERGENCY SHELTER FOR 50 MIGRANT WORKERS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF IMPALA DRIVE BETWEEN PALMER WAY AND ORION WAY. CASE NAME: LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD CASE NO: CUP 91-10 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 4th day of December, 1991, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby APPROVES the Negative Declaration according to Exhibit “ND”, dated November 14, 1991, and “PII”, dated October 11, 1991, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findings: 1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant impact on the environment. 2. The site has been previously graded pursuant to an earlier environmental analysis. 3. The streets are adequate in size to handle traffic generated by the proposed project. 4. There are no sensitive resources located onsite or located so as to be significantly impacted by this project. c 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 l( 1: II l< 2( 21 2: 2: 24 2f 2E 2'i 2E L 5 7 3 a 1 L > , 5 k i i I 5 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning A Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of December, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairman Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Savary, Erwin, Noble , & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Schramm. .-e..-, ABSTAIN: None. ROBERT HOLMES, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION PC RESO NO. 3325 -2- * NEGATIVE DECLAMTION , PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: North side of Impala Drive between Palmer Way and Orion Way in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Temporary emergency shelter for homeless migrant workers in four modular structures. 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. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification 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 Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 21 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Mike Grim in the Planning Department at 438-l 161, extension 4499. DATED: NOVEMBER 14,199l CASE NO: CUP 91-10 APPLICANT: CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SAN DIEGO PUBLISH DATE: NOVEMBER 14,199l MC&m 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 - (819) 438-l 161 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACI’ ASSE!%hdEWT FORM - PART II (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO. CUP 91-10 DATE: OCTOBER 11. 1991 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD 2. APPLICANT: CATHOLIC CHARITIES 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 349 CEDAR STREET 4. SAN DIEGO. CA 92101 (619) 231-2828 DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: AUGUST 2.1991 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TEMPORARY EMERGENCY SHELTER FOR HOMELESS MEN IN THREE MODULAR STRUCTURES. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration. * A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, “NO” will be checked to indicate this determination. * An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a significant effect on the environment. The project may quahfy for a Negative Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings “YES-@’ and ‘YES-insig’ respectively. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant. - PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT W’JLL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards? ’ 2. Appreciably change the topography or any unique physical features? 3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils either on or off the site? 4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? 5. Result in substantial adverse effects on ambient air quality? 6. Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? 7. Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? a. Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? 9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? 10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? 11. Alter a significant archeological, paleontological or historical site, structure or object? - YES YES bigI (big) NO x x x x x x x x x x x -2- . BIOLOGICAL ENMRONMEXT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES big) 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic plants)? Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance? Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms and insects? Introduce new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? mJMANENvIRoNMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? 18. Substantially affect public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? YES (sig) YES NO (insig) x x x x YES NO ww x x -3- I HUMAN FNVlRONMENT WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste control systems? , Increase existing noise levels? Produce new light or glare? Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area? Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Generate substantial additional traffic? Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking? Impact existing transportation systems or alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans? Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public vie&? Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? YES YES Wg) (insig) NO A x x x x x x x x x x x x x X 4- . MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES 33. 34. 35. 36. 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 r&e or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. big) WigI 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.) Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (“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.) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? NO x x x x -5- DfSCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION The project involves the temporary location of three modular structures on temporary foundations on a pre-graded, industrial infill lot. No grading will be required for the development nd the driveway and parking lot will be surfaced with decomposed granite. The site will be fenced and landscaped and overhead exterior lighting will be provided for safety. Based upon field visits to the disturbed infill site, staff has concluded that no adverse environmental impacts will result from this proposal. PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.10. 11. No grading is proposed for the existing, pregarded industrial pad, therefore no geologic hazards or unstable soil conditions are anticipated. No topographic changes are proposed and no unique physiographic features exist on the site, therefore, no impacts will result. While the site will be landscaped and irrigated, all drainage will be directed to the street and no overflow down surrounding slopes should occur. As groundcovers are proposed, no impacts due to erosion of soils is expected. No beaches or stream channels exist on or near the site and no modification to such will occur. While no standard traffic generation route excess for this use, it is expected that the incremental increase in ambient aerosol production resulting from this project is insignificant. Covering the undeveloped pad with buildings and landscaping will slightly change climatological indices, however, this change is small in scale and considered insignificant. No marine, fresh, or flood watercourses exist on or near the site and all drainage will be directed to the street. No adverse impacts to water courses will result. The incremental depletion in water supply due to this project is considered in&r&ant and no impacts to ground or surface water will result as these water sources do not exist within the project area. Construction and operation of the facility will result in an incremental increase in the consumption of fuel and natural resources, however this minor increase is insignificant. The pre-graded, infill pad contains no archeological, paleontological, or historical structures or objects therefore, no adverse impacts to such will result. -6- BIOLOGICAL FNVIRONMENT U/13. Currently, the graded pad contains very little vegetation, consisting of weeds. The proposed landscaping will be in keeping with the landscaping of the surrounding developments and will not adversely affect the diversity of flora in the area. 14. No agricultural crop or farmland exist on the site and future development of the site will be industrial rather than agricultural. No adverse impacts to crops or farmland will result from this project. 15/16. The existing graded, infill pad contains no significant diversity of fauna and no new species of animals are proposed to be introduced. No adverse impacts to crops or farmland will result from this project. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. While this conditional use will differ from the adjacent land uses, the daily operation periods of the uses will not overlap and there will be no change in the future industrial land use designation. No adverse land use impacts are anticipated. All public utilities and services required to serve the proposed project are in place and adequate to accommodate the use. No adverse impacts are expected. All existing sewer and waste control systems are adequate to accommodate the proposed use and no additional systems or modification to the existing systems is needed. While installation and operation of the facility will produce an incremental increase in noise levels, this is considered insignificant because of the neighboring industrial uses. Some exterior lighting will be installed on the project site, the lighting is in character with the surrounding development and no significant adverse impacts will result. No hazardous substances are proposed onsite and no significant risk of explosion is expected as a result of the proposed development. The maximum of 50 temporary residents of the shelter is not considered a substantial alteration of density of human population. The proposal is providing a housing supply, not creating a. demand therefore no adverse impacts are expected. The project is not expected to generate traffic equal to an industrial or office use and is therefore considered insignificant. No existing parking facilities exist on site and all parking demands should be accommodated within the project area. No adverse impacts to parking is anticipated. -7- - 27.28. 2;. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. No existing transportation systems or circulation patterns traverse the project site and therefore no impacts to such is expected. The modular trailers will be transported along pre-approved haul routes and all construction and assembly will occur out of the public right-of-way. No increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicycles or pedestrians is anticipated. No emergency response plans or evacuation plans involve the project site and no impacts to such are expected. The project will not obstruct any scenic vistas and landscaping and setbacks will eliminate any significant aesthically offensive public views. No recreational opportunities exist onsite and the project is not expected to create additional demands on recreational opportunities. The infill, temporary development on the pre-graded pad will not degrade the quality of the environment, habitats, or examples of California history since these features do not exist onsite. The project will not produce either short-term or long-term environmental disadvantages since it is a temporary use on a previously disturbed, intill industrial lot. No cumulative impacts are anticipated since all affects of the proposed development re well below the level of significance. No direct or indirect impacts to human beings are anticipated from this inEll development as it provides for emergency shelter for homeless individuals without impacting the site or public services. ANALYSIS OF VIAE3LE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: B) 0 D) El F) G) ‘MG:lh A a) Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, c) alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative. The project is too small to phase and must be completed as a whole in order to function properly. Alternate site designs do not produce any environmental advantages alternatives. The proposed scale of development is necessary for the proposed. The proposal is temporary and the ultimate use of the site will be industrial, as designated int he City’s general Plan. The emergency shelter is in response to a current housing need. Development at a future time would postpone addressing this issue. Since this site accommodate the proposed without any significant impacts, alternate sites do not necessarily produce environmental benefits. See E) above. -9- DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATMZ DECLARATION will be prepared. - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required. Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared. - I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed. - I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE) -lO- - . APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJEm. Date , Signature -ll- . 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 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3326 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A TEMPORARY EMERGENCY SHELTER FOR 50 MIGRANT WORKERS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF IMPALA DRIVE BETWEEN PALMER WAY AND ORION WAY. CASE NAME: LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD CASE NO: CUP 91-10 WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on the 4th day of December, 1991, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider said application on property described as: Parcel 2 of Map No. 15247 in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to CUP 91-10. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: ~ ) A That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission APPROVES CUP 91-10, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: . . . . . . 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1c 11 12 13 14 15 16 11 16 19 2c 21 22 22 24 25 26 27 28 Fin-: 1. 2. 3. 4. That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community since it supplies a needed housing supply, is essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the general plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located; That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use because all required and desired facilities and landscaping fit within the project boundary; That all of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained, as demonstrated in the large structural setback from the top of slope and the landscaping along Impala Drive; That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use since Impala Drive is an industrial street with a capacity of 10,000 average daily trips. Conditions: 1. 2. 3. 4. Approval is granted for CUP 91-10, as shown on Exhibits “A”-“C’, for an emergency shelter for up to 50 migrant workers for a maximum of 60 days per individual, dated December 4, 1991, incorporated by reference and on file in the Planning Department. Development shall occur substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions. The developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar copy of the site plan as approved by the Planning Commission. The site plan shall reflect the conditions of approval by the City. The site plan copy shall be submitted to the City Engineer prior to issuance of haul permits or grading plan submittal, whichever occurs first. L This project is approved upon the express condition that haul permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the City Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of application for such sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy. Water shall be provided to this project pursuant to the Water Service agreement between the City of Carlsbad and the Carlsbad Municipal Water District, dated May 25, 1983. PC RESO NO. 3326 -2- - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 e 9 1c 11 12 12 14 1: 16 17 1E 19 2c 21 22 2z 24 25 26 27 28 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance. This conditional use permit is granted for a period of two (2) years from the date of certificate of occupancy. This conditional use permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Director on a semi-annual basis to determine if all conditions of this permit have been met and that the use does not have a significant detrimental impact on surrounding properties or the public health and welfare. If the Planning Director determines that the use has such sign.Xcant adverse impacts, the Planning Director shall recommend that the Planning Commission, after providing the permittee the opportunity to be heard, add additional conditions to mitigate the significant adverse impacts. This permit may be revoked at any time after a public hearing, if it is found that the use has a significant detrimental affect on surrounding land uses and the public’s health and welfare, or the conditions imposed herein have not been met. This permit may be extended for a reasonable period of time not to exceed one (1) year upon written application of the permittee made no less than 90 days prior to the expiration date. In granting such extension, the Planning Commission shall find that no substantial adverse affect on surrounding land uses or the public’s health and welfare will result because of the continuation of the permitted use. If a substantial adverse affect on surrounding land uses or the public’s health and welfare is found, the extension shall be considered as an original application for a conditional use permit. There is no limit to the number of extensions the Planning Commission may grant. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a six-foot high solid wall with gates. Location of said receptacles shall be approved by the Planning Director. Enclosure shall be of similar colors and/or materials to the project to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. No outdoor storage of material shall occur onsite unless required by the Fire Chief. In such instance a storage plan will be submitted for approval by the Fire Chief and the Planning Director. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance with the City’s Sign Ordinance and shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs. Building identification and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identification and/or addresses shall contrast to their background color. PC RESO NO. 3326 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 - - 12. Notices shall be posted on the site, in English and in Spanish, asking residents to travel on public streets to and from the shelter. . Ermnd Conditions: 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. The developer shall comply with all the rules, regulations and design requirements of the respective sewer and water agencies regarding services to the project. The developer shall be responsible for coordination with S.D.G.&E., Pacific Telephone, and Cable TV authorities. Pretreatment of the sanitary sewer discharge from this project may be required. In addition to the requirements for a sewer connection permit the developer shall conform to the requirements of Chapter 13.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The developer shall apply for an industrial waste water discharge permit concurrently with the building permit for this project. No Certificates of Occupancy for the project will be issued before the industrial waste discharge permit application requirements have been met and all applicable fees paid. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to any proposed construction site within this project the developer shall submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation. The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. Reference Chap 11 .O6. Additional drainage easements and drainage structures shall be provided or installed prior to the issuance of grading or building permit as may be required by the City Engineer. This project is approved specifically allowing site drainage to flow out the proposed driveway onto Impala Drive. The water meter for the project shall be installed outside of the proposed driveway. The sewer cleanout shall be fitted with a t&Tic lid. The proposed onsite driveway and parking lot shall be constructed with decomposed granite to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. PC RESO NO. 3326 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1c I.1 12 12 14 15 16 17 1E 19 2c 21 22 22 24 25 26 27 28 23. Concurrent with the submittal of the building plans for the project the developer shall also provide a “fine” grading plan for review. The “fine” grading plan shall be reviewed as a part of the building plans, no additional plancheck fees are requiredandnogradingpermitwillberequired. Fire Conditions: 24. P$or to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be submitted to and approved by the Fire Department. 25. Applicant shall submit a site plan to the Fire Department for approval of access, driveways and general traffic circulation. 26. All required fire hydrants, water mains and appurtenances shall be operational prior to combustible building materials being located on the project site. 27. Proposed security gate systems shall be provided with “Knox” key operated override switch, as specified by the Fire Department. 28. All private driveways shall be kept clear of parked vehicles at all times, and shall have posted “NO Parking/Fire bane” pursuant to Section 17.04.020, Carlsbad Municipal Code. 29. Plans and/or specifications for fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, extinguishing systems, automatic sprinklers, and other systems pertinent to the project shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to construction. 30. The dormitory shall meet the requirements of Title 24. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PC RESO NO. 3326 -5- PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular. meeting of the Plating Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of December, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: , Chairman Holmes, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Savary, Erwin, Noble & Hall. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Schramm. ABSTAIN: None. CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION PC RESO NO. 3326 -6- APPL, .I’ION COMPLETE DATE: OCTOBER 23.1991 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DECEMBER 4,1991 PMNING COMMISSION PLANNING DEPARTMENT CUP 91-10 - LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD - Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation and operation of a temporary emergency shelter for 50 migrant workers on property located on the north side of Impala Drive between Palmer Way and Orion Way, in Local Facilities Management Zone 5. 1. RECOMMENDATION 0 3 STAFF REPORT That the Planning Commission ADOPT Plannn, i m Commission Resolution No. 3325, APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by the Pla,nning Director and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3326, APPROVING CUP 91-10, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. PRCLJEV DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUNQ The applicant, Catholic Charirics of San Diego, is proposing to locate a temporary emergency shelter for homeless migrant workers on a previously graded, in-fill lot on Irnpala Drive near Orion Way. The shelter would consist of four modular buildings placed on temporary foundations, including a dormitory, mess hall, resident manageis office, and an office/classroom. The buildings wculd cover approximately 7,645 square feet of the 52,270 square foot graded pad. Landscaping would be installed in and around the buildings, providing external screening and an interior patio, and a 10 space parking area would also be provided. The site is zoned M-Q (Industrial with a Qualified Development Overlayj which allows, by Conditional Use Permit, a variety of establishments involving the overnight stay of large assemblages of people including hospitals, treatment centers, and overnight campgrounds. CUP 91-10 LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD DECEMBER 4,1991 PAGE 2 The shelter would be operated by Catholic Charities of San Diego and would provide up to 50 men with housing for up to sixty days. The target population is the homeless migrant workers of Carlsbad, however the shelter would not exclude other homeless males. The residents would receive two meals per day and also available would be support services such as literacy programs, English classes, and job training courses. The property is on a two-year lease, therefore the Conditional Use Permit is being recommended for a two year period with semi-annual review. ANALYSIS 1. Can the four findings required for a Conditional Use Permit be made? Namely, That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located; b) That the site for the intended use is adequate is size and shape to accommodate the use; That all of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained; d) That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use. 2. Is the proposed project consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport? DISCUSSION la. Necessity and Consistency of prOposed Use A The emergency shelter will provide temporary housing for homeless migrant workers that currently inhabit the undeveloped portions of Carlsbad. By providing support services as well as shelter, La Posada Guadalupe will aide the homeless in securing more permanent . CUP 91-10 LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD DECEMBER 4, 1991 to the community. The project is consistent with the General Plan because it implements the objectives of the newly adopted Housing Element by providing affordable housing for groups with special needs (e.g. farm workers and the homeless). As discussed below, external noise levels will be below 65 CNEL and all public facilities required to serve the project are currently in place. Given the above, the project is desirable for the community and essentially in harmony with the General Plan. lb. Adequacy of Site in Size and Shape As can be seen on Exhibit “A”, dated December 4, 1991, all proposed improvements necessary to support the proposal can fit on the pregraded site and no expansion or grading is required. Patrons of La Posada Guadalupe are expected to arrive by bus, bicycle, or foot. Bike racks are being provided and a bus stop is located nearby. The ten space parking lot can accommodate the maximum of four employees, since the occupants are not expected to drive automobiles. As discussed below, all features necessary to adjust the proposed use to the surroundings can be provided. Therefore, the site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the requested use. lc. Yards, Setbacks, Walls and Other Features Necesuy to Adjust Use As shown on Exhibit “A”, dated December 4, 1991, the site is a pre-graded pad, separated from the adjacent industrial uses to the east and west by large 2:l slopes. The most prominent view of the property is from the west therefore the buildings have been grouped on the eastern portion of the pad. Fencing and landscaping will be provided along the top of slope to minimize views of the project from properties to the west. Planting will be installed along the street frontage to soften views and the project will be adequately setback from all property lines. In summary, all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or future uses in the area will be provided and are conditioned to be maintained. Id. Adequacy of street SJrstem The site is served by Impala Drive, an industrial street with a maximum capacity of 10,000 average daily trips. Currently, only some of the surrounding properties are developed and Impala Drive is operating well below capacity, at approximately 3,000 average daily trips. Therefore, the street system serving the site is adequate to accommodate all traffic generated by the proposed use. 2. Consisteucy with the Airport Land Use Plan The Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport requires that no tall buildings be located within the flight activity zone and that no residential development occur within the area subject to noise levels above 65 CNEL. The project is one-story and CUP 91-10 LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD DECEMBER 4, 1991 PAGE 4 occur within the area subject to noise levels above 65 CNEL. The project is one-story and lies within the 60 to 65 CNEL noise contours, as shown in the Land Use Plan. The project is therefore consistent with the guidelines of the Airport Land Use Plan. Iv. ELWIRONMENTAL REVIEW Since the in-fill site has been previously disturbed by grading and the use is temporary, the Planning Director has determined that, as conditioned, the project will be compatible with surrounding uses and no significant adverse environmental impacts will result from this proposal and has, therefore, issued a Negative Declaration on November 14, 1991. SUMMARY Considering that all findings required for a Conditional Use Permit can be made, Staff recommends approval of CUP 91-10, as conditioned. ATTACHMENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3325 Planning Commission Resolution No. 3326 Location Map Background Data Sheet Disclosure Statement Exhibits “A” - “D”, dated December 4, 1991 MG:lh November 6, 1991 SITE \ \ !SAFElYCENTER , I A city of clll*l , LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD CUP 9140 - BACKGROUND DATA SHEET - CASE NO: CUP 91-10 CASE NAME: LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD APPLICANT: CATHOLIC CHARITIES OF SAN DIEGO REQUEST AND LOCATION: Temnorarv emergencv shelter for 50 migrant workers on pronertv located on the north side at Imnala Drive between Palmer Wav and Orion Wav. , LEGAL DESCRIPTION: P[ Dieno. State of California. APN: 209-041-28 Acres 3.62 (Assessor’s Parcel Number) Proposed No. of Lots/Units N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation PI - PLANNED INDUSTRIAL Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed N/A Existing Zone M-O Proposed Zone M-O Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoning Requirements) Zoning Land Use Site M-O VACANT INDUSTRIAL North O-S OPEN SPACE south M-O VACANT INDUSTRIAL East M-O GOVERNMENT West M-O VACANT INDUSTRIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES School District CARLSBAD Water District CARLSBAD Sewer District CARLSBAD Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) 4.25 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT X Negative Declaration, issued NOVEMBER 8. 1991 - Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated Other, MG:lh DISCLOSURESTATEMENT F APPLICANT’S STATEMENT ‘OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP IFCTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR ANY APPOINTED BOARD, COMMISSION OR COMMillEE. (Please Print) The following information must be discfosed: 1. Amlicant ing a financial interest in the application. 2. Owner List the names and addresses of al! persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. AQ~rf!rr&4S 3, fl’i7cLY s--?-J- __ nl~r~14-a t4. Qaoac’ 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or pa9nership, list the names and addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares’in the corporation or owning any partnership If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-proffl organiration or a trust, list the names and addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary FRMooo13 8/90 2075 Las Palmas Drive - Cartsbad. California 92009-4859 l (619) 438-l 161 . Disclosure Statement (Over) Page 2 5. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes - No J/If yes, please indicate p&son(s) Per,on is ddinod U: ‘Any individual, firm, copartnership, jointvWtur,, Mintion, rob4 club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, raCcIw@r, ryndicata, thir and any other county, city and county, city municipality, dirtrid or other political aubdhirjon, or any other group or combination acting aa a unit.’ (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.) Signature of Owner/date ‘ Si&Iature of applicant/date Print or type name of owner ld7-a aC < Print or type name of applicant FRMooo13 8/90 . . PALOMAR INVESTMENT ASSOCIATES GENERAL PARTNERS Darnell Development Company 1920 Main Street, ste 720 Irvine, CA 92714 25% Werdin Development Company 1920 Main Street, ste 720 Irvine, CA 92714 25% Carlsbad 48 P.O. Box 230577 Encinitas, CA 92023-0577 GENERAL PARTNERS Morris I Steiman 6243 Rockhurst San Diego, CA 92120 50% 33.33% Donald P Hubbard 410 Arroyo Dr Encinitas, CA 92024 33.33% Robert Astleford 1010 Linda Vista Dr San Marcos, CA 92069 16.67% R. D. Templeton 1010 Linda Vista Dr San Marcos, CA 92069 16.67% Catholic Charities CORPORATE BOARD 1990-g 1 , Mr. Robert H. Baker 730 Camino de1 Rio North Rev. Daniel Dillabough Diocese of San Diego San Diego, CA 92108 Post Gffice Box 85728 B/297-5001, San Diego, CA 921865728 W756-3655 B/574-6300 Mr. John T. Blankinship, Jr. 2775 Via de la Valle, 201 De1 Mar, CA 92014 B/755-5166, R/755-5658 Most Rev. Robert Brom Diocese of San Diego Post Gffice Box 85728 San Diego, CA 92 186-5728 B/574-6300 Ms. Trina Brown Wells Fargo Bank 6545 Balboa Avenue San Diego, CA 92111 B/2386415, R/262-2090 Rev. Joseph Carroll St. Vincent de Paul Center 1550 Market Street San Diego, CA 92101 B/233-8797 Mr. Barry M. Crane 110 west c street 23rd Floor San Diego, CA 92161 B/234-0792, R/270-3669 Sister RayMonda DuVall Catholic Charities 349 cedar street San Diego, CA 92101-3197 B/231-2828 Rev. Msgr. I. Brent Eagen 10818 San Diego Mission Road San Diego, CA 92108 B/283-73 19 Ms. Martha Emerald 4597 Rueda Drive San Diego, CA 92123 B/2376330, R/569- 1787 Mr. John Ford 4382 Ampudia Street San Diego, CA 92103 R/291-2617 Mr. J. David Gardner 1202 Kettner Boulevard 5th Floor San Diego, CA 92101 B/23 16700 w669-0589 \ ~:ov\lcsIn SERVI(:E \IISISTR\ Diocese of San Diego Cl :MY (:ccl;lr SII-LW. San L)iey). C..\ !JL’IOl-:1lY7 l (6191 ?JI-‘LHL’H -III,- ‘mchm” .- I ,A Mr. Robert A.‘Hoeh.n 5566 Paseo de1 Norte Carlsbad, CA 92008 B/438-9599, FAXJ438-8094 Mr. Jesse Macias 3%3 Ashford Street San Diego, CA 92111 R/277-846 1. Sister Dolores Molina St. Rose of Lima Church 293 “H” Street Chula Vista, CA 91910 B/427-7637, Rl422-2573 Ms. Elizabeth A. Moore Port District 3165 Pacific Coast Hwy San Diego, CA 92101 B/291-3900 Mr. Mike Reidy Nexus Development 9373 Town Centre Dr., Suite 200 San Diego, CA 9212 1 B/587-2 100 R/756-25 10 Ms. Mary Jo Riley SD Housing Commission 1625 Newton Avenue San Diego, CA 92113 B/231-9400, X 223 R/223-5092 Dr. Anthony Rippo Post OfFice Box 2509 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067 B/673-1851 R/75w252 Mr. Robert H. Taylor Post of&e Box 927 Solana Beach, CA 92075 B/4814815, RI7561826 Mr. Bruce Wadman 989 Sidonia Street Leucadia, CA 92024 B/755675 1, R/753-88 12 FAX/7556063 Mrs. Diane Wadman 989 Sidonia Street Leucadia, CA 92024 Rl753-8812 RD.wP 03/27/g 1 MINUTES . December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 3 COMMISSIONERS ’ \ - Request for an extension of tional Use Permit 298 to continue permitting a "granny flat" addition to a single family at 1315 Basswood Avenue in Local Facilities Robert Green, P ipal Planner, reviewed the background of the request and d that the applicant is requesting a five year extensio n existing CUP for the second unit addition to a sing ily residence at 1315 Basswood Avenue. The original it was granted on December 17, 1986 and is due to expi December 17, 1991. conditions allow for an ted number of extension the discretion of the Comm for periods of u years. The applicant has me of the condition approval of the original appli n and conform requirements of the zoning ordin units. All findings required to e n be made. Therefore, staff is recommending ap Chairman Holmes opened the public test nd issued the invitation to speak. Homer Hinkley, 1315 Basswood Av Commission and stated that he h would appreciate receiving an a request. Chairman Holmes declared the stated that he has some reservations Commission Resolution No. 3320 approving a five 3) CUP 91-10 - LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD - Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the installation and operation of a temporary emergency shelter for 50 migrant workers on property located on the north side of Impala Drive between Palmer Way and Orion Way, in Local Facilities Management Zone 5. Michael Grim, Assistant Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that the applicant, Catholic Charities of San Diego, is proposing to locate a temporary emergency shelter for homeless migrant workers on a previously graded, in-fill lot on Impala Drive near Orion Way. The shelter would consist of four modular buildings placed on temporary foundations, including a dormitory, mess hall, resident manager's office, and an office/classroom. Landscaping would be installed in and around the buildings, providing external screening and an interior patio, and a 10 space parking area would also be provided. The shelter would provide housing for up to 50 men for up to 60 days. / \ Erwin Hall Holmes Noble Savary Schlehuber - MINUTE5 December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 4 Residents would receive two meals per day. Also available would be support services such as literacy programs, English classes, and job training courses. In analysing the proposal, staff determined that all findings required for a CUP could be made. The emergency shelter would provide temporary housing for homeless migrant workers that currently inhabit the undevelopable areas of Carlsbad. By providing support services as well as shelter, La Posada Guadalupe will aid the homeless in securing more permanent employment and learning English. Therefore, this use provides a much needed use to the community. The project is consistent with the General Plan because it implements the objectives of the newly adopted housing element by providing affordable housing for groups with special needs, i.e. farm workers and the homeless. The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate all proposed improvements. Fencing, setbacks, and landscaping have been included to adjust the proposed use to its surroundings. The project is also consistent with the McClellan-Palomar Airport land use plan, since external noise levels on the site remain below 65 CNEL and, as conditioned, no environmental impacts are anticipated. Based upon this analysis, staff recommends approval. Mr. Grim concluded his presentation by stating that Exhibit "D" was inadvertently included in the package and should be removed. Therefore, Condition Cl to Resolution No. 3326 should be revised to read "...Exhibita A-C...". He added that staff was recently contacted by a property owner across the street who is present tonight to comment on the proposed project. Commissioner Hall stated that just prior to the meeting he had received a letter dated December 4, 1991 from Robert D. Shoecraft of Duckor & Spradling, Attorneys at Law, 401 West "A" Street, Suite 2400, San Diego 92101-7909, representing Mr. J. C. Baldwin. He inquired if staff had also received and read this letter. Mr. Grim stated that he had not seen the letter. However, Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney, did receive a copy of the letter just prior to the meeting. A copy of the referenced letter is on file with the minutes in the Planning Department. Commissioner Hall inquired if the person that staff has had discussion with was Mr. Baldwin. Mr. Grim replied that he has had discussions with James Baldwin on two or three occasions prior to this evening. Commissioner Erwin requested time to read the letter, which was granted. Commissioner Hall asked the City Attorney if it would be preferable to continue this item to the next meeting. Ron Ball, City Attorney, replied that the Planning Commission has the prerogative to continue the item if it so desires. However, there may be some urgency as to timing, etc. which the Commission might want to consider. Gary Wayne, Assistant Planning Director, stated that he understands there is a time constraint but the question should probably be posed to the applicant. Commissioner Erwin would like to hear what both the applicant and Mr. Baldwin have to say. It appears that the major issue in Mr. Shoecraft's letter is that Mr. Baldwin did not receive notice, but it sounds as though staff members discussed the matter with him on several occasions. MINUTES December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Pace 5 COMMISSIONERS \; Chairman Holmes opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak. Kathleen Wellman, 4213 Isle Drive, Carlsbad, President of Caring Residents of Carlsbad, addressed the Commission and stated that her organisation is jointly working with Catholic Charities of San Diego to implement La Posada. She introduced several other citizens in the gallery who have also helped with the La Posada project. Ms. Wellman stated that Caring Residents of Carlsbad is a community volunteer organisation comprised of approximately 50 members which was formed about a year and a half ago. Their first project was to find a way to help the homeless migrant workers in Carlsbad. Tney first met with the City Council and stated that grant monies were available which could help to resolve the homeless problem of the migrant workers. They then contacted Catholic Charities who has some expertise in providing shelters for the homeless. A grant proposal was then written and submitted to the State of California which resulted in funds of approximately $300,000. In addition, Catholic Charities was able to secure additional monies from various other sources to assist with the project. Ms. Wellman is in full agreement with the staff recommendation except for Condition 121 which states that the driveway and parking lot must be constructed of concrete. Since La Posada will only be a temporary shelter, she would like to request that decomposed granite, instead of concrete, be used for the driveway and parking lot. Commissioner Erwin inquired if any homeless person is able to use the shelter, or if it will be restricted to migrant workers. Ms. Wellman replied that the shelter is targeting migrant workers but no homeless person would be turned away if room is available. Commissioner Hall inquired about the square footage of the driveway/parking lot area. He would also like to have a realistic projection of how long the shelter will be located at this site. Ms. Wellman replied that the lease is for two years, after which they must relocate to a permanent site. The structure will be modular units that can easily be relocated. All special features being installed in and on the structure will also be easy to remove when it is time to relocate the shelter to a new site. Even the kitchen facility is designed so that the large cooking stove will be modular and easy to relocate. The County Health Department has approved the first permit process. Commissioner Hall inquired if at the end of two years the shelter fully expects to relocate to a permanent site. Ms. Wellman replied yes. Commissioner Hall inquired if she had received a copy of the letter from Mr. Baldwin's attorney or had seen the petition signed by the Sunnycreek property owners. Ms. Wellman replied that she had just seen both documents for the first time just prior to the meeting. Commissioner Hall stated that this is why he feels a continuance might be preferable to making a decision on this matter tonight. Ms. Wellman replied that time is of the - MINUTE5 December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 6 essence because the shelter must be operational no later than January 26, 1992 'in order to receive the grant funds. If this item is continued, it is unlikely that the aperational target date can be met. Commissioner Hall stated that he is more interested in nearing all sides of the story from the various parties involved. Commissioner Erwin inquired if it would be possible to secure an extension on the grant monies. Ms. Wellman replied that there is a possibility but it has not yet been confirmed. If an extension is possible, it would only be for 30-60 days. Commissioner Erwin inquired if she was the person responsible for notifying all owners of record as of November 20, 1991 and how she obtained the names of the property owners. Mr. Wellman replied that Stewart Title provided a list of property owners from the tax rolls. . Bob Ladwig, Rick Engineering, Carlebad, addressed the Commission and stated that he is involved with the engineering aspects of the La Posada project and would be happy to answer any questions. Commissioner Schlehuber inquired about the size of the parking lot. Mr. Ladwig replied that it is approximately 5,000 s.f. Commissioner Schlehuber inquired if a paved parking lot would create a problem when the shelter relocates after two years. Mr. Ladwig replied that the asphalt would have to be dug up and disposed of. As far as water runoff is concerned, asphalt would be better; however, the parking lot is a flat grade so there should be no major water runoff to cause erosion. Commissioner Erwin inquired if the parking lot would be graded to slope towards the street. Mr. Ladwig replied that the site drains to the street now and it would not change. The only difference is that asphalt would cause more runoff while decomposed granite would have lees runoff due to absorption. Chairman Holmes stated that there should be some sediment runoff with decomposed granite and he inquired how that runoff could be controlled. Mr. Ladwig replied that the CUP requires a final grading plan to be provided to the Planning Director. The runoff issue will be addressed at that time. Robert Shoecraft, Duckor & Spradling, 401 West "A" Street, Suite 2400, San Diego, representing the J. C. Baldwin Co., addressed the Commission and assured the Commission that Mr. Baldwin is not against homeless persons. His major concern is that he did not receive notice and only found out about the project two days ago. Mr. Baldwin purchased the property in 1990 and has paid taxes on it for the past 14 months. During most of this time, he has been working with staff to construct offices on the site. Mr. Shoecraft stated that his eight page letter dated December 4, 1991 contains the substantive issues to support Mr. Baldwin's position on the La Poeada project. (The original letter was given to the Minutes Clerk and will be on file in the Planning Department.) - - MlNUTEs December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 7 Commissioner Erwin inquired if it was true that Mr. Baldwin heard about the project only two days ago. Mr. Shoecraft replied that his client lives in Encinitas. It is his understanding that Mr. Baldwin was told about the La Posada project by SDG&E approximately S-10 days ago. He claims that the Planning staff had not made him aware of the shelter prior to that time. Mr. Shoecraft does not feel that a residential use such as a homeless shelter fits the intent of the zoning ordinance. Because his family will be working in the offices located next to the shelter, Mr. Baldwin is concerned about many issues, including safety. Mr. Shoecraft feels that because his client was not formally noticed about the public hearing, he has been deprived of an opportunity to property evaluate how the issues will affect his proposed business. Commissioner Erwin asked Mr. Shoecraft to repeat how his client was made aware of the project. He replied that Mr. Baldwin was told about the La Poaada project by SDGLE when he was attempting to arrange for power to his new offices to be located next door to the shelter. After hearing about the shelter from SDG&E, Mr. Baldwin immediately inquired of the Planning staff, who supplied more details. He never received formal notice of the public hearing even though he has paid taxes on the property for approximately 14 months. Commissioner Erwin asked Mr. Shoecraft to elaborate on the zoning issue. He replied that the property where the shelter will be located is zoned industrial and he does not feel that a homeless shelter fits the parameters of the industrial zone. The La Posada project does.not fit the meaning of "lodge" as it is defined in the zoning ordinance. Commissioner Schlehuber inguired if Mr. Baldwin authorised him to make this appearance on his behalf. Mr. Shoecraft replied that he did. Commissioner Hall requested staff to respond to the time frames of when Mr. Baldwin was made aware of the shelter project. Michael Grim, Assistant Planner, replied that about six weeks after Mr. Baldwin had submitted his building permit application, he saw him at the counter and mentioned to him that an application had been received for a temporary shelter for migrant workers which would be located across the street from his proposed offices. He does not recall when the actual discussion took place about the hearing but it was probably within the past two weeks. After that discussion, Mr. Baldwin called and said that he would be sending his attorney down to discuss the matter. A representative from Duckor & Spradling came to the Planning Department last Monday and did their research. Commissioner Erwin inquired if Mr. Grim specifically advised Mr. Baldwin at the time he talked to him that the project would be on tonight's agenda. Mr. Grim replied that he did. Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning Associates, 2386 Faraday Avenue, Suite 120, Carlsbad, addressed the Commission and stated that he is representing the property owners who live adjacent to the site in the area known as the Sunnycreek Specific Plan. The property owners have signed a petition that expresses their concerns. The petition was submitted to the Commissioners as well as the Minutes Clerk. Although the property owners in Sunnycreek think that the La Posada project is a very worthwhile cause, they are concerned about the possibility that the shelter will be there in excess of - MINUTES December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 8 two years, which would be detrimental to future development in that area. The property owners have requested that the following conditions be added to the CUP: * That the CUP be granted for a two year period only, with no possibility of extension. * That the users of the facility be required to use the public rights-of-way for access. . That access to the shelter be restricted close to the top of the slope to reduce fire potential. * That a berm be required along the top of the slope to separate industrial uses from the Sunnycreek area. * That lighting be directed such that it does not spill onto the Sunnycreek property. Dennis Mehan, 3981 Gloria Lane, Carlsbad, addressed the Commission and stated that La Posada is an outstanding project and he is concerned that the adjacent neighbore say they are not against the use, yet they are all trying to sabotage it. The migrant workers are a segment of the Carlsbad population which has long been ignored. The community has banded together to try to resolve this problem in an area where there will be little impact. He noted that the migrant workers are currently walking through the fields to reach their work. He is unclear how the shelter can control where the workers walk or force them to use public rights-of-way. Further, it is impossible to foresee the situation two years from now. He urged the Commissioners to support the project. Ed Scarpelli, 929 Orchid Way, Carlsbad, addressed the Commission and stated that he is President of the Carlsbad Rotary Club and is speaking on their behalf. The club was contacted two years ago to assist in this community effort to help control the homeless problems of the migrant workers. They have assisted the effort by meeting with every agency who has a potential impact on the project. The Carlsbad City Council has encouraged their efforts. There is a dire need for the shelter right now and it has taken a long time to find the right location. He noted that this particular site has many advantages because it is close to the Safety Center, is already graded, and is not too close to the residential areas. He urged the Commission to grant the CUP as requested so that the workers can be housed before the real cold weather hits and the date for the grant funds expires. The applicant was permitted time for rebuttal. Allen Bureon, an attorney with Feiet, Vetter, Enauf & Loy, residing at 7210 Daffodil Place, Carlsbad, and representing Caring Residents of Catlebad, addressed the Commission and stated that the attorney representing Mr. Baldwin apparently does not realize just who will be using the shelter. It will not be a situation of people coming in and staying for 60 days and then being replaced by another group for 60 days. Many of the residents will be there for one night and then gone. Others may be there for a week and gone. sixty days is the maximum that any person will stay. As far as the two year period is concerned, that has been stipulated in the lease. It would be financially infeasible for the shelter to operate at this location after two years. - MINUTES December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 9 However, the lease allows for a period of time after the two years in order to disassemble the structure. Regarding the noticing issue, the ordinance requires that notice of a public hearing be sent to those owners listed on the most recent egualized assessment rolls. The equalised assessment rolls are not necessarily up to date. As a matter of fact, the Baldwin Co. has had actual knowledge of the shelter for at least 10 days, which is all that is required. In actual point of fact, the notice was sent to the bank who formerly owned the property and they have advised us that the notice was mailed out to Mr. Baldwin on the very day it was received by them. He urged the Commission to support the project. Ms. Wellman responded to the issues raised by the Sunnycreek property owners. She can agree to most of the conditions proposed by Mr. Hofman on behalf of those owners. In response to the first condition regarding the two years, Caring Residents has stated over and over again that they will be out in two years but she would like to have the option of an extension if, for some reason, the permanent site is not totally ready at the end of the two year period. As far as the third proposed condition, the buildings will be set back 60 ft. from the north slope and the project will be completely fenced so that should take care of the problem. Commissioner Hall can agree that it is not feasible to put down asphalt for only a two year period. He could accept decomposed granite for the driveway as long as the shelter will not be there longer than two years. Commissioner Erwin stated that, as he understands it, the applicant plans to be out in two years but they would prefer not to have a "drop dead'* clause in the CUP in case it is necessary to extend the move out date for a legitimate reason. Ms. Wellman replied that this is correct. Some overlap may be needed but that is not known at this time, and they would prefer to have some flexibility should it be necessary. Commissioner Erwin inquired if the applicant could accept a limitation of one additional year. Ms. Wellman replied that a one year extension would be more than sufficient. Commissioner Erwin inquired if notices could be posted requesting the workers to use public rights-of-way to access the shelter. Ms. Wellman replied that the entire facility will be fenced and it is unlikely that people will climb the fence in order to enter and leave the premises. However, it would be possible to post notices in Spanish and English asking workers to use the public rights-of-way. Bob Ladwig, Rick Engineering, addressed the Commission and stated that the fourth condition requested by the Sunnycreek homeowners is for a berm at the top of the slope. The facility has been designed to be at least 60 ft. from the slope and, with landscaping, it should be almost invisible by adjacent homeowners. There will also be a fence. The gate to the property will be at the street. As far as the second condition is concerned which requests workers to use public rights-of-way, this may pose a problem since there is no network of public streets in that area and the condition may be difficult to enforce. Commissioner Schlehuber is not in favor of drop dead clauses where extensions to CUP's are concerned because it might be MINUTk; December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 10 necessary to extend the CUP due to extenuating circumstances. Commissioner Erwin stated he would like the condition to read that the CUP will be granted for a period of two years, with one year renewals as needed. Mr. Ladwig requested if the condition could also be stated as two years from the date of occupancy which would allow time for inspections, etc. Mr. Ladwig stated that all of the lighting on the premises will be directed away from surrounding properties. All lights will be focused towards the interior of the site. Chairman Holmes inquired if the trash receptacle could be moved closer to the kitchen area. Mr. Ladwig replied that there is room up front and he will give that suggestion some thought. There being no other persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Holmes declared the public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members. Chairman Holmes requested that the City Attorney respond to the points which were made. Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the code reads that notice must be sent to the owners of record as stated on the latest equalised assessment roll. Unfortunately, properties get sold and the latest assessment roll is not always accurate. The due process requirement was satisfied in this case because Great Western was the owner of record on the latest equalised assessment roll as verified by Stewart Title; In addition, staff went beyond that because the project was discussed with Mr. Baldwin on more than one occasion and, coincidentally, also by SDG&E. This is evidenced by the fact that Mr. Baldwin's representative is in attendance at this meeting. In Mr. Ball's opinion, the due process concerns have been satisfied. As far as the zoning is concerned, there is a provision which would allow this use in Chapter 21.42.010 of the Municipal Code. Although an emergency shelter for migrant workers is not specifically stated, hospitals, treatment centers, and overnight campgrounds are permitted and the shelter is similar in nature to the stated uses so it, too, would be permitted. As far as the term of the CUP, Mr. Ball feels it should run from the date of occupancy. The CUP, as written, allows for unlimited extensions in two year increments. This can be changed to no extensions , or any other period of time different than two years. Extensions are treated the same as renewals. Commissioner Erwin requested the City Attorney to state the proper wording in order to restrict renewals to one year. Mr. Ball replied that in Condition #6, after the first couple of sentences, on Line 9, "two years*' could be changed to "one year." The first sentence would also have to be changed to read, "The Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of two years from the date of issuance of the Certificate of Cccupancy or final inspection." Commissioner Schlehuber feels there are sufficient safeguards in the proposed CUP. Since the migrant workers are probably now sleeping somewhere in the vicinity of the project, he feels it will be good to congregate them into a facility. In view of the two year term, he agrees that decomposed granite would be the best material for the MINUTE; December 4, 1991 PLANNING COMMISSION Page 11 COMMISSIONERS y parking lot. If, for some reason, the CUP will continue for a longer period past the two years, he would probably then be in favor of asphalt. Commissioner Schlehuber thinks that there are sufficient safeguards to limit the sediment which will run off with the water. He can also agree that the effective date of the CUP should be concurrent with issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Commissioner Savary can accept the project, as proposed, with the corrections which have been mentioned. Commissioner Erwin feels that the issues identified by Mr. Shoecraft and the Sunnycreek property owners have been addressed satisfactorily. He is in favor of one year extensions rather than two year. He is satisfied with sign postings in English and Spanish which request workers to utilize public rights-of-way to access their work sites whenever possible. Access close to the top of the slope and the request for a berm has been taken care of with the fence. He can support the project because it is needed in the community and will benefit the citizens as well as the workers. Commissioner Noble concurs with the comments which have been made. Commissioner Hall can support the project and feels it is long past due. Chairman Holmes can support the project with decomposed granite for the parking lot, relocation of the trash receptacle, and posting of signs to use public rights-of-way. Ron Ball, Assistant City Attorney, noted that the resolution does not specify a limit of 50 workers for up to 60 days. He suggested additional wording be added to Condition tl as follows H . ..approval is granted for a CUP, as ehown on the Exhibits, for an emergency shelter for a maximum of 50 workers for up to 60 days." Motion was duly made, seconded, and carried to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3325, approving the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3326, approving CUP 91-10, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, with the following revisions: (1) change Condition Yl of Resolution No. 3326 to read "...Exhibite A-C..."; (2) incorporate in Condition #l a maximum of 50 workers for up to 60 days per individual; (3) change the first line of Condition #6 to read, *'...for a period of two years from the date of the Certificate of Occupancy...'* and line 9 to read *I . ..may be extended for a reasonable period of time not to exceed one year, upon written application..."; (4) replace Condition X21 with a statement which specifies that the material for the parking lot shall be decomposed granite; (5) add a new condition which requires that notices be posted in English and Spanish requesting residents to use public access, in lieu of private property, to reach their work sites whenever possible; and (6) relocate the trash facilities closer to the kitchen. RECESS The Planning Commission recessed at 7:40 p.m. and reconvened at 7:49 p.m. Erwin Hall Holmes Noble Savary Schlehuber . . 1200 ELM AVENUE . CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Office of the City Clerk TEtEPHONE fI:(6191;434-2808 --Y .. ~1 A’: : : I!‘-- .’ ,,._, ~ 2 ! 1 (” j A ,, ;‘ ‘~ ,: c :: ] -,,,s _’ ” :, ,. ;I^. - _ I 3’J, 3 1 E. .r) /,” I (J-J 4 CD . . I-,.. g L-j . /,..’ r.rl ‘. APPEAL FORH I (We) appeal the following decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council: Project Name and Number (or subject of appeal): LA POSADA DE GUADALUPE (CUP 91-10) Date of Decision: December 4, 1991 Reason for Appeal: See attached. fl-//- 5y Date Banning Cantarini Name (Please Print) 905 Laguna Drive Address Carlsbad, CA 92008 (619) 729-2046 Telephone Number APPEAL OF CUP 91-10 I own property within the Sunny Creek Master Plan area which lies to the north of the proposed shelter. Currently my property is undeveloped. My concern is that the ongoing operation of the shelter beyond two years will create substantial adverse impacts on my property as well as the entire Sunny Creek project. While I am also concerned that the temporary operation of the shelter will have a direct and negative financial impact on me, I am willing to support the CUP if one condition is added. I feel a specific time limit of two years without the ability for any extension should be included as a condition of approval of the CUP for the following reasons: i) such a condition would encourage effort and attention toward locating a more suitable and/or permanent site for an emergency shelter; ii) such a condition would not create any false hopes on the part of the applicant in being able to extend the CUP; and iii) existing and future property owners would know with certainty the date the CUP would expire, thereby minimizing any long-term financial impacts or uncertainty to individual property owners. Banning Cantarini &TLEFORL/ & CONSTRUCTION INC. . .- (6 19) 744-0630 (619) 727-1347 “’ RE~‘~~~- January 6, 1992 City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Vi 1 lage Drive Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 Attn: Bud Lewis, Mayor RE : La Posada De Guadalupe (CUP 92-10) Dear Bud: It is my understanding that the property owners of the Sunny Creek area have filed an appeal of the CUP 91-10 passed by the Planning Commission. For your information, we made this property available to the La Posada De Guadalupe group at the request of the City. Our understanding with this, group is that the faci 1 ity would not be on the premises for a period longer than two years. At the time of agreeing to a lease, we stated that we had plans for the property after the two (2) year period. In fact the lease was ammended to include, at the end of the two year limit, the lease amount would be doubled to an amount that would be discouraging, if not prohibitive to the organization. We hope this clarifies our position regarding this property. Sincerely PAL0 R INVESTMENT ASSOCIATES dIiii?be Y’ Bob Astleford / Partner J BA/mlb ,n,n r ,xcn~ \I,PTA T\DI\IIT- CAP.’ h”n Df‘C\C f-A1 IUf\DNlA O?IMXl j ~ _.. ’ --:- c -- f’. i .. ! . . j j i;: ; : -- .. _ 1 --.. ..L. 1 .:, j -’ .‘Lf’iL. p ‘7 IL’* -‘_. ,.:, ; - 7 fi * . i ,i r,: 25 r, i -..- 1 , L. ? f i ii’ .- :‘i : i : f t -.- , -I ~i‘.&#qj January 7, 1992 City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 To: Office of City Clerk This letter is to withdraw my appeal of the Planning Commission's CUP 91-10, La Posada de Guadalupe, dated December 4, 1991. Carlsbad, CA 92008 (619) 729-2046 cc: Mayor Bud Lewis Deputy Mayor Ann Kulchin 1200 ELM AVENUE e CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Office of the City Clerk ClJit~ of Mnrls;bab TELEPHONE (619) 434-2808 DATE: December 13, 1991 TO: FROM: RE: Bobbie Hoder - Planning Dept. Karen Kundtz - Clerk's Office CUP 91-10 - La Posada De Guadalupe THE ABOVE ITEM HAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL. According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by all parties.) Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the 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 of Signature Date MEMBERS OF PLAWWIWG COWMISSIOW Deixmber 2, 1951 Re: CUP 91-10 The undersigned property owners constitute substantially all of the owners of property contained within the Specific Plan #SP-191 known as Sunny Creek Specific Plan and also property lo- cated outside the SP-191 boundary (see attached map). We have just recently been informed of the proposal relating to the above referenced Conditional Use Permit. Many people have worked hard to bring the temporary homeless shelter into frui- tion, and we recognize the need for such a facility. In the short run, we have no opposition to the concept or its location. However, if the use were to extend beyond the two ye,ars, we believe the use at the proposed location would be detrimental to a future development of the land within the Sunny Creek Specific Plan area. We also believe that there are current operational standards which we would recommend. Therefore, we request that the Plan- ning Commission condition its approval of the project as follows: (1) (2) . (3) (4) CUP 91-10 be issued for two years only without any right of renewal under any conditions at this location; Those persons utilizing the facility be required to ac- cess the facility through the use of public right of ways only. Our concern is to deter any foot traffic up and down or across private property owned by the under- signed as a convenient way to reach El Camino Real or farm jobs immediately north of the site. . The potential for fire is great, and access of any kind close to the top of the slope or any part of the slope must be prohibited at all times. The conditions established for the development of this area in the first instance should be complied with: it has always been our understanding that a raised earth berm would be constructed along the top of slope, visually separating the industrial zoned project from the Sunny Creek Specific Plan area, and that all light- ing be directed in a manner to prevent a direct view of such lighting from the Sunny Creek Specific Plan area. WAWDAWA CAL CO. nr\120291\bebe\cup91.10 SUNNY CREEK PROPERTYOkNERS . . . . . : . . . . . . . \. . 1. 2 KELLY KATO . 3, MANDANA 4. GROSSE 5. .MANDs?A - 6. EBRIGHT’- 7. DELORM a WRISLEY 9. GRIBBLE 10. HAGAMAN 11. BARLOW . . . . , 12. iYCAMORE CREEK CO. 13, CANTARINI 14. WESTERN LAND 15. %JNNY CREEK II . . . . . . “W * . . By: Patrick Kelly Karen Kelly -JJwar ' Ida Kate Harold Gribble Dorothy Ebright Chase Koman SUNNY CREEK II By: Russell W. Grosse Mary E. Grosse Tim Barlow * Betty Barlow 2 nr\120291\bebe\cup91.10 Patrick Kelly Karen Kelly Harold Gribble Dorothy Ebright Chase Koman SUNNY CREEK II By: Russell W. Grosse . Mary E. Grosse Tim Barlow * Betty Barlow Jim Gaiser for Cantarini Family 2 nr\120291\bebe\cup91.10 - ' Ida Kato Harold Gribble Dorothy Ebright Chase Koman / ,/ -Russell W. Groske t /,,Q* -f - , &o Mary E" Gtdsse Tim Barlow * Betty Barlow Jim Gaiser for Cantarini Family 2 nr\12029l\bebe\cup91.10 - By: Patrick Kelly Karen Kelly * Ida Kate Harold Gribble Dorothy Ebright Chase Koman SUMMY CREEK II By: Russell W. Grosse . Mary Eflrosse Jim Gaiser for Cantarini Family 2 nr\l20291\bebe\cup91.10 i Patrick Kelly Karen Kelly ' Ida Kato rl N. Gribble . Dorothy Ebright Chase Koman suNN?fCREEKII By: Russell W. Grosse . Mary E. Grosse Tim Barlow * Betty Barlow Jim Gaiser for Cantarini Family 2 nr\120291\bebe\cup91.10 - . Patrick Kelly . . Karen Kelly * Ida Kato Harold Gribble SUNNYCREEKII By: Russell W. Grosse Mary E. Grosse Tim Barlow r Betty Barlow Jim Gaiser for Cantarini Family 2 nr\12029l\bebe\cup91.10 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL CUP 91-10 - LA POSADA DE GUADALUPE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive (formerly Elm Avenue), Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 7, 1992, to consider an appeal of a condition of approval for CUP 91-10 which allows for extensions of the permit. This project will allow the installation and operation of a temporary emergency shelter for 50 migrant workers on property generally located on the north side of Impala Drive, between Palmer Way and Orion Way, in Local Facilities Management Zone 5, and more particularly described as: Parcel 2 of Map No. 15247 in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Mike Grim in the Planning Department at 4348-1161, ext. 4499. If you challenge this matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at or prior to the public hearing. APPELLANT: Banning Cantarini PUBLISH: December 26, 1991 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL LAPOSAMnrrvl!## I UP -10 (Form A) TO: CITY CLERK ‘S OFFICE FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice LA POSADA GUADALUPE DE CARLSBAD APPEAL -- CUP 91-10 for a public hearing before the City Council. I Please notice the item for the council meeting of Thank you. MARTY ORENYAK Assistant City Manager Dec. 18, 1991 Date , - IMPALA CARLSBAD PARTNERS, GREAT WESTERN SAVINGS, PALOMAR INVESTMENT LTD., CONS NSNS ASSOCIATES, CONS. C/O GERALD A. DUCOT C/O REO DEPT. P.O. BOX 577 1148 FOURTH AVENUE 9301 CORBIN AVE ST ENCINITAS, CA 92024 SANTA MONICA, CA 90403 P.O. BOX 1010 NORTHRIDGE, CA 91328 BECKMAN INSTRUMENTS INC., COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO CITY OF CARLSBAD CONS NSNS NSNS 2500 HARBOR BLVD. 1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE FULLERTON, CA 92634 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 MANDANA CAL CO (CORP), CONS 4675 MAC ARTHUR COURT SUITE 1210 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660