HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-03-21; City Council; 13066; Camino Village Appeal: ‘f
a 5
a, V -d a 1 ‘r)
k” a
1
c U
.rl 3
U
0
rl cd a, a a (d
*rl ?
a ?
(II c, C 3 V
0 a
5
C
aJd
or: .ti
ual a
aJc h
4 -i
c,u hO
a, TI G 5s
U
am -rl
rl .ti r:
-d 3
$4 3 c,.
k(d
GO k *rl om urn
-rl WbD
cd ad UPI
UaJ as hCL,
vi a url GO 3s oa w3
o\ z
1 0
4 hl F 0 4
J U
-f
m
\ c?
8
CW OF CARLSBAD - AGEVA BILL #, !.J
AB # /3~ob6 TITLE: DEP
MTG. 3/21/95 TO DENY GPA 94-02EC 94-01/SDP 94-02 CIT‘
DEPT. PLN & CAMINO VILLAGE CITY
RECOMMENDED ACTION!
-PEAL OF A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION
The Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council direct tl
Attorney to prepare documents UPHOLDING THE DENIAL of the General Plan Amer
GPA 94-02, Zone Change ZC 94-01 and Site Development Plan SDP 94-02
ITEM EXPLANATION
The applicant has requested approval of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Chai
Carlsbad Village Drive and El Camino Real from Residential Medium/Office and Resi
Professional to Community Commercial and General Commercial. A Site Development PIi
submitted concurrently describing the project which would implement the land use chi
approved.
The applications were recommended for denial because:
1)
change the land use designation of property generally located at the northeast coi
The proposed change would be inconsistent with the General Plan Land Use Ell
Commercial implementing policy and action program C.13 which states tha
commercial should be discouraged south of Hosp Way.
There are existing parcels within the Primary Trade Area (PTA) established t
Development and Demographic Study, dated February 1994, which already t-
Community Commercial designation that when developed will be more centrally IC
to the community than the proposed site.
2)
3) The subject site is the last remaining parcel north of College on El Camino Real th
a designation of Residential Professional and eliminating that designation may pn
the opportunity for a Residential Professional use in the future.
RP land uses are intended to be effective for the transition between residentis
commercial development. Because the site is an area that transitions from resic
on the west, south and east to commercial on the north the RP designation is
appropriate.
Approval of the land use changes and implementation of the site pian would requi
addition of a median break and traffic signal midway between Hosp Way and Cai
Village Drive on El Camino Real which would be contrary to City Engineering stan
and in staff’s opinion would further deteriorate the quality of traffic flow on El Cz
Real.
4)
5)
The applicant disagrees with staffs conclusions and has in the appeal (exhibit 5) cited E
objectives, and implementing policies from the General Plan which support the reques
addition more than 200 names were submitted by the applicant identifying persons who t
favor of a full size supermarket convenient to where they live. The applicant has also oi
to revise the site plan to reduce the building square footage and thereby reduce the numl
Average Daily Trips (ADT) generated by the proposal. That revised site plan has not
formally reviewed by the Community Development Department. However, staff’s position i
even with the reduction in building square footage, the proposed median break and traffic :
at this location are unacceptable. Moreover, as noted above, the primary reasons forth
0 9 r f
PAGE TWO OF AGENDA BILL NO. I3.Ob6
Commission’s denial were related to inconsistency with established land use policy. Th
and circulation problems associated with the proposed use just reinforced the denial.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
A project which is denied is statutorily exempt from the provisions of the California Enviror
Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, the Planning Commission applied this exemption and t
action on the Negative Declaration. Should the City Council choose to uphold the appg
overturn the Planning Commission denial, the environmental documents related to the C
Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Site Development Plan would need to return to 8
further evaluation and for public review.
FISCAL IMPACT
A fiscal impact analysis of the project was performed by Onaka Planning and Economi
submitted to the City by the applicant. The study indicates that the proposed supermarl
the potential of creating approximately $1 15,000 in annual revenues for the City and (
approximately $25,000 for public services, resulting in net revenues of $90,000. Develc
of an office project would create approximately $21,000 in annual revenues and cost $,
for public services, resulting in a $4,000 annual deficit of revenues less expenditures.
EXHIBITS
1. Location Map
2.
3. 4.
5.
Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 371 9, 3720, 3721 Planning Commission Staff Report, dated January 18, 1995
Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated January 18, 1995
Appeal form dated January 26, 1995.
B I L q
E.
4
tity of GIW
GPA 94-02/ ZC
SDP 94-0: CAMINO VILLAGE
I r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
10
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXt 0 9 -
,,
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3719
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN
AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE
GENERAL PLAN FROM RM/O TO C ON 6.7 ACRES OF
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE
OF EL CAMINO REAL AND NORTH OF ITS INTERSECTION
WITH CARLSBAD VLLAGE DRIVE.
CASE NAME: CAMINO VILLAGE
CASE NO: GPA 94-02
WHEREAS, a verified application for an amendment to the Ge
designation for certain property located, as shown on Attachment “A” dated Januaq
attached and incorporated herein, has been filed with the Planning Commission; ar
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for an amc
the General Plan as provided in Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 18th day of Jan1
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request;
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission con
factors relating to the General Plan Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A)
B)
Findings :
1.
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the C
DENIES General Plan Amendment GPA 94-02, based on the followin
That the proposed land use designation is not appropriate for the s
inconsistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan. The
designation is inappropriate as the site’s access possibilities are too limi
commercial use. The site has clearly visible public street frontage on1
lane of El Caniino Real would not meet intersection spacing requireni
prime arterial roadway.
Camiiio Real, a prime arterial roadway. Site access to and from the so!
i r
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 e
-,
2. That Commercial Policy “C.13* of the Land Use Element is to “Discou
commercial development along scenic roadways and major thoroughfares
but not limited to El Camiw Real...”. This General Plan poky has estab
the redesignation of properties along El Camino Real to commercial c(
in the creation of strip commercial development along this scenic con
Planning Commission finds that the southern right-of-way line of Hosp P
be the dividing line for commercial development when considered in cc
with the existing commercial development to the north.
That Overall Land Use Pattern Policy “C.1” is to “Arrange land uses sa
preserve community identify and are orderly, functionallv efficient,
convenient to the public and aestheticidly pleasing”. Access to the site is 1
identifiable access by motorists.
“That Streets and Traffic Control Policy “C.4” stipulates that the numbei
points to major and prime arterials should be minimized to enhance tb
of these streets as throughways”. Policy “C.5” states that the ni
intersections and other conflicting traffic movements should be mMmh
policies address the main ktion of a prime arterial which is to a
volumes of traffic within and through the City. Limitations on the loc
number of intersections, signals and driveways allow prime arterials to a
intended function of their design. It also maintains a higher degree
safety. This policy provides justiscation for the prohibition of a median 1
signal to provide south bound access on El Camin0 Real to and from the
That approval of the proposed land use amendment has the potential of
the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) for the site from approximatelj
approximately 9ooo which will require that a median break and signal bt on El Camino Real north of Carlsbad Village Drive and south of Hosp
That the proposal is contrary to Commercial Policy “C.13” which encoi
location of neighborhood commercial sites to be one mile apart and at a
distance from other commercial centers.
That the applicant has submitted justifcation in the form of statistical a
the market seMice area consistent with Commercial Policy “C.1.5” and
analyses do not justify the requested land use amendment because
existing commercially designated sites that could accommodate a superm
there are no other sites in the area designated for community office use
3.
to be functionally efficient for a commercial land use requiring direct,
4.
5.
6.
7.
...
a**
...
PC RES0 NO. 3719 2
I I I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
0 e
-a
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of th
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of January, l!
following vote, to wit:
AYES: chairperson Welshom; commissioners Cornpas, Em&
Nielsen, Noble and &vary.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
KIM WELSHONS, chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COM
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. H&M ILLER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 3719 3
L
f 1 0 0
_, ArrAcMwl
JMLlARy l(
4
City d tr~
1 GPA 94-02 / ZC
SOP 94-02 CAMINO, VILLAGE
t \
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
l9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3720
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING A ZONE
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF EL CAMINO
REAL NORTH OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH CARLSBAD
VILLAGE DRIVE.
CASE NAME: CAMINO VLLAGE
CASE NO: ZC 94-01
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to wit:
Parcels 2, 3, and 4 as shown at page 13206 of parcels filed in the
office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, March 14,
1984, together with that portion of lot 5 in Section 32, Township
11 south, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, according to
official plat thereof, being in the City of Carlsbad, County of San
Diego, State of California,
CHANGE FROM RP TO C-2 ON 6.7 ACRES OF PROPERTY
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to the Planning Commission;
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change i
by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 18th day of January,
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all tesl
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered
relating to the Zone Change; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning C
as follows:
A)
B)
Findins:
1.
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the C
DENIES Zone Change ZC 94-01, based on the following findings:
The findings for GPA 94-02 are incorporated by reference as they also a]
proposed Zone Change which would iniplement the General Plan Amenc
1
I \
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
0 0
,,
2. ~~~~oftheCalifoFpio~~e~e~Codere(luireStbatzOningbe
with the General Plan.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of tht
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, CaWomia, held on the 18th day of January, 19
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Wekhons; Commissioners Compas, Erwin
Nielsen, Noble and &vary.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
KIM W~LSHONS, chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMh
A'ITEST:
\
V MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
/
-2- PC RES0 NO. 3720
4 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3721
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. SDP 94-02 FOR A COMMERCIAL
DEVELOPMENT WHICH INCLUDES A 50,000 SQUARE FOOT
SUPERMARKET AND TWO ADDITIONAL RETAIL
BUILDINGS ON A 6.7 ACRE SITE EAST OF EL CAMINO
REAL AND NORTH OF ITS INTERSECTION WITH
CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE.
CASE NAME: CAMINO VILLAGE
CASE NO: SDP 94-02
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site De
Plan as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the
Commission did, on the 18th day of January, 1995, consider said request on property
as:
Parcels 2,3, and 4 as shown at page 13206 of parcels filed in the
office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, March 14,
1984, together with that portion of lot 5 in Section 32, Township
11 south, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, according to
official plat thereof, being in the City of Carlsbad, County of San
Diego, State of California,
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all test
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered
relating to SDP 94-02.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Cc
of 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, the
Commission DENIES Site Development Plan, SDP 94-02, based on the
findings:
Findings :
1. That the proposed supermarket and associated retail are not pernii
within the Residential-Professional zone.
$ I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
l7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of th
commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of January, 1s
following vote, to wit:
AYES: chaitperson Welshom; commissioners Cornpas, Erwir
Nielsen, Noble and &vary.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAW. None.
KIM WELSHONS, chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSIO
ATTEST:
\
MICHAEL J. Hbh4 ILL%R
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RES0 NO. 3721 -2-
> EXHll m APPLICATI dl! LOMPLETE DATE: i
JULY 8,1994
STAFFPLANNER CHRISTERWESTh
7
STAF'F REPORT 0
DATE: JANUARY 18, 1995
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01/SDP 94-02 - CAMINO VILLAGE - A General 1
Amendment to change the land use designation from Reside1
Medium/Office (RM/O) to Community Commercial (C), a Zone Change f
Residential-Professional (RP) to General Commercial (C-2), and a
Development Plan for a commercial development which includes a 50
square foot supermarket and two additional retail buildings on a 6.7 acre
within Local Facilities Management Zone 2, north of Carlsbad Village D
and east of El Camino Real.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission TAKE NO ACTION on the Negative Declaration
ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions Nos. 3719,3720 and 3721 DENYING GPA 94
ZC 94-01, and SDP 92-02.
11. PRO.JECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The site is currently designated as a combination, Residential Medium (RM) and Of
(0), district in the General Plan. That combination was approved in 1981 by the (
Council with the intent of allowing a transitional office development while maintaining
option of residential use on the remaining portion of the property. A zone change
Residential Professional (RP) followed shortly thereafter.
A Specific Plan was subsequently approved for the site which included an office complex daycare. A single building was developed on the site, the First Interstate Bank building,
the remainder of the property was graded. The Specific Plan ultimately expired. With
exception of the First Interstate Bank, there are no currently valid site approvals for
property.
The request is for a General Plan designation of Community Commercial (C), a Zon
designation of General Commercial (C-2) and a Site Development Plan (SDP). The S
includes a single market of approximately 50,000 square feet and two smaller building:
approximately 6,000 and 8,000 square feet.
@
1 a d) ’7
GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01/S 94-02 - CAMINO VILLAGE
JANUARY 18, 1995
PAGE 2
Access to the site is proposed via two driveways off of El Camino Real, a northerly acc
to Hosp Way and a southerly access to Carlsbad Village Drive. The architectural desi@
the buildings is proposed in a Spanish style.
111. ANALYSIS
1. Is the proposed land use consistent with the goals and policies of the Gent
Plan?
Do the technical studies commissioned by the applicant support the reques
land use change?
Are there significant Site Development Plan issues?
2.
3.
GENERAL PLAN
During recent public hearings regarding the General Plan, there was discussion of “st
commercial” along El Camino Real. That discussion reiterated the historic concern of 1
City Council that commercial designations along El Camino Real should be restricted
areas north of Hosp Way. To address that concern, the City Council adopted a Gene Plan commercial land use policy ((213) to discourage strip commercial development alc
scenic corridors including but not limited to El Camino Real:
“Strip commercial development shall be discouraged along scenic roadways
and major thoroughfares, including but not limited to El Camino Real, so that
land uses and scenic roadways are preserved and enhance the visual,
environmental and historical characteristics of the local community through
sensitive planning and design of transportation and utility corridors”,
Strip commercial is generally defined as a string of commercially zoned lots that devel
independently. The independent development usually results in a number of plannj
problems that cannot easily be mitigated because there is a lack of coordinated site plannj
and centralized management. A local example of strip commercial is in Encinitas along
Camino Real, south of Encinitas Boulevard.
The proposed land use change to General Commercial would create a continuous “strip”
retail commercial development along El Camino Real from Highway 78 to Carlsbad Villz
Drive. Therefore, the proposal is not consistent with the recently adopted policy of 1
General Plan.
1 I
1 e 0 GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01/SL* 94-02 - CAMINO VILLAGE
JANUARY 18, 1995
PAGE 3
TECHNICAL STUDIES
The applicant has submitted the following studies to justify the General Plan Amend
and Zone Change requests: a demographic study prepared by Derrigo Demographic St1
a fiscal impact analysis prepared by Onaka Planning & Economics; a highest and be:
study prepared by The Limbach Company, Inc.; and a Traffic study prepared by U Systems. Following is a summary of each report and a staff analysis.
Demographics --
The demographic study concludes that: a) present supermarket sales indicate a substa
active residential projects develop, there should be sufficient demand for a supermark
locate on the subject site and on each of the existing commercial sites within the PTA
c) because of the lack of other possible supermarket sites in the immediate area, the su
site can feasibly support the proposed project.
The determination that there is a shortage of supermarket retail space within the PI
based on an existing supermarket square footage of 171,856 and a total PTA sales figu
$118.8 million. Accordingly, at a median sales figure of $403 per square foot, the
should be able to accommodate 294,866 square feet of supermarket retail space; a shoi
of 123,010 square feet. Assuming the study's growth projection of 10,000 additj
residents within the PTA the short fall of supermarket square footage is increase
173,010 square feet. However, if the PTA's growth is less than projected the shortfi
supermarket square footage is also proportionately reduced.
The study indicates that even with the proposal and buildout of the two existing come
sites (College Boulevard/Carlsbad Village Drive and El Camino Red/&llege Boulev
there would still be a shortage within the PTA of about 33,000 square feet of superma
retail space.
However, the study does not address the very possible fact that several interve
opportunities could dilute the certainty of it's conclusions. Examples of intervention c
be: 1) the introduction of other commercial sites in the PTA in Carlsbad; 2) supermarkets could be developed in the PTA in Oceanside, or, 3) the existing supermai
within the PTA could be expanded in size. If any of these occurred there would bc
potential of a surplus of supermarket retail space within the identified PTA. In addi
development of each of the two existing commercial sites in Carlsbad other than
proposed site will provide more evenly distributed retail space within the Carlsbad poi
of the PTA. On the otherhand, if other markets within the PTA closed, the remai
markets would gain customers. Nonetheless, staffs conclusion is that in the short tern
within the ITA, however, success in the short term does not guarantee success in the
term as the other sites within the PTA develop and claim their share of the market. It
shortage of supportable supermarket retail space in the primary trade area (PTA); *
project could be very successful by capitalizing on the shortage of supermarket retail SI
I I
1 # 0 0
GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01/SDk 94-02 - CAMINO VILLAGE
JANUARY 18,1995
PAGE 4
be more reasonable to reassess the zoning of the project site after more growth has occur
and other commercial sites within the PTA have developed.
Fiscal
The fiscal impacts analysis prepared by Onaka Planning & Economics compares the c(
and benefits of an office development and a supermarket. The analysis identifies t
although an office building and a supermarket of about the same size will cost the City
same in providing services, a market has the potential of generating substantially more
sales tax revenue and will ultimately contribute a positive cash flow to the City. The sa
assumes a cost of services for either development of $25,000. Approximate reven
associated with an office development are projected to be $21,000 and with a supermar
to be $114,000. Therefore a supermarket will yield an annual net positive cash flow
$89,000 and an office will create a deficit of $4,000.
The study appears to adequately support the fiscal advantage of a typically success
supermarket over an office development.
Highest - and Best Use
A highest and best use study attempts to identify the use of a property which will have 1
greatest fiscal benefit to the property owner. In this case, the study concludes tha
supermarket (a single phase commercial project with an anchor tenant) is the highest a
best use. This conclusion supports the request for a General Plan Amendment and Zc Change. However, the highest and best use study further states that based on the exist
General Plan and zoning, holding the property for future office development is the high
and best use. The estimated period of time that the property may need to be held is fi
to eight years. A supplement to the report indicates that even after eight yea
development would have to take place as a phased project.
Since the identification of highest and best use is determined in part by the designated la
use and in part by timing (existing or future projections) staff has concluded that the existi
Office designation is appropriate for the site, however, it is not appropriate to develop t
site as such at this time.
The study additionally states that there is a surplus of vacant land zoned for of€
development and therefore the city should consider redesignating the subject site. St
surrounding Palomar-McClellan Airport. The type of office use allowed within the vario
industrial specific plan areas surrounding the airport is corporate or is involved in activiti
that do not cater directly to the public. Unlike those properties, the project site is
community service office designation and is the only parcel with such a designation on
Camino Real north of College Boulevard.
notes however, that most of the vacant Office land is located within the industrial par
I W 0 GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01/SDt- 34-02 - CAMINO VILLAGE
JANUARY 18, 1995
PAGE 5
SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN ISSUES
TrafficKirculation
The site plan includes a proposal to allow project left turn ingress and egress by instal:
a traffic signal and a break in the median on El Camino Real. The median break and tra
signal have been represented as improvements necessary for the success of a supermar
at this location. Staff does not support the proposed median break or traffic signal.
The City has designated El Camino Real as a prime arterial, with the purpose of cany
large volumes of through traffic within and through the City, and to provide connection!
major roads and other primary access points at certain intersection spacing intervals.
order to effectively accommodate traffic, access to a prime arterial is usually very limii
City Standards prohibit direct driveway access from a prime arterial unless no other acc
is available. If no other access is available, right idout driveways only are allowed as 1(
as they meet certain spacing requirements and are designed with acceleration i
deceleration lanes. This provision to allow right Yout driveways only was also included
part of the previously adopted Specific Plan for this area, SP 182(A).
Within the stretch of El Camino Real between Highway 78 and Carlsbad Village Dri
existing traffic volumes have reached a point of extended periods of congestion and de
during peak hours as well as during several off peak hours and on weekends. The cau
of the congestion and delay are a combination of heavy travel demand, numerc
intersections within a relatively short stretch of road, and the bottleneck effect of traffic
the El Camino Real bridge over Highway 78.
The applicant’s traffic engineering consultant has presented a traffic analysis which conch
that the addition of a signalized intersection at this location will not adversely impact traf
flows on El Camino Real. The consultant’s analysis further states that traffic progressi
on El Camino Real may actually improve due to effects caused by platooning of traf
through the proposed signal.
Staff is of the opinion that the report ignores the bottleneck effect of the closely spac
intersections and heavy side-traffic volumes which occur north of the project site. Stal
position is that these effects negate the ability to platoon traffic except during low volui
off-peak periods. At such times, platooning is not necessary and the addition of 1
proposed signal will only restrain the free flow of traffic on El Camino Real. During pe
hours, the effect of the proposed signal will be to extend the bottleneck effect further sou
through the Carlsbad Village Drive intersection. Therefore, the inclusion of the proposl
traffic signal and median break on El Camino Real will result in the additional deterioratic
of this corridor. If the economic viability of a supermarket depends on a median break a]
signal, then the site is not suitable for a supermarket.
I ! I I W a
GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01/SDr 94-02 - CAMINO VILLAGE
JANUARY 18, 1995
PAGE 6
The proposed land use change will also have an effect on the trip generation for the I
Based on typical trip assumptions, the number of average daily trips would increase f
an estimate of 1,800 to 9,000. In either case some of the trips would be taken from
existing traffic on El Camino Real and some would be new trips created as a resul development. However, these projections indicate the potential need for a median bi
and/or signal and they also beg the question of land use compatibility. The potei
significant increase in ADT over currently anticipated average daily trips travelling nort
Hosp Way may have adverse impacts. Connicts may arise from a greater volume of tri
using the Hosp Way access to the project site.
SITE PLAN
The site plan as presented by the applicant includes a supermarket and two smi
third from Carlsbad Village Drive which is shared with the First Interstate building ai
fourth from a new access road which will connect with Hosp Way at it’s eastern termi
The preliminary site plan has been reviewed and there are no significant onsite is
However, no conditions have been developed for the site because approval of the site 1
is subject to approval of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. Should
Planning Commission choose to recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment
Zone Change, the Site Development Plan should be referred back to staff to develop a 1
site plan and appropriate conditions.
buildings, parking for all three uses and access from two driveways on El Camino Rei
Iv. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Staff has recommended that the requests for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Cha
and Site Development Plan be denied. Denials are not subject to the Calif0
Environmental Quality Act as Article 18 Statutoxy Exemptions (Section 15270 of the CE
Guidelines). The Planning Commission will implement this section of the CEQA Guide1
by taking no action on the Negative Declaration.
If the Planning Commission should choose to recommend approval of the land use chai
and/or the Site Development Plan, the environmental impact analysis will need tc
referred back to staff for additional analysis because implementation of the
Development Plan may have significant impacts on the human environment and
mitigation has been identified.
V. SUMMARY
The proposal is inconsistent with the General Plan Policy of discouraging strip r(
commercial north of Hosp Way along El Camino Real.
I I c I
GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01/SDr w 94-02 - CAMINO VILLAGE e
JANUARY 18, 1995
PAGE 7
The demographic analysis identifies that there is a need for additional supermarket sp
within the Primary Trade Area (ITA) and speculates that the project site will be succes
even after other sites within the PTA are developed as supermarkets. Staff disagrees F
the conclusions because there are too many intervening variables. Therefore it may
appropriate for the other commercial sites within the PTA to develop first before the 4
considers the redesignation of property for commercial uses.
The fiscal study concludes that a supermarket could generate revenues for the CitJ
approximately $89,000 annually. The Highest and Best Use Study states that a single ph
commercial project with an anchor tenant which requires a General Plan Amendment Zone Change, is the highest and best use, but further states that under the current zon
the highest and best use is for speculative holding of the property until such time that
site is ready for office development.
Staff cannot support a median break and/or signal on El Camino Real between Hosp 1
and Carlsbad Village Drive, therefore, the site should be developed with a use or uses 1
can be adequately served by right-in and right-out driveways on El Camino Real.
Staff recommends that the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and Site Developm
Plan be denied.
ATTACHMENTS
1.
3.
4. Location Map
5. Environmental Documents
6. Background Data Sheet
7. Disclosure Statement
8. Reduced Exhibits
9. Correspondence
10. Neighborhood Meeting Flyer.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3719
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3721
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3720
cw?Jd&
September 15,1994
f I
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/ LOCATION: East of El Camino Real and north of Carl!
Village Drive in Carlsbad, CA, San Diego Cot
A General Plan Amendment and Zone Change f
Residential Medium/Ofice (RM/O) and Reside
Professional (RP) to Community Commercial (C)
General Commercial (C-2) in association with
development of a 50,000 square foot market and
smaller retail buildings on 6.7 acres.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described pr(
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said revie
Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on
environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for chis action is on file ir
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Plani
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the pi
are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Deparrment within 21 da!
date of issuance.
Department at (6 19) 438- 1 16 1, extension 4448.
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
If you have any questions, pl
DATED: SEPTEMBER 20, 1994
CASE NO: GPA 94-02/ZC 94-0 1 /SDP 9
CASE NAME: CAMINO VILLAGE
PUBLISH DATE: SEPTEMBER 20, 1994
CWVd
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1 576 0 (61 9) 438-1
I
I w 0
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
FO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01
DATE: Au
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Camino Village
2. APPLICANT: David A. Dunn
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: Hoyt Pardee c/o Dunn & C
13352 Loretta Drive
Santa Ana. CA 92705
4.
5.
DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: Julv 8, 1994
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from Re!
Medium/Ofice (RM/O) and Residential Professional/RP/O) to General Commercial 1
Communitv Commercial (C) in association with the development of a 50.000 square foot
two smaller retail buildinrs on 6.7 moss acres.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Er
Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Er
Impact Assessment appears in tKe following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies <
biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with
to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report or Negative De(
* A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the proj
its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. On the checklist, "NO" will be checke
this determination.
An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect (
may cause a significant effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declarat
if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insignificant. These
shown in the checklist under the headings "YES-sig" and "YES-insig" respectively.
*
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
I I W a
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES 1
big) (insig)
1. Result in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards? - - -
unique physical features? - - -
Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site? - - -
Result in changes in the deposition of beach
any bay, inlet or lake? - -
ambient air quality? - -
movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? - -
water (marine, fresh or flood waters)? - -
water, ground water or public water supply? - -
depletion of any natural resources? - -
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? - -
2. Appreciably change the topography or any
3.
4.
sands, or modification of the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
5. Result in substantial adverse effects on
6. Result in substantial changes in air
7. Substantially change the course or flow of
8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface
9. Substantially increase usage or cause
11. Alter a significant archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object? - -
-2-
I I 1 0 0
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES YES
bg) (ins%)
12. Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)? -
13. Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species? -
14. Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance? -
15. 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
16.
migration or movement of animals? - -
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
(si& (inSlg)
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area? -
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fire, emergency or other
public services? - -
-3-
I
J 0
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES P
(si@ (insig)
19. Result in the need for new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control sys terns? -
20, Increase existing noise levels? - - -
21. Produce new light or glare? - - -
22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pes ti cides, chemi cds or radiation)?
human population of an area? - -
for additional housing? - - -
-
23. Substantially alter the density of the
Affect existing housing, or create a demand
25. Generate substantial additional traffic? - - -
26. Affect existing parking facilities, or
create a large demand for new parking? - -
27. Impact existing transportation systems or
alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods? - -
28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic? -
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? -
emergency evacuation plans? -
aesthetically offensive public view? - -
existing recreational opportunities? -
29. Increase traffic hazards to motor
30. Interfere with emergency response plans or
31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
32. Affect the quality or quantity of
-4-
W e
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES r\
(si@ (msig)
33. Does the project have the potential
to substantially degrade the quafty
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. -
34. 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.) - - -
35. Does the project have the possible
ronmental effects which are in-
c +tlally 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.) - - -
36. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly? - - -
-5-
W
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
The property is located adjacent to El Camino Real north of Carlsbad Village Drive and is not associa
body of water. The site has been graded into three large pads, one of which has been developed
building. A grading permit was issued for the previous grading and no unstable earth conditions were id(
The remaining pads have been consistently cleared of vegetation.
The site is infill (in between two developed projects) and has been previously graded. The previou:
reduces the environmental value of the property considerably. There are no natural features wi
boundaries and the aesthetic value is limited to the development pads. Development height of the propt
to thirty five feet and will therefore not fully obstruct views from El Camino Real of the slope to th
proportions and design of the proposed project is substantially in conformance with the existing adjaa
The design is also in substantial conformance with the standards of the El Camino Real Corridor Gt
There is no evidence that development of the site will have any impact to the physical environment (
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
The site has been previously graded and has been consistently cleared of vegetation. The lack of veget:
absence of visible signs of faunal species supports the conclusion that there is no biological significanc
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
A general plan amendment and zone change from Residential Medium/Office (RM/O) and Residentia
(RP) to Community Commercial (C) and General Commercial (C-2) are proposed as part of the projc
The current RP zoning allows office development and the site was previously approved for an office E
has since expired. The proposed C-2 zoning allows for supermarkets which is consistent with the pr
change of use from RP to C-2 will not create a significant increase in demand for services. General]]
and ofice uses require about the same level of service for police, fire, water and sewer. With either
Camino Real would need to be improved with a deceleration lane to allow for adequate ingresdegre
Neither the existing office designation nor a commercial designation would generate the need for addi
facilities, library or parks. Either the existing or the proposed use has the potential of creating the need 1
housing. The determining factors might include the pay level of the employees of the project and if tho
are new residents of the City.
The project site is located next to El Camino Real which is a prime arterial with an unbroken median
the median, access to the site is limited to right in and out for north bound traffic and there is no dir
south bound travelers. Although an office will typically generate greater peak hour impacts in the morn
will typically generate higher average daily trips per square foot. Markets are used heavily after the WOK
also have a higher peak impact in the P.M.
A traffic study prepared by Urban Systems Associates, Inc. identifies an advantage of a median break
the entrance to the project. The project applicant also suggests that the success of the proposed market
-6-
I W e
in part on the provision of a median break and signal at the project entry.
Contrary to the findings of the study, the City determination is that the signal at this locat
will further increase friction points along El Camino Real. The analysis of the traffic
impacts have therefore been based on a project that does not include either a traffic signal
median break. In addition City intersection spacing standards will not allow a signal and
break at this location. Those proposed improvements would require a variation to the
standards and would also require greater in depth environmental review, possibly an
Environmental Impact Report due to the conflict of expert opinion.
Onsite, there is nothing unusual about the proposed use or the physical structure. Assumj
that the project will not include a traffic signal or median break, there are no significant
environmental impacts anticipated to be created by the proposal.
I m 0
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROTECT SUCH AS:
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,
fj alternate sites for the proposed project, and
g) no project alternative.
No significant impacts were identified, therefore no alternative analysis is necessary.
-8-
I W e
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
DECLARATION will be prepared.
- I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction wil
certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required. Therefc
of Determination has been prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, the1
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 ENVIRC
IMPACT REPORT is required.
X
-
/h**Mk
Date
&- *
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM IIF APPLICABLE)
-9-
I W 0
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASl
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
CWVd
-10-
m BACKGROUND DATA SHEE~
CASE NO:
CASE NAME: Camino Village
APPLICANT: Hoyt S. Pardee
REQUEST AND LOCATION: A General Plan Amendment to change the land
designation from Residential Medium/Office (RM/O) to Community Commercial (C), a 2
Change from Residential-Professional (RP) to General Commercial (C-2). and a
Development Plan for a commercial development which includes a 50.000 square
swermarket and two additional retail buildings on a 6.7 acre site within Local Facil
Management Zone 2, north of Carlsbad Village Drive and east of El Camino Real.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcels 2, 3. and 4 as shown at page 13206 of Darcels filed ir
office of the County Recorder of San Diego County. March 14, 1984. together with that DOI
of lot 5 in Section 32. Township 11 south. Range 4 west. San Bernardino Meridian, accom
to official dat thereof, being in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. State of Califon
APN: 167-090-56. 60, 61 Acres 6.7 Proposed No. of Lots 4
(Assessor's Parcel Number)
GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01/SDP 94-02
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation RM/O
Density Allowed N/A
Existing Zone R-P Proposed Zone C-2
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Requirements)
Density Proposed N/A
(See attached for information on Carlsbad's ZOI
Zoning Land Use
Site RP Vacant-EW/O
North RP-Q Dentist Office/Day Care - 0
South RP Bank - RMIO
East PC Open Space - OS
West RDM-Q Apartments - RMH
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District Carlsbad Water District Carlsbad Sewer District Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) 35.15
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated March 31, 1994
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
- Negative Declaration, issued - Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
Other, Statutory ExemDtion Guidelines 15270 Article 15
1 ,
D I SCLOS C RE ST.TEM ENT
G'pCIC2+TS f7AZYE?;T .SF 3SCLPJSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPUCATICNS WHICH ir
*~ISC~~IONAF1Y ACTION CN ThE PART CF mE CfiY COL'NCIL OR ANY APPOINTED BCAAO. COMhiISSION CR CCh(h1
(Please Prinf)
.. . The following information must be disclosed:.
1. Applicant
List the namesqnd addresses of 211 persons having a financial interest in the application.
Hoyt S. Pardee
% David A. Dunn, Agent
13352 Loretta Dr.
Santa Ana, CA 92705
714 838-0610
2. Owner
List the names ingd addresses 01 all persons having any ownership interest in the properl
3.
-- interest in the partnership.
Hoyt s. Pardee 55%
Wesley s. Pardee 15%
David w. Pardee 15%
Doualas K. Pardee 15%
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2)'.above is a corporation or partnership, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owl
% Sandler & Rosen, Is01 Avenue of the Stars#510 Los Angels, CA 90067 -
% Sandler 13 Rosen, 1801 Avenue of the Stars#510 Los Angels, CA 90067
% Sandler & Rosen, 1801 Avenue of the Stars #510 Los Angel=, CA 90067
% Sandler 8 Rosen, 1801 Avenue of the Stars #SI0 Los Angeles. CA 90067
100%
4. If any person identinod pursuant to (1) or (2) abovo i3 a non-profit organization or a trus
addresses of any person serving as oficor or director of tho non-profit organization or as of the trust.
FRM00013 8/N
3n7c; I le P--,I~~- nrlYln . p2r~ct,3d r7i,fnrnl3 q?pc)q-4p,59 - (613)
a 1 I l a a
(over)
Disc!osurs Satsment
5. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City
Commissions, Committees and Council within the past tweive months?
Yes __ No >G If yes, please indicate person(s)
- Person is defined EU: 'Any individual, firm, copartnership. joint venture, -lation. ~xlal club, fraternal organization, corporation, esi
syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district 01 other political subdivision, or any other group or comb
unt'
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necsssary.)
ws , f& 3 1% i 149 BisfZ-e aL
Signature of Owner/date Signature of applicant/date
OM +~.pcLRha QdA
M%P.e;l CRWZUSD &A Print or 'type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
FRM&I imi
L
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
\
\
\
---
b 0, 0.
; I
z z 0 F 5 g F 5 2
$
Y
$ 5 -1 Y
$ 3 I I- f w
0 f
i
<
0
Y < 0 0 i L
E Lu8 U2 d’ a3 =$ >;
Oi Z’
b! ui
31
2 P $
Y 3.
0 i
l
'8 0. e
I
!
1
P i
$ I J
U
<
2-
c
5 0- 5: g
$5 Zf 5 5: s a:
b
I=
yI
Y A*
!z Y
*
t
I 1
B D
I
/ e.
111 0/95
Christer Westman
Associate Planner
Carlsbad Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Subject: GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01 - Camino Village
Dear Christer:
General Plan
North of Marron Road is a Regional Center. Take away the regional, and th
retail development that remains can hardly be characterized as stri
development. It is two blocks long and the only land level enough t
accommodate non-residential uses. There is already a commercial use at th
southern extremity of our project. Zoning and topography will not perm
business uses South of our project, so "strip" does not and could not exist.
The proposed center creates an integrated single phase development. It meel
all the scenic corridor criteria and far exceeds your landscape requirements. N
variances or special considerations are needed. As a completed development,
will have far less buildable space than any office complex would have. It has 48
feet between buildings allowing for the maximum amount of view to the grove
that border our property on the East. The trees in the parking lot have bee
positioned to make them appear as extensions of the groves coming down fror
the open space.
The Limbach report confirms that there will never be enough office use
available at one time to obtain financing on the entire site. Since it is not a goo
office area, and there has never been any significant demand for offices in th
area, such development will wme in small increments over many years. Variou
owners and tenants, each demanding their own identity, will produce a resu
that sounds like:
"The independent development usually results in a number of plannin
problems that can not easily be mitigated because there is a lack (
coordinated site planning and centralized management."
Office zoning is far more likely to produce the result you are trying to avoid.
REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE & DEVELOPMENT
1782 Terry Lynn Lane Santa Ana, CA 92705
CW3REV.DOC (71 4) 838-061 0 Fax (71 4) 544-681 6
, 0 0
Christer Westman
1/8/95
Page 2
Demoqraphics
The demographic study is extremely accurate, and is based on an exact count c
all units in all developments that the city has already approved.
The city has turned down commercial at Tamarack and El Camino twia
Business property in that area would take away the rural atmosphere. Thz
atmosphere is the main reason why many people bought homes nearby.
College and El Camino should not be a consideration. In 180 degrees of th
compass from that site, no homes are planned. The Derrigo Study indicated
was too far away to be considered.
There aren’t any good sites in Oceanside for supermarkets, but if a supermarkt isn’t allowed in Carlsbad, and Carlsbad fails to provide its citizens decer
shopping alternatives, some market will make a marginal site in Oceanside worl
That will draw more sales tax out of Carlsbad, and it’s citizens will have to g
right through the congested area to get to it..
The goal of “evenly spaced” commercial fails to recognize that the population i
not evenly distributed. The population is concentrated in the immediate area (
the subject property, thus it will always be more convenient to more peopl
than any other site is capable of being without radical changes to the Generi
Plan.
The accompanying letter from Albertsons indicates that this site is superio
They do not consider this to be only temporarily convenient to their customer!
For their investment to be successful, they have to make people happy. This l
strong, that they have agreed to buy additional land and buildable are
associated with the building pad closest to their store. We hereby agree 1
remove that building pad, and a new site plan will be sent to you that shows thi
change.
Grocery shopping in the area is limited and inconvenient. Vons is only 27,OC
square feet. Four and a half times that much additional space is needed fc
the existing population to have supermarket options comparable to the rest 1
the Western United States. ihe residents are looking to the city to address th
shortfall now, not eventually. They deserve better right now.
Fiscal
where they think they can make the best job of that, Their belief in this site is s
CW3REV.DOC
I I I l a e
Christer Westman
1/8/95
Page 3
The residents are counting on the city to approve a development that wi
generate $89,000 per year in taxes over one that will cost the city $4,000 PE
year in services. Additionally, this project will create approximately 120 full an
part time jobs.
Hiahest & Best Use
What determines a property’s value is its ability to deliver things to people th:
they need. People need this property for commercial much more than the
need it for office. As a matter of fact, there is not now, and there has neve
been any significant demand for office space in the area. The offices neatb
have had to drop their rates significantly, and they are still struggling. All offic
users are permitted in commercial zoning. When there is office demand, office
will be accommodated.
The Limbach study shows that there is no comparison between its value a
commercial and its value as office. Any office development now would lose mor
money than the value of the land on which it is built. Offices are not goo
enough for this unique site. Remember, location, location & location. This i
ground zero for one of the best concentrations of housing in the city. It is a
outstanding choice for a market. Office zoning will limit its ability to serve th
community. These location features can not be duplicated and they should nc
be squandered on a use that can go just about anywhere.
TrafficlCirculation
The city has guidelines which are appropriate goals. We support them an
commend the city on the good job they have done, but in this situation thes
guidelines will hurt the citizens who live in the immediate area.
The traffic from the industrial complex impacts the area in the evening becaus
the freeway ramps are too close together. Fixing them will be very expensivt
The City has not persuaded Caltrans to find a cure. The fact that Caltrans ha
not yet found a solution, should not deprive the neighbors of appropriat
shopping options.
People will not eat more, or go shopping more often because of this Albertson!
Since it will be twice as big and have twice the selection of nearby market!
people will be making fewer trips, and traveling shorter distances. Mar
residents have told me that they refuse to patronize the local option, and driv
considerable distances, or go out of town to shop to avoid the horrendous line
at the check-out stands.
.
CW3REV.DOC
Price Club $607,000
Plaza Camino Real $1,880,000
Albertsons $90,000
t Total $2,577,000
, 1 0 0
Christer Westman
1/8/95
Page 5
Your Regional Shopping, and your industrial Complex help to give Carlsba
residents one of the highest standards of living in San Diego County. The traffi
consequences of those blessings come together in just a few blocks. Th
citizens who live in the immediate area deal with those consequences more tha
residents from other parts of the city. To deny them decent grocery shopping i
addition to the sacrifices they are already making is not right. They have a
indisputable need for a supermarket, and this application provides a beautifi
first class solution. The citizens nearby are counting on the city officials to satisf
that need.
Sincerely,
Q-4Qb
David A. Dunn, agent for
HSP El Camino North, Inc.
Fax: Christer at 619 438-0894
Copy: Hoyt Pardee
John O’Meara
Don Agatep
CW3REV.DOC
it 0 b@ CHILDRE 'S CENTER
2634 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92008
October 5, 1994
Michael Holtzmiller, Planning Director
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
RE: GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01 - Camino Village
Dear Michael:
We are writing this letter to you to state our opposition to the proposed land 1
change from RMH /O to C.
ABC Children's Center cares for approximately 150 children. Our playgrou
and building is located immediately adjacent to the proposed roadeasement off
Hosp Way. If the land use is changed, and the proposed market goes in behind
there will be a substantial increase in traffic and noise around o
playground, and building. I can see it being'a potential hazard as we ha
123 families each day entering Hosp Way to drop off and pick up their childrc
Hosp Way is also one of the entrances to the shopping center next to us. We i
also very uncomfortable with the thought of huge freight trucks driving smack
front of us, and inches from our playground. Another concern we have is
Hosp Way becomes congested our parents will not have quick and easy access
us which is detrimental to us in marketing our school.
As owners of ABC Children's Center we not only speak for ourselves, but o
staff of 18, and our 150 plus families. We all oppose the land use change f
safety reasons, and the possible financial impact it could have on us by maki
our school less marketable. We plan to attend the October 19th public heari
and speak in opposition of the change.
Sincerely,
.J -\L8.L.3c\ -&!LcL
(-Y- v --. \ ----\ &LA
Gly~ and Teresa Illich
"Recommended by kids everywhere"
, I 0 0 A\ Albertsons"
December 16, 1994
Mr. David A. Dunn
Dunn & Company
1782 Terry Lynn Lane
Santa Ana, California 92705
Re: E/S El Camino Real Between Hosp Way & Carlsbad Village
Carlsbad, California
Dear Dave:
I have reviewed the Planning Department's Staff Report dated July 8, 1994
and feel it is important to make several points in regard to the captionec
location. They are as follows:
1. The captioned site will always be an excellent location for a convenienct
operator, like a grocery store, because it is in the center of thg
population. As a matter of fact, we are confident enough in the Ions
term viability of this location that we are willing to spend $10,000,00(
to develop a store.
2. We have reviewed the alternate locations at El CaminoKollege anc
Carlsbad/Carlsbad Village, and believe they are inadequate supermarke
sites. The Staff Report is correct in that they provide more evenly
distributed retail space, but that has nothing to do with selecting i
supermarket location. Unfortunately, these sites are on the periphery o
attempted to develop these properties for the past six or seven year!
without success confirms this conclusion.
the population at inferior intersections, The fact that developers havt
3. The Staff Report mentions a location at El Camino and Tamarack. Ou
studies indicate that this location would be a viable, albeit lower volume
alternative. Unfortunately, the neighbors were not receptive to i
development at this location.
ALBERTSON'S INC / SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DIVISION / 1180 WEST LAMBERT ROAD / PO. BOX 7500 / BREA, CALIFORNIA 5
71 4-671 -61 00
I 0 e
Dave Dunn
December 16, 1994
Page 2
4. Our research indicates that there are in excess of 34,000 people living i
Carlsbad north of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The newest supermarkc
is at least 15 years old and half the size of current day standards. W
think the residents of Carlsbad merit a first class market facility in
convenient location.
We are excited about the captioned location and look forward to presentin
our case to the residents of Carisbad.
Very truly yours,
Real Estate Manager
JAD/jb
I 1 0 0
NOTTINGHAM ASSOCIATES, INC.
January 10, 1995
Mr. Christer Westman
Associate Planner Carlsbad Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009
Re: GPA94-02/ZC94-01-Camino Vi11
Dear Mr. Westman:
We would like to thank you and Ken Quon for meeting with regarding the staff report for our proposed Albertson's shopF center in Carlsbad. As we discussed, in an effort to help miti< staff Is concerns regarding our proposed projects, we are willin< modify our proposed project as follows:
(1) Traffic Sianal Insress/Esress: As we discussed in meeting, we believe that the traffic signal is an inteq part of our proposed project. Since our project requires little green time for turning movements into and out of
shopping center, we agree with the technical results of
traffic study which indicated that thru traffic on El Can Real would not suffer any degradation due to the signal.
fact, we are so convinced that our position is correct thal would agree to put the signal in with our initial project permit the City to have it removed in the event that signal does indeed result in the negative impacts envisic in the staff review. In other words, we will spend c
$100,000.00 to install the signal and provide the City k
the option of removing it in the event that it results degradation to thru traffic.
While we are willing to put the signal in on a contin<
basis, it is essential to the success of our retail proj that we have a median break to permit a left-turn into project for southbound traffic on El Camino Real.
As we discussed, we believe that the combination of the mec and left-turn in, left-turn out signalization will gree
enhance the convenient and efficient operation of this proj
for our customers who are mostly the citizens of Carlsbac
2910 RED HILL AVENUE SUITE 200, P.O. Box 5047 COSTA MESA. CALIFORNIA 92628-5047 (71
b r I 0-
Mr. Christer Westman January 10, 1995 Page Two
(2) In our transaction with Albertson's, we have agreed that project would be limited to the Albertsonls building and additional shop building of 8,000 square feet. By eliminat the additional 6,000 square foot shop building, we F
improve the traffic utilization at Carlsbad Village Drive
El Camino Real to Level of Service B for PM peak hour traf at ultimate buildout of the City. Additionally, we o provide a more open vista into the existing eucalyptus gx on the east boundary of this project, exhance the aesthc
appeal of our project, and further reduce the Itsti commercial aspect of this shopping center.
In conjunction with our meeting, Sam Kab is preparing revj
summary pages for our traffic report showing the net effect eliminating our 6,000 square foot shop building.
Christer, if you have any questions or concerns regarding these items, please give me a call. We would appreciate it if you wc include this letter in the packages you present to the Planr
Commissioners for our project. Thanks again for your help assistance.
Very truly yours,
NOTTINGHAM ASSOCIATES, INC.
fiizz/P-L
John S. O'Meara President
JSO/jh
cc: Hoyt Pardee David Dunn Jeff Dierch
Sam Kab
Mary Rohrer
1 I ,
. .. .>
* I 0 UKRl e E>’ PLAN N I N G COMMISSION January 18, 1995 Page 11
2. GPA 94-02ZC 94-01 /SDP 94-02 - CAMINO VILLAGE
Request for approval of a General Plan Amendment to change the land use
designation from Residential Medium/Office (RM/O) to Community Commercial (C
a Zone Change from Residential-Professional (RP) to General Commercial (C-21, a
a Site Development Plan for a commercial development which includes a 50,000
square foot supermarket and two additional retail buildings on a 6.7 acre site wit1
Local Facilities Management Zone 2, north of Carlsbad Village Drive and east of E
Camino Real.
Christer Westman, Associate Planner, gave the staff presentation on this item. He
explained that the property was located north of Carlsbad Village Drive and east of El
Camino Real, and pointed to the location on the map. He stated that the existing zoning
was residentiaVprofessiona1 and the General Plan designation was residential medium an
office. As outlined in the staff report included in the commissioner’s packets, he explair
that staff recommended denial because General Plan Commercial Policy #13 discourage:
the development of strip commercial along El Camino Real. He described what was
located in the immediate vicinity and explained that staff was recommending denial
because there was already strip commercial along El Camino Real.
In addition, he referred to General Plan Commercial Policy C.1.3 which encourages the
optimal distance between neighborhood commercial centers to be one mile, and explainc
that there was another supermarket one-half mile from the site. He also mentioned that
other sites were identified as neighborhood commercial within the primary trade area thi
would be more evenly distributed within the community when developed, and he pointel
to these areas on the overhead.
Mr. Westman explained other reasons for staff’s recommendation of denial. He stated
that the highest and best use study submitted by the applicant indicated that a
supermarket was the first choice and holding the property for future office was the secc
choice. He pointed out that because the site was a transitional site between residential
the south, east and west and commercial to the north, the RP designation was more
appropriate.
He raised the issue of traffic in the area and indicated that staff felt that the potential
change from 1,800 ADT to 3,000 ADT is inappropriate for a transitional area and
explained why.
Mr. Westman discussed the traffic signal and median break and pointed out where the
location was on the map. He explained that staff felt that the traffic signal and median
break would further deteriorate traffic along El Camino Real.
Chairman Welshons opened the item for questions from the Commission members.
MlNUl
h I I 0
PLAN N I N G C 0 MM I S S IO N Page 12
Commissioner Erwin mentioned the handouts and asked staff to comment what else COL
be built on the property. Mr. Westman repnied that alternatives had not been looked at
January 18, 1995
since staff just evaluated the project as submitted.
Commissioner Erwin queried why staff felt that the traffic impact was different from the
traffic consultant. Staff's response was that there were differences of opinion from timl
to time, and that staff's belief was based upon observation of the area, especially durinc
the peak hours, that there would be no platooning effect.
Commissioner Erwin asked whether having an intersection with a left-turn in going soutt
would be the superior of the two options, and Mr. Wojcik responded that from a safety
standpoint, it would have to be analyzed.
Commissioner Erwin identified the three letters submitted: A letter from Urban Systems
Associates, Inc. dated January 17, 1995 to Mr. David A. Dunn; a letter from Dunn & Co
dated January 15, 1995, addressed to the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission; and a
letter from The Limbach Company, Inc. dated January 5, 1995, addressed to Mr. Hoyt S
Pardee, c/o David & Dunn, dated January 5, 1995
Commissioner Monroy asked about the speed limits on El Camino Real and whether the
additional traffic signal would become a safety problem. Mr. Wojcik responded that it
could become a problem and explained that a steeper downgrade required greater stoppi
distance. He stated that staff preferred not to put in another signal.
Commissioner Compas asked about the possibility of a change in the speed limit if the
signal was put in, and Mr. Wojcik indicated that it would have to be analyzed further. Hc
emphasized that the main reason why staff was recommending denial was because of tt-
land use and that the traffic issue was secondary.
Commissioner Savary asked staff to state the City's policy with regard to placing traffic
signals, and was told that all the signals in the area violated the spacing. This signal
would be located approximately 700' south of Hosp, and would result in the increase of
the number of violations on El Camino Real.
Commissioner Erwin asked what the property was zoned for under existing zoning, and
Mr. Westman responded that it was residential/professional. Commissioner Erwin
questioned what could be placed at that site, and Mr. Westman indicated that it was for
an office type of use such as accountants, banks, residential, professional, or a high
residential use such as apartments or senior housing.
Dave Dunn, Dunn & Company, 13352 Loretta Drive, Santa Ana, represented the owner,
Mr. Hoyt Pardee. He paraphrased his letter and explained why he did not see residential
zoning at the site. He indicated that he had signature cards from 300 people in the
neighborhood requesting a supermarket.
Mr. Dunn mentioned that the ABC Children's Center would be most affected and referrec
to a letter from ABC Children's Center, dated October 5, 1994, which was included in tt
Commissioners' packets. He explained that the owners agreed with the traffic light but
they would like to see the access between their property closed off. He added that they
had asked Mr. Dunn to speak on their behalf.
MINUTI
b I e 0
PLAN N I N G C 0 M M I SS IO N
John O'Meara, Nottingham Associates, Inc., 2910 Red Hill, Suite 200, Costa Mesa,
represented the landowner of the property. He indicated they were proposing a
neighborhood commercial project, consisting of two buildings of a high quality design,
50,000 sq. ft. Albertsons and an 800 sq. ft. retail building. He pointed to the plan on t
wall and stated that he did not think there was a significant problem with the site plan i
the land use was approved.
Mr. O'Meara addressed parking concerns of the day care center and discussed alternati!
for traffic going in and out of the center. He indicated that the primary reason for the
signal was for people going to the east. He explained that the proposed project was
approximately 19% coverage of the site and that typical office type coverage would be
more, and also mentioned that there would not be a market for office buildings for at le
5-8 years.
Mr. O'Meara discussed phased development and indicated that it would result in strip
commercial development if there was phased development of office projects on the
property. He stated that they were proposing a project that would provide a quality
project with integrated development, incorporated view corridors to the open space, ant
included a project enhancement of open space behind the project to the east. He
explained that additional trees would be planted in the opening.
Mr. O'Meara referred to staff's comments about basic guidelines of the Land Use Eleme
essentially C-13 strip commercial, and also mentioned an attempt to locate neighborhoc
centers within a mile of each other. He also referred to Goals A?, and A2 and Objectivc
under B2 in the same commercial portion of the General Plan. He referred to a study
which showed a shortage of supermarkets in this trade center and stated that they wer
more compatible with the goals mentioned in the General Plan than the two evidenced I
staff.
He discussed the demographic study and shortages of supermarkets in this trade area ir
the future and stated that the alternative sites referred to earlier were inferior. Mr.
O'Meara referred to the Limbaugh letter regarding the General Plan and zoning for the s
which indicated that it was not well conceived. He mentioned traffic circulation, and tt
applicant's willingness to take out traffic signal if it was a problem.
Commissioner Compas asked if the median break and. traffic light were not approved,
would the applicant go ahead with the project, and Mr. O'Meara indicated they would n
Commissioner Welshons opened the item to public testimony and issued the invitation t
speak.
John Jones, 3044 State Street, Carlsbad, indicated that he agreed with the Engineering
Department that there should be no traffic signals and no change in El Camino Real. Hc
suggested using a traffic circle in which there would be one way in and one way out in
circle.
Harv Waiken, 230 West Eusteria, Arcadia,, explained that he was responsible for the tw
' shopping centers in the area. He mentioned that he made a request about 10 years agc
change the land use but was denied the change because of the impact on traffic, and tl
January 18, 1995 Page I3
MINU'
I b I 0 m
PLAN N I N G C 0 M M I S S I 0 N Page 14
now it was evident that the decision was a correct one. He suggested that this site dot
not need a commercial use. He also mentioned an illegal easement on the east side.
Commissioner Erwin asked Mr. Waiken for clarification of the location of the illegal
easement.
Robert Breckinridge, 31 10 Via Sorbete, Carlsbad, represented the Tiburon Carlsbad
Homeowners Association, and read his letter addressed to the City of Carlsbad Planning
Commission which indicated that the Board of Directors of the Tiburon Carlsbad
Homeowners Association unanimously approved a resolution to oppose the approval of
Negative Declaration, General Amendment Zone Change, and Site Development Plan for
the proposed commercial development, Camino Village. The letter further stated the
reasons for the approval of the resolution which included: The project did not adhere tc
City Council approved development standards; concerns about the private frontage
requirements and median breaks; property owners had not expected a change in land u:
in the area; several units faced directly into the project site; and the increase of traffic.
The letter was entered as part of the record.
Thomas David, 2534 Via Astuto, Carlsbad, explained reasons for his concern about the
zoning change. This included concerns about heavy traffic and adding an additional trai
signal at Hosp that would increase the potential for an accident in the Tanglewood area
He referred to the project developer’s comments about traffic and grocery shopping anc
indicated that a left turn would create further delays. Mr. David expressed concern abo
the outdated design at El Camino Real and 78, and also stated that office development
stated that the area did not need another supermarket complex within such a small area
Mr. David mentioned that the project was not in the best interest of residents and citize
in Carlsbad, and emphasized that he was not opposed in principal to development of thi
area.
Nelson Philips, 299 Via De Paz, Carlsbad, pointed out on the map where he lives and
discussed the apartment complex below it with a 6’ chain link fence. He indicated that
did not like stepping out the door and looking at the back side of a market and mention€
concern about the infestation of mice and rats in the garbage. He stated that there wa:
another Albertsons‘ close by on 1-5 and Carlsbad Village Drive and that another strip cei
was not needed.
Chairman Welshons offered the applicant an opportunity for rebuttal.
Mr. O’Meara mentioned that they had met with several of the members of Tanglewood.
He indicated that traffic was reviewed on Avenida de Anita and discussed the traffic
patterns observed. He mentioned that traffic to the supermarket was traffic that was
already moving to another trade area and would not create a lot of new traffic in this tr:
area. He suggested that speed bumps could be installed in the Tanglewood area.
He indicated that it was too premature to discuss design of the center with staff.
Commissioner Erwin asked about the access by the existing pre-school, and Mr. O’Mear
addressed the issue. When asked by Commissioner Erwin about the illegal easement, N
MINU1
January 18, 1995
.
would not have the noise after business hours that a Qrocery store would have. He furl
* T 0
PLAN N I N G CO MMI S S I 0 N Page 15
O'Meara indicated that as far as he knew it was legal. Staff also indicated they were n
aware of any illegal easements at the site.
Since no one else wished to speak, Chairman Welshons closed the public testimony
Chairman Welshons opened the item for discussion among Commission members.
Commissioner Noble asked staff to describe the City Strip Ordinance again, and Mr.
Westman responded that there was a General Plan Policy included in the latest revision
the General Plan and read the portion to the Commission. He then explained staff's
interpretation.
Commissioner Noble asked about the comment on the statement that if general
commercial zoning was not put in there that it would end up being developed as a strip
mall anyway. Mr. Westman responded that changing the project site to a commercial
designation would really be the determining factor. He said that if a project was develo
under current zoning and General Plan, although it would be retail in nature, it would be
different type of commercial activity that would occur and not necessarily "strip"
commercial.- He stated that it would not be de facto strip commercial if the site retainec
the existing General Plan and zoning and explained why.
Commissioner Noble asked what staff's experience was with regard to an increase of
traffic, and Mr. Wojcik replied that the Traffic Engineer policy did not count pass-by trip
Chairman Welshons opened the items for discussion among Commission members.
Commissioner Erwin stated that he could support staff's recommendations and express
concern about the n6ise impact and the median break in the road.
Commissioner Nielsen agreed that more supermarket shopping in Carlsbad was needed
mentioned that this location was a problem. He said that he was unable to evaluate
whose report on traffic was correct and that he was concerned about the zoning and it:
effect on the neighborhood.
Commissioner Savary said that she agreed with Commissioners Erwin and Nielsen and
supported denial.
Commissioner Monroy expressed his support for denial and concerns about traffic.
Commissioner Noble discussed his concerns about traffic and noise, and mentioned Ralb
at Poinsettia and the problems encountered. He indicated that Carlsbad needed another
grocery store but not at this location.
Commissioner Compas also said that he supported staff's denial.
January 18, 1995
MINUl
b 1 I 0 e
PLANNING COMMISSION ,January 18, 1995 Page 1E
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Compas, and duly seconded,
the Planning Commission take no action on the Negative Declarati
and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 3719, 3720, and
3721 denying GPA 94-02, ZC 94-01, and SDP 94-02.
Chairman Welshons, Commissioners Compas, Erwin, Monroy,
Nielsen, Noble and Savary
VOTE: 7-0
AYES:
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
Commissioner Erwin mentioned that he spoke to Mr. Agatap on the project, and played
telephone tag with Mr. Dunn.
Commissioner Noble stated that he spoke with Messrs. Dunn and O'Meara.
Commissioner Welshons stated that action by the Commission was final and would not
forwarded to City Council unless it was appealed within 10 days.
enue in Local Facilities Management Zone 1.
e the staff presentation on this item. He showed sli
e said that the purpose of the wall was for
rear yard portion was done at
the street was fully improved, the fr
He discussed the west portion and m
ho had no objection to the
ht be a site issue.
se it was over 6 feet, the pers
or the wall facing her property.
t. As a result, Mr.
nning Commission.
that there was no problem along certain PO
d to the area on the side. He indicated that this was where it excee
MINU'
EXHIBIT 'I \ 0 0
REASON FOR APPEAL:
Almost three hundred people signed petitions in support of the Albertsons. We did two
mailings to 1,100 homes, and hand delivered them once. The turn out at the Planning
Commission was small because the neighbors liked what they saw in the exhibits we
adjacent development, were many times greater than those opposed. Of the few
people who had concerns about traffic, most were upset about an exi5ting condition on
Avenida De Anita, which we think can be improved. We were not given the opportunity
to present our traffic study on De Anita. Issues about noise were raised. We had the
results of an acoustical analysis with us, but we were not given a chance to present it.
ABC Children's center, adjacent to the North of our site, was opposed initially, but they
now embrace our project. Others who have expressed concerns and then taken the
time to evaluate it, now support it.
We tried our best to live within the constraints given the property by the city. When the
supermarkets showed such strong interest, and their assessment was confirmed by our
consultants who documented a profound shortage of supermarket space in the area we
had to go forward with our project. Our appraiser also demonstrated the total futility of
building offices in the face of low rents, high vacancies, better located competition, and
numerous foreclosures.
Close to our hearing date, we were able to get a building removed from our plan. The
resulting reduction of trips was not shown in the staff report. We did not get a chance to
explain that, but if we had, we could have shown that the current plan produces 106 fewer
cars in the A. M. Peak hour, and only 38 more cars in the P. M. peak hour than was
approved in (SP 182A), the office project that was previously approved for this site. Thai
same trip generation was used by the city for this site in the Traffic Element of the General
Plan. This project will not cause the Level of Service for traffic to go below B at Carlsbad
Village Drive in the P.M. Peak between now and build out of the city (even withou!
pass-by traffic considerations).
The project will produce $901,000 in taxes, and 120 new jobs. This site can serve more
people better for retail supermarket use than any other site in the trade area. Many
goals in the Land Use Element of the General Plan Up Date can be furthered by this
project, including, but not limited to:
GOALS:
gave them, The number of positive responses from residents of Tanglewood, the
A.l
A.2
B.2
C. 1.4 (Central location),
C1.5 (Statistical justification)
C. 1.6 (Evaluate excessive undeveloped office zoning)
C.3 (Easily Accessible to nearby residents).
We were not allowed sufficient time to present these findings at the Plannin!
Commission hearing, and request your consideration.
(Healthy and diverse economic base)
(Compatible, conveniently located neighborhood shopping centers)
(All residential areas adequately served for daily food needs)
OBJECTIVES:
IMPLEMENTING POLICIES:
.*
.
APPEAL IFOW
I (We) appeal the following decision of the Obw4 \LI c0,W 2
--_ _._ . to the City COL
2) GPA 9402/zc 94-01/SDp 94-02 - 0 VILLAGE - Request for approval of a GI
Amendment to change the land use desi8
Residential Mediurn/OfEce (RM/O) to G
Commercial (C), a Zone Change from Re
Professional (Rp3 to General Commercial 1
a Site Development Plan for a commercia
deveiopment which includes a 50,000 squi
supermarket and two additional retail buiI
6.7 acre site within Local Facilities Manag
Zone 2, north of Carlsbad Village Drive a.
El Camino Real.
Project Name and Number (or subjec
Date of Decision:
Reason for Appeal:
\ \ \d4q
- -- 5% akkd
I\ a&tq - QL jq e&
Date Signature
\ XS p a Glv.ai t,q 0 hlo&IL - Nzmn IDln2c- n-:-L\
- - Ad JAN 2 6 13%
- I David A. Dunn
- - Te Fax (71 4) 544-681 6
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, California 92008-1 989 - (61 9) 434-280
9 6
I I* w .
REASON FOR APPEAL:
Almost three hundred people signed petitions in support of the Albertsons. We did two
mailings to 1 ,I 00 homes, and hand delivered them once. The turn out at the Planning
Commission was small because the neighbors liked what they saw in the exhibits we
gave them. The number of positive responses from residents of Tanglewood, the
adjacent development, were many times greater than those opposed. Of the few
people who had concerns about traffic, most were upset about an existing condition on
Avenida De Anita, which we think can be improved. We were not given the opportunity
to present our traffic study on De Anita. Issues about noise were raised. We had the
results of an acoustical analysis with us, but we were not given a chance to present it.
ABC Children’s center, adjacent to the North of our site, was opposed initially, but they
now embrace our project. Others who have expressed concerns and then taken the
time to evaluate it, now support it.
We tried our best to live within the constraints given the property by the city. When the
supermarkets showed such strong interest, and their assessment was confirmed by our
consultants who documented a profound shortage of supermarket space in the area we
had to go forward with our project. Our appraiser also demonstrated the total futility of
building offices in the face of low rents, high vacancies, better located competition, and
numerous foreclosures.
Close to our hearing date, we were able to get a building removed from our plan. The resulting reduction of trips was not shown in the staff report. We did not get a chance to explain that, but if we had, we could have shown that the current plan produces 106 fewer
cars in the A. M. Peak hour, and only 38 more cars in the P. M. peak hour than was
approved in (SP 182A), the office project that was previously approved for this site. That same trip generation was used by the city for this site in the Traffic Element of the General
Plan. This project will not cause the Level of Service for traffic to go below B at Carlsbad
Village Drive in the P.M. Peak between now and build out of the city (even without
pass-by traffic considerations).
The project will produce $901,000 in taxes, and 120 new jobs. This site can serve more
people better for retail supermarket use than any other site in the trade area. Many
goals in the Land Use Element of the General Plan Up Date can be furthered by this
project, including, but not limited to:
GOALS:
A.?
A.2
B.2
C.1.4 (Central location),
C1.5 (Statistical justification)
C.1.6 (Evaluate excessive undeveloped office zoning)
C.3 (Easily Accessible to nearby residents).
Commission hearing, and request your consideration.
(Healthy and diverse economic base)
(Compatible, conveniently located neighborhood shopping centers)
(All residential areas adequately served for daily food needs)
OBJECTIVES:
IMPLEMENT1 NG POLlCl ES:
We were not allowed sufficient time to present these findings at the Planning
PROOF OF PUBLlCATiON
(201 5.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years,
and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of
Blade-Citizen
a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published daily in the City of Oceanside and qualified for
the City of Oceanside and the North County Judicial district with substantial circulation in Bonsall, Fallbrook. Leucadia, Encinitas, Cardiff, Vista and Carisbad, County of San Diego, and which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior
This space is for the County Clerk’s nlir
Proof of Publication of
Motice of Public Hearing
.........................................
.........................................
Paste Clipping of Notice Court of the County of San Diego, State of California,
under the date of June 30,1989, case number 171349; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the
fallowing dates, to-wit:
March 10, 1995
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
SECURELY In This Space.
63- a: i
I\ i -3 ‘.I /G.
‘Y!+ ,, c
BLADE-CITIZEN Legal Advertising 1722 South Hill Street P.O. Box 90
Oceanside, CA 92054 (61 9) 433-7333
2
GPA 94-2tZC 94-1tSDP 94-2 - CAMINO VILLAGE
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, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m., on Tuesday, March 21, 1995, to consider an appeal of a Planning Commission denial of a Negative Declaration, a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Residential MedidOfice (WO) to Community Commercial (C), a Zone Change From Residential Professional (RP) to General Commercial (C-2), and a Site Development Plan for a commercial development which includes a 50,000 square foot supermarket and two additional retail buildings on a 6.7 acre site on property generally located within Local Facilities Management Zone 2, north of Carlsbad Village Drive and east of El Camino Real, and more particularly described as:
Parcels 2,3 and 4 as shown on Page 13206 of parcels filed in the Office of the County Recorde
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Cbrister Westman in the Planning Depamnent,at (619) 438-1161, ext. W8.
If you challenge the Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and/or Site Development Plan in cow, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by
you or someone else at the public he+g described m.tfliis notice, or in wntten correspondence delivered to the city of Carlsbad City Clerk's OEce at, or prior to, the public hearing.
HSP El Camino North, Inc.
,
. 0 w
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
APPEAL
GPA 94-2/ZC 94-1/SDP 94-2 - CAMINO VILLAGE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsb
Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m, on Tuesday, March 21, 1
consider an appeal of a Planning Commission denial of a Negative Decla
a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Resi Medium/Office (RM/O) To Community Commercial (C), a Zone Chans Residential Professional (RP) to General Commercial (C-2), and Development Plan for a commercial development which includes a 50,OOC foot supermarket and two additional retail buildings on a 6.7 acre property generally located within Local Facilities Management Zone 2 of Carlsbad Village Drive and east of El Camino Real, and more parti
described as:
Parcels 2, 3, and 4 as shown on Page 13206 of parcels filed in the Of. the County Recorder of San Diego County, March 14, 1984, together wi portion of Lot 5 in Section 32, Township 11 South, Range 4 We:
Bernardino Meridian, according to the official plat thereof, being City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Christer in the Planning Department, at (619) 438-1161, ext. 4448.
If you challenge the Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendmenl
Change, and/or Site Development Plan in court, you may be limited to
only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to t
APPELLANT: David Dunn for
PUBLISH: March 10, 1995
hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad
-
HSP El Camino North, Inc.
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
4
C$ d 0
lsA9442/ SOP94 CAb#4OVLLAM
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold
public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 69
p.m. on Wednesday, January 18, 1995, to consider a request for approval of a Negatil
Declaration, General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation from Resident
Medium/Office (RM/O) to Community Commercial (C), a Zone Change from Residentii
Professional (RP) to General Commercial (C-2), and a Site Development Plan for a commerc
development which includes a 50,000 square foot supemarket and two additional retail buildin!
on a 6.7 acre site on property generally located within Local Facilities Management Zone 2, nor
of Carlsbad Village Drive and east of El Camino Real and more particularly described as:
Parcels 2, 3, and 4 as shown at page 13206 of parcels filed in the office of the
County Recorder of San Diego County, March 14, 1984, together with that portion
of lot 5 in Section 32, Township 11 south, Range 4 West, San Bernardino
Meridian, according to official plat thereof, being in the Crty of Carlsbad, County
of San Diego, State of California.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the pub1
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after January 12, 1995. If you ha\
any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Planning Department at (61 9) 438-1 161, e)
4448.
If you challenge the Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and/or Sii
Development Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someon else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in wriien correspondence delivere to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE:
CASE NAME: CAMINO VILLAGE
PUBLl SH: JANUARY 6, 1995
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
GPA 94-021ZC 94-011SDP 94-02
cwvd
w 0
(Form A)
-
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: Putxxc HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for YOU to notice GPA 9)
ZC 94-Q1/SDP 94-02 CAMINO VILLAGE APPEAL
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice tho item for the council meeting of
.
Thank you.
2 I1 7/95 - Assistant City Man-- Oate
n -
w I,
81
.1
1 , -_
Ij
.I
, .j
I
!
I -.
I .I
,.
1
;
., j 1
.I
:.j .,
I
, ,i
./ ":I J 'I ,! !
,! I :. I
..I . - !.,
.. .,
..
: ,
1 .. ... I : .
1.
I.
L. :
I. , I' 4. .
... i : : CnPXW
1 !Gx% ..
Pt& .. .,
,
.,
Ht+
._ *
~ I' .. , ...
..
E&tI
W *3; 1 ,- .. nrz
... .. ..
Hi3
~,
j
1
..
j.
..
~rz I.
35X urn.
, .. ..
H 2 0 .... ! .. ,.
:. !. ,
.. .I
~ ; ......... .. .... 1 I .. , .! L: ,..
..
.. .. ,, , -. '. .. . ,:. . 1 :. !
: !
.,
..
I.. .. i.
,. ! .'.
i., . I. . ' 'I .'
.' , .. , .. i ; ': '
,' .... .............. ....... - -. - .,~ ..
.I . . ..
... ... I. . .. .. . . , f'.
..
.....
.. I.
, .'.
. '.. : '3 .. ..
.... ..
." '
j ,,.'
. . * ,.
.. I. .. ..
...
..
....
..
.. 5. .. .. -. c .
: .-.. _.
..
.
. .' .. ,. ..
..
.. .- ..
....
-. .
.....* ., .. .. .. ., ..
, . :
..
.. .. .. '. ,
..
8
.,
I.
.. .: ..
I
I
.‘ 4
t,
I
L , w a If TI -
Vanderburg Western Financial Savin Ray N Mcclave
Arcadia CA 91006 San Diego CA 92121 Carlsbad CA 920(
150 N Santa Anita Ave 6 10140 Campus Point Dr 2508 El Camino RE
Western Financi Helix Assoc
10140 Cam ...-.,f:;:"/; oint Dr Western 10140 i Campus Financia oint Dr
San Di CA 92121
305 Hihill Way
El Cajon CA 920: s7° CA
Mitsugi America Corp Brentwood Heights Homeo Horace Felkins
2300 Rising Glen Way 2727 Hoover Ave PO Box 431
Carlsbad CA 92008 National City CA 91950 Oceanside CA 921
Hosp Way Ltd Hosp ;. Way Ltd
1990 Westwood Blvd 300 Los Angeles CA 90025 Los A les CA 90025 eles CA
Hosp 1990 3 Way Wes Ltd od Blvd 300 ;:! ;y
Los eles CA 90025 es CA 90025 geles CA
Hosp 1990 Jo Way West Ltd ;/ 1990 West od Blvd 300 ;y
Los eles CA 90025 eles CA 90025 geles CA
Hosp 1990 ? Way Wes Ltd od Blvd 300 ;. ;y
Los eles CA 90025 es CA 90025 eles CA
Hosp io Way Ltd ;; 1990 Wes od Blvd 300 ;p Los geles CA 90025 eles CA 90025
Hosp Way Ltd Hosp Way Ltd Raymond S Reife:
1990 West d Blvd 300 2380 Hosp Way 2: Los ll geles CA 90025 L/ les CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92(
Hosp 1990 / Way Wes Ltd od Blvd 300 ;;oo ;e
Hosp 1990 c Way West Ltd
Los geles CA 90025 geles CA 90025 Angeles CA
L . w I I .I
Hasp 1990 > Way Westw Ltd ;; ;- Los A es CA 90025 geles CA 90025 geles CA
Hosp 1990 ; Way Wes Ltd od Blvd 300 ;; 1990 We ood Blvd 300 ;r 1990 We ood B1-
Los eles CA 90025 geles CA 90025 HI 1990 We wood Blvd 300 ;;; 1990 Wes od Blvd 300 ;y
Los geles CA 90025 geles CA 90025 geles CA
Hosp 1990 __j__ Way Wes Ltd ood Blvd 300 ;; ;y
Los geles CA 90025
Hosp lJ Way Ltd Hosp ;/ Way Lt
;;;y
;:: ;y
Hosp Way Ltd Hosp Way Ltd
Los 1990 jr____ We geles ood CA Blvd 90025 300 ;-
Hosp 1990 ; Way Wes Ltd ood Blvd 300 ;; 1990 We ood Blvd 300 ;/ 1990 W wood B1
Los geles CA 90025 geles CA 90025
Darwin 2380 Hosp S Lee Way 338 Carlsbad CA 92008 Los eles CA 90025
Hosp 1990 ; West Way Ltd Los eles CA 90025 eles CA 90025
Hosp 1990 ; Way We Ltd ood Blvd 300
Los geles CA 90025
La Scott 756 Habra Lamat CA Rd 90631
Louis R Islander Billy Y & Helen Shen Eric H Yeargain
5457 E Anaheim Rd 2312 Hosp Way 154 1910 Suncrest Ax
Long Beach CA 90815 Carlsbad CA 92008 Oceanside CA 9;
I w e .1
-
Kathleen M Everett Lorrie T Rannochio Robert W Scheire
2312 Hosp Way 156 2310 Hosp Way 157 2310 Hosp Way 151
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 9201
Hosp Way Ltd Vincent & Jeneen Gin John M Wydo
1990 West d Blvd 300 2310 Hosp Way 160 2312 Hosp Way 25 Los A eles CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 920
David D Craig Linda L Kosareff
2312 Hosp Way 255 2008 Harbor Dr 2
Hosp Way Ltd 1990 West d Blvd 300
Los eles CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92008 Oceanside CA 92
/
_i_
Secretary Of Veterans A Ira M & Gladys S
11000 Wilshire Blvd 2130 Sunset Dr 1
Los Angeles CA 90024 Vista CA 92083
William G Meyer 2310 Hosp Way 257 Carlsbad CA 92008
Anthony R Terralavoro Stephen A Hardley Boston Harbor Co
1621 Wagon Wheel Dr 30809 E Sunset Dr E 3111 Camino Del Oceanside CA 92057 Redlands CA 92373 San Diego CA 92
Hosp Way Ltd Boston Har Stanley W Hoffma
3471 Valley St
Los 1990 c A West es CA 90025 ;;l ego CA 92108 Carlsbad CA 920
Hosp 1990 2 Way West Ltd d Blvd 300 Hosp 19y7/&G Way Ltd Ernest 2342 Hosp C Grant Way 122 Carlsbad CA 92008 Los eles CA 90025 Los A eles CA
Hosp Way Ltd
1990 West d Blvd 300 2344 Hosp Way 12
Los eles CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92C
Brian A Corso
Craig R & Roger Turk First&South Rive
1990 West Blvd 300 2340 Hosp Way 217 4180 La Jolla Vi
La Jolla CA 92C
Hosp Way Ltd
Los A les CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92008
wood Blvd 300 1990 We ood B1
H/ 1990 We ood Blvd 300 :::y geles CA
Los geles CA 90025 geles CA '90025
T Debra M Gerhart
2344 Hosp Way 125 Carlsbad CA 92008
/ __d
, w ..
Charles V Robinson Earl L & Gail Shelman Margaret F Stoll
2342 Hosp Way 222 2342 Hosp Way 223 2342 Hosp Way 22d
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 9201
Hosp Way Ltd Hosp Way Ltd David C Blasko 1990 Wes od Blvd 300 2344 Hosp Way 22 Los > :; Carlsbad CA 920
Donald L Jabbar Federal National Mortga Raymond R & Jean
2344 Hosp Way 228 PO Box 66854 2345 Ala Wai Blv
Carlsbad CA 92008 Saint Louis MO 63166 Honolulu HI 968
Hosp Way Ltd Jerry A Huber Sell
1990 Wes od Blvd 300 2340 Hosp Way 320 PO Box 1091
Los eles CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 920
Ptnshp Ehrlich&Schulthe Kristy & Diane Klein Great Western Ba
250 W Colorado Blvd 200 2342 Hosp Way 323 9200 Oakdale Ave
Carlsbad CA 92008 Chatsworth CA 9 Arcadia CA 91007
__II^
~
1 /
Ena L Mitchell Vilma J Thomas Teresa L Goar
2344 Hosp Way 325 4518 Gainsborough Ave 2344 Hosp Way 32
Carlsbad CA 92008 Los Angeles CA 90027 Carlsbad CA 920
Hosp Way Ltd Wanda L Magana Lester & Freda C
1990 Wes od Blvd 300 2360 Hosp Way 129 1339 Crestview I?
Los eles CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92008 Redlands CA 923
Mayme R Willis Franklin M Taylc
2360 Hosp Way 131 2360 Hosp Way 132 2362 Hosp Way 1:
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Raymond J Taf ej ian
Carlsbad CA 92008
Hosp Way Lt 1990 We ood B1 Los / geles CA
Hosp Way Ltd Catherine Rowan 1990 Westw Blvd 300 409 Dell Ct
Los A es CA 90025 Solana Beach CA 92075
Secretary Of Ve ans A Michael P Morioka Donald A Dods
11000 Wils e Blvd 266 2360 Hosp Way 230 162 S Rte 94
Los A es CA 90024 Carlsbad CA 92008 Warwick NY 1095
b , w a
Ruth I M Madiyan Joseph Spina Charlea S 6c Agne
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Las Vegas NV 89
Hosp Way Ltd Isaac R Minor Calvin J & Mary
1990 Westw lvd 300 2362 Hosp Way 236 110 Ross Ave __1_5 es CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92008 San Anselmo CA
Hosp Way Ltd Deborah K Christensen Matthew V Worthi
1990 Wes od Blvd 300 2360 Hosp Way 331 2066 Avenue Of T
Los geles CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
2360 Hosp Way 232 2362 Hosp Way 233 3886 Spftze Dr
Marilyn J Powell Marcus J Smith Alan J & Teresa 2362 Hosp Way 333 2362 Hosp Way 334 2362 Hosp Way 33 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C Carlsbad CA 92008
3
z
K
Hosp Way Ltd Brenda & Michael Stone Leroy F Morris
1990 West d Blvd 300 3700 E Calle De Ricardo 2330 Hosp Way 1C
Los eles CA 90025 Palm Springs CA 92264 Carlsbad CA 92C
Ptnshp Ehrlic chulthe Secretary / 11000 Wi Of ire Blvd 266 ii_y ;w
Los geles CA 90024 Arcad' CA 91007
Hosp Way Ltd Thomas N Seela
1990 Westw Blvd 300 246 Hemlock Ave
Los es CA 90025 Carlsbad CA 92(
John R Kaitangi;
2334 Hosp Way 1:
Hosp Way Ltd Walter L Shatsky
1990 West Blvd 300 27672 Via Real
Los A es CA 90025 Sun City CA 92585 Carlsbad CA 92(
z Lawrence Luevano
2332 Hosp Way 106
Carlsbad CA 92008
Smith Francis F Eloise Doyle Robert W Gallow; 4718 Athos Way
Oceanside CA 92056 Carlsbad CA 92008 . Oceanside CA 9;
2336 Hosp Way 113 1706 Downs St
David L Downey Edward E Lavoie James R Hill
2336 Hosp Way 115 2336 Hosp Way 116 2636 Brookview I
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Saint Paul MN !
1 1 w 0
Ehrlich&Schulth Edward S Gwin 250 W Colo o Blvd 200 2600 Kentmoor Rd
Arca ; Bloomfield Hills Carlsbad CA 92008
Jghn 0 & Eun Chun
2330 Hosp Way 202
Laurie J Cohen Phyllis Yamaguchi Kin-Hang & Rosa1
2332 Hosp Way 205 12552 Brando St 2332 Hosp Way 20
Carlsbad CA 92008 Cerritos CA 90703 Carlsbad CA 920
Anwar M Shadward Michelle Kanter Paulette M Cimma
2332 Hosp Way 208 2334 Hosp Way 209 2334 Hosp Way 21 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 920
Hosp Way Ltd Federal Home Loan Mortg Gayle J Mayfield
1990 Westwo Blvd 300 4500 Salisbury Rd 2336 Hosp Way 21 Los An es CA 90025 Jacksonville FL 32216 Carlsbad CA 920
Robert R Briggs Andrew Shonley
250 W Colo o Blvd 200 2336 Hosp Way 215 1009 Crest View
Carlsbad CA 92008 Vista CA 92083
Ehrlich&Schult
Arcad' A 91007
: 1
Steven A Turner Usin I Pisingan
Charlotte NC 28231 Apo AP 96364 2312 Back Nine St PO Box 31728 Psc 79 PO Box 20
Michael G Hatch
Oceanside CA 92056
Ehrlich&Schult
250 W Co
Arc ,/ 'a CA 9100
Hosp Way Ltd
1990 Wes
Los / eles CA
Linda P Flynn Martin L Acosta
2330 Hosp Way 304 2354 Wales Dr Carlsbad CA 92008 Cardiff By The Se 92007
Bowman Richard William
2332 Hosp Way 307 2332 Hosp Way 308
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008
Christopher B Randolph
Yongsheng Liang Rory S & Barbara Goree Chris M & E Bade
2334 Hosp Way 310 2334 Hosp Way 311 2334 Hosp Way 31 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Bradford Michael L Dill Paul C & Claudir
2336 Hosp Way 313 13081 Fescue Ct 2336 Hosp Way 31
Carlsbad CA 92008 Corona CA 91719 Carlsbad CA 92C
I
b 1 w m -.
Pueblo De Oro Ltd Marko Dakovich
p/ 12552 Br Dba Oceancrest Apts 1305 N Paclonia
Cerr s CA 90703 2320 Via Clemente 92008 Whittier CA 906
Roby L Blessing Jane A Paradowski Carolyn A Mead
2903 Via Carrio 2905 Via Carrio 1513 E Murray St
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Macomb IL 61455
James F Asbrock Dennis M Giaruso Kenneth K Baird
1402 Pambara Cir 2911 Via Carrio 2913 Via Carrio
Oceanside CA 92054 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 920
Samuel L Farley Dominic Angerosa George H Reasons
2915 Via Carrio 2708 Via Colima 7402 Lantana Ter
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Robert T Philburn Frances F Clark Wallace E & Ruth Voreck 44 E Shore Trl 2521 Via Esparto 2519 Via Espartc Sparta NJ 07871 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Vern L Simmons Stephen E & J Hilliker Frank R & Marci;
PO Box 1307 30 Cascade Rd 2513 Via Espartc
Rancho Santa Fe C 92067 West Henrietta NY 14586 Carlsbad CA 92(
Vern L Sirnrn
PO Box Ran / Santa Fe
Robert B Breckii
3110 Via Sorbet( -_-.'y/ Ra o Santa Fe C 92067 Carlsbad CA 921
Michael A Kozlowski Philippe Peluso
2511 Via Esparto 3102 Via Sorbete
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008
Carlsbad CA 92008
Debra B Tase
3106 Via Sorbete
Jan Moneypenny Dennis A Peterson Johnny & Jovita
3112 Via Sorbete 2502 Via Sorbete 2504 Via Sorbet(
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92
Ruth Casey Patricia A Perkins Dianne Regan
2506 Via Sorbete 56 Longstaff St 2510 Via Sorbet
Carlsbad CA 92008 Jacksonville NC 28540 Carlsbad CA 92
I . 1
c 0 w
Rjchard T Jacinth Kirk Foroozani Eugene Farrell 2883 Cottingham St 2514 Via Sorbete 3208 Via Pescadc Oceanside CA 92054 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
William S Fogarty Jerry L & Leigh Carlson Ruth M Johnson
7844 S Locust Ct 2758 Victoria Ave 2515 Via Sorbetc Englewood CO 80112 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92t
Tigran A Gasparian Robert J Norton Baron A Coenen
2513 Via Sorbete 2511 Via Sorbete 6172 Montecito I Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Huntington Bead
Albert Abramovitz Hidehiko Chino Angela Moore 2409 Carriage Cir 3601 Ames P1 2503 Via Sorbetc
Oceanside CA 92056 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92(
Lusardi Warner C Tiburon&Carlsbad Homeow Robert C Brodkir
1570 Linda Vista Dr 6215 Holly Mont Dr 2516 Avenida De
San Marcos CA 92069 Los Angeles CA 90068 Carlsbad CA 92(
Vernon J Steinman E L Fogal Fogal E L Co
2518 Avenida De Anita 1991 Village Pal
Carlsbad CA 92008 Encinitas CA 92024 Encinitas CA 9:
1991 Village Park Way 2
Selim S & Ilhan Tarabus Yoshitani Timothy P Harryr
PO Box 713 5171 Belmez 2504 Via Rojo
Chicago IL 60690 Laguna Hills CA 92653 Carlsbad CA 92(
Henry W Hastings Kristina Allen Dorthy Bird 2500 Lake Park Ln 2503 Via Rojo 2505 Via Rojo Newport Beach CA 92660 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92(
Suzanne Pippin Brick D Langford Ann C Gongola 2507 Via Rojo 2509 Via Rojo 500 Grand Ave Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92(
Dieterle August J & Diana Link Jerry F & Alice 2902 Via De Paz 2904 Via De Paz PO BOX 9000-137 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92(
8
I e w e
I'
Tbomas F & Mary Siersma Val H Nakamura Steve D Beyer 2908 Via De Paz 1542 Madrid Dr 748 9th Ave Carlsbad CA 92008 Vista CA 92083 San Francisco CA
Robert D Hopkins Ernestine Ryan Robert B Doolitt
1137 Santa Madera Ct 2518 Via Naranja 2520 Via Naranja
Solana Beach CA 92075 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Steven W Knight Irene K Nicolai Edward & Pamela
2697 Sausalito Ave 2323 Ocean St 34 2519 Via Naranjz
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Gilbert J Soto William R Oxford John C & Linda F
3669 Via Bernard0 2515 Via Naranja 2925 Mountain Pi
Oceanside CA 92056 Carlsbad CA 92008 La Crescenta CA
Ken & Harriet Cooke Ray & Hazel Raino Garabed P Toumay
7742 Rocio St 3014 Via De Paz 2 8 0 9 Jacaranda P
Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Scott F Carmen Rex A Jackson Thomas A Alcaraz
3018 Via De Paz 3020 Via De Paz 3022 Via De Paz
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Vern L Simmo William I Shaw Alfred W Stone PO Box 13 2510 Via Esparto PO Box 1063 Ranc anta Fe C 92067 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
David H & Karen Beadle Joseph & Jeanne
2516 Via Esparto 23332 Park Marig Brian F & Kathleen Ward
2514 Via Esparto
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Calabasas CA 91
1
Frances Mcgregor Joseph Amendola Richard L Philli 2520 Via Esparto 2215 E 3rd St 2524 Via Espartc
Carlsbad CA 92008 Brooklyn NY 11223 Carlsbad CA 92C
Joseph & Jea Bosco Robert L Haney John P & Mabel E 23332 P Mariposa 3037 Via Amador 3436 James Dr Cal 2 sas CA 91302 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
w e , -4
1) I.
I, .w '
Eyma Reid Mark A Brennan Patricia Green
3033 Via Amador 3031 Via Amador 3029 Via Amador Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Bonnie L Duphiney Hector R & Rivera Perez Doris R Linke
3027 Via Amador 3023 Via De Paz 3021 Via De Paz
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Kathern E Beasley Daniel E Schulenburg James P Riseley
Cypress CA 90630 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92(
11351 Anegada St 2641 Brighton Rd 3015 Via De Paz
Dorothy A Bowman
323 Avenida Carmel B 3011 Via De Paz Laguna Hills CA 92653 Carlsbad CA 92008 Enci as CA
Michael & Henry Barnes Fogal l/ E L Co
Fogal E L Com
1991 / Vi11 Steven M Meyers Walter H & Helen Lorenz
3007 Via De Paz 256 Tampico Gln
Carlsbad CA 92008 Escondido CA 92025 Enci s CA
Carlos I Galan James F & Noelma Walsh C N & Dona Phil1
Carlsbad CA 92008 Irvine CA 92714 Carlsbad CA 92(
3001 Via De Paz 2 Duskywing 2997 Via De Paz
Tiburon&Carl Homeow Dorothy B Hartnc
Car 33 ad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C a De Anita 3123 Via Premio Carlsbad CA 92008
Ramond A Little
2995 Via De Paz
M J Flaming Bette S Springer Daniel V Gamelir
3121 Via Premio 3119 Via Premio 3117 Via Premio Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Jean E Truax Evelyn B Corder Murray J Long
3115 Via Premio 3113 Via Premio 2786 W Tola Ave Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Anaheim CA 928C
Christopher J Mahon Meredith J Perkins Brian J Maynard
3109 Via Premio 1007 Sunset Dr 4825 Chalk Ct Carlsbad CA 92008 Healdsburg CA 95448 Oceanside CA 9;
. . w e u, fn
*# '
Cilayton C Wiest John C & Beth Harris Douglas Rasar
3101 Via Premio 2601 Via Vera 1670 Basswood Ave
Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Dana A Tobiassen Francisco J Jimeno Steven T Tiplitr 2603 Via Vera 3218 Via Pescado 4504 Corte Azul Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Oceanside CA 92
Mark S Bauknecht Richard K & Susan Rowe George E & Gwynr 3031 Via Sabinas 3029 Via Sabinas 3027 Via Sabinas Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92C
Gloria R Giorella Insook Baik Shabbir Ismail 3025 Via Sabinas 3023 Via Sabinas 2601 Via Bocas Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 920
Blaine D Smiley Mary E Humphreys Russell A & Poll 2603 Via Bocas 2604 Via Bocas 2602 Via Bocas Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 920
Tiburon&Carls TiburonKarlsbad William F Biebus: 3115 Aven' a De Anita 3115 Avenid 3201 Via Tonala Jw CA 92008 < A 92008 Carlsbad CA 920
Vern L Simon Harry E Hollaway
PO Box 1 3207 Via Tonala San Diego CA 92130 \ Santa Fe C 92067 Carlsbad CA 920,
Donn M Graff
3697 Caminito Cannel Ln
TiburonKarlsb omeow Leeroy D Sorensen Glen C Hemphill 3115 Aveni e Anita 2354 Kimberly Ct 2344 Kimberly Ct Carlsb CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 920(
ATTN: TERESA ILLICH DON AGATEP Leo J Dezzutto ABC CHILDREN'S CENTER 2956 ROOSEVELT ST
2334 Kimberly Ct 2634 EL CAMINO REAL PO BOX 590
Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 9200
:
MARY ROHRER
c/a NOTTINGHAM ASS0
2910 RED HILL AVE
PO BOX 5047
COSTA MESA CA 926
*** 325 Printed *** DAVID DUNN
13352 LORETTA DR
SANTA ANA CA 92705
c -e 0
City Council
City of Ca rlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5u bject: GPA 94-0UZC 94-01 - Carnino Village
5incerely, Lb OVvdL
Names:
Address: 72-t
0 *
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5ubject GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
CI ----
Names:
/
Address: &cxG hf'
. m v
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92000
~LJ bject: GPA 94-0UZC 94-01 - Carnino Village
Dear Councilmem bers!
& &A > +c"a' 5i ncerely,
Names:
Address:
0 .\ /
City Council
City sf Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5u bjec-t;:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
n / $/if I o$ 7?& &ct,e-- 7AO6-J ipI 50PT (:&Ld.&g //(- /qg J-&k.J
?,dg./L -3h+- 7ddFf6, /x 3; @CY?r.AL Id LLAL >~cJ..9L<6+9-% c -z FZ2L - 7-66-55 jg $Go /"I? pe3.C.4Ct-c-
2 .'L 3 5 /-,' L, &$ $3
i" @ ~ 6'f L- LC.& c- 7--&4 u -2 n-/ &-
Ana &&I-..) 0
- i,-5LCC"O .la-;;- CR Lq *L5d4 2.- -.e- L7rl c.3 Lac/ kt7 e-u-T--
-&Wd 9L e &/4 s &RLa@LL / ,
\iJ i' 9 o-) /q 3 VCL. ,u' EIsZ?z?- *L - k-cw. -
,h
\ -7 - py-L-, ( ;i3 hL Q p u .L=7---
'y-ttL5 u >&-.A i
b cs
Si ncerely,
Names: . ~qfIl&AEL- cJB.Rkd
RP (L,,.f&-) (&tf-r;*CJA.- 4-PL
Address: &LjLLSmw cA C?$Cc,7 1
c e 0
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5ub'ect:
Pear Counci I members:
GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01 - Carnino Village J
-
0
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Garlsbad Village Dr,
Garlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
B
I
GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino,Village
e
F
-1
I
2-3 3% H"5p uay, *Ug,
Address: Ccbl~/Shu.$.. Cfl ?LOO$- ).Z 23
a 0
s
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-OUZC 34-01 - Camino Viilage
JflAYA
/P- &A J Af.!.&d.e,zN /?f++iUA J -=L / fl AA-&z,& / I /'
v
/ 4d.4 A-rA& & ;,, /Yh.&-lM/+ // " Y /
L -
c-* /&.&&-e+&- 5i ncerely,
Names:
? LtL.@L Address: 5!&J/ /f&> /k&&' I/ rA L-
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
Dea r Cou nci I members:
r
GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
.
/
v
J4L&/wdv + d’
I‘ !
,J
-----
----------
Sincerely, 37-2- 0- i- , ,@Liid’U
Names:
Ken and Susan Roush
181 0 Ratcliff Road Carlsbad, CA 92008
Address:
.
a e e
\,
I
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject: GPA 94-02/ZG 94-01 - Camino Village
I
-. .-- - -.-
I Dear Councilmembers:
- 'AC /owec os;e\_
- -
7 ! -
I
-A \. v Ln ' i ''4
Sincere'YJ N; L\ p(& I\?GnwTubb
bJ&3 Address: 23L RL%lr\C( elk,
Names:
?-
0 I. 0
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject: GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Viilage
- I-
6
-J Sincerely,
Names:
1
. City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
' Carlsbad, CA 92008
5ubjea: GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01 - Camino Village
a 0
-
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5 u & j ect:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-UUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
I
i 1
~
I
Address: L-AAL
L
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-0ZZC 94-01 - Camino Village
1 fLE 7-tt-F .fmSI /a y?s LOi5 ?$+%I F dm1
i/fvpfBL-E .ia O&JE-P-S723-&?J3 bod u' SiJJ3Eid: w.4 6 /Vt?-
RQF8, 77- I/O&'S =S;TDRri #7- &Z@.&~/UO @#L
s3-0Dn,/4r, 1 &s rg&* ad .L,//v/zFA id m/S
r Yt &% /+ l/<Fy L/ M/V~ - $E--LfdT/O&
&;D& &F-fl -
p/vo~L4m su QeLflkiKe2
A&auT- 0 lvL-y &V/M& ONE soa6iMARiFT /d
m Dm STQRES, ~KLi7Ufe-
!
/ s ub%l Q u ES7/ O/d A@ Lg
/4/Lr'c?FSSpq.~~/, I BUR. dEl GlrPSoRf 8RE &/iiSrn/V?-L~ &+7/2LA/N//vG
mr &em so WE eT2.F SV&F -k/ As z, WLY
&&--LC # #-7 P7?# /q ODQO n7-d AIJ Til -rL .E!L,DELL=S%
ou/? L3Q/nlj UdS
1
{ I
I
---
Si merely,
Names: dfiM~5 *R~IJGT
-3oeo nf-\6 *eTw-7---
Add re55: did 3 &A fimw/D --&/%sanO $?208&-
Sa PPV LEZ1-800Z6 V3 ‘PEqSljE3
ZZZX ABM dsoH ZPIZ
UOsUlqO~ 3 SJNg JN
:s~aquraurl!mno3 J gad
:3.= T4 n s
*.la Q~WA PW-W 0091
I!2uno3 h!3
96gll!A OU!ug3 - LO--tr6 32/20-+6 Vd9
80026 V3 ‘P45lJg3
Pg451-Jg3 P &!3
0 @
/# / #px v’: ! L! o+/ b pfir :sea-JPPv
‘/Cl3J’ZIU!S
o@e/s d 03 :G9UgN /
t;wyf- PA aya $71 a 4y-J
I‘ :erlaqura~u Ipunq -J gad
aW!A OU!ug3 - 10-476 32/20-476 Vd9 :war4 n S
‘Ad g@gII!A P4W3 0091
pun03 K9!3
80026 V3 ‘Pg4’+a3
Pg451Jg3 $0 &!3
e B
:esa.lppy - v3 ‘ws7wa ==mw Orsr ’1H3’M *3 NVf17jM
:GalUt?N
36all!A OU!Wg3 - 10+6 3Z/Z0+6 Vd9 :v3r4ns
. *-a 36~~ PVI-W 0091
I!guno3 &!3
60026 V3 ‘Pg45l-W
Pg4q-l g3 do A3!3
0 0
:559JppV
T& $- w &-$,,,,,
‘+Jam !cJ
t
3
t? @--- ( g6 v.9 6 3-t
@ wmcm mi VJ @WWfl 1 T3”a”B”TTW -)_-” -- ~ - a--* --
:o-raqwaurl!~uno3 myj
96gll!A OU!urg3 - IU-t.6 3ZEO-t.6 Vd9 :war4 ns
60026 V3 ‘P04olJg3 ‘Ja 96gII!A Pg4Vg3 0091
Pg4CIJ03 $0 ‘%!3
I!D’unq &!3
0 e
*’
--I_
:e~aqucauc ipuno3 J wa
a6gll!A OU!Wg3 - 10+6 3Z/Z0+6 Vd9 :wg r4 n s
--(a ~WA PWJ~~ 0091
pun03 h!D
80026 V3 ‘Pg4Wa3
Pg4ClJW 40 h.!9
e e
--
‘74~?~L@7?-yq&rn p%q<wg :53Lut2N
‘. ‘IClaJa%J!s
-----
96gll!A OU!Wg3 - 10-f.6 3Z/ZU+6 Vd9 :%)a f4 n s
80026 V3 ‘Pg4Vg3 *-la 9@gII!A Pg4GlJg3 0091
Pg4Wg3 40 &3!3
I!g’uno3 &%!3
0 e
e / #& (9 ag //IA #d ac :553JQQV - %7 a@- "ay
/3/aby Zfl3 2'9/7 f q :GaI.UgN
*KjClaJCla3 U !S
-I__-- --------
/ * / 39YF.d
kf2-9G 4 'Q rJ717i L Y ?I a vc 7f3c *= 3fl#VJg/ SWOS eq/ Q Gd' PY 2/2d
~%4..~ep SVH/ -I /i av-99 A- --. I3 ? . 2'.
3fiv(J 1 ZlfY ip Q/u v7 qJ 13 -"-"Q "J?d 5,'YYYd Q/Y 9B QJ?73// -
/ / 'W/ -asj-j/(J a HL fl* rc 9JJ a7/n PTU-dJk .c '(7dQNfl 31 "! v
e 5GmHS ang Lay - 3YW &?fl
dP! BSLV2lgl 7pH- QJWW Q,n/Wp.,~ -q iy9 $ #@ QA p~va3r"i3g 23~~~9
$0 s.3P-T~fl a - 7R fl a/J -3-8 f a4yH c"L 4r -F-tT O?""rn .* 3 97v f
*
pP PPZx;/P'ab/ 4. -9AILCl57 a* d 3 fY a pPq- J# 4y Gfu?c71?7 I! d/
3Y.L d.8 ,"AQ-Jddv 0
:s~aq~uaurl!m~q Jgag
afigll!A OU!wg3 - 10-tt6 3ZEO-tt6 Vd9 :wg f4 n s
$0026 V3 'Pg45lJg3
'4 gh!A Pg4sIJe3 0091
Pg4Wg3 $0 A3!9
I!guno3 &!3
@ I)
* vq 7J-w +WJ -5-4hE
w ’2 2w/owxi 4 * 3 (i WJ/b” qaJa3U!s
:59LUeN
*WJ Am w ff 2n++Lt/ JrI +=
-3 W‘W 3 23 - S-eA 3U cf/ oAV .==@
-- I J
AAPgl&l&! 3hvaL* - v Jg 33/m ONL
03
Y WWQ-L-! SU7J
>rwy WN dw WQ 3310A QA
7 1Etj7 ALldrll2LOdM i+LL ~wJ;L~M 3~ SmqA 2
-+LL -- W~933yJ 3 L.!?w/=@ %
96gII!A OU!Wg3 - 10-+6 3Z/ZU--t76 Vd9
:GJ94LU9LUl!3UflO3 JWa
:vaT4n5
80026 V3 ‘Pg4GI-Jg3
‘4 96gll!A Pg4’4Jg3 0091
Pg4GlJQ3P k!3
1!3uno3 &!3
e r, e
S77qq l%WA@7W7 344QJ PPV
‘-&a 5 9r”/..w- /L5T
b 7v& :52lUtQ
qa”la2 u ! 5 yyw”p/ -72 +-?L
4
-Tmr--- # 1
~9~1754 aug57aY7 +y3lyz@h/&/ 3 a ~1%
3yA- LtY /-i~~f-?H7 wp3Jt3 20 23 2 Q-db”
&WQW G/ 3sn Qpq 92hy / “/jq
1 -AY79
29 QQcaq92 47175fl p7!J9&/Q9 +/A
3 9 a@
---A 1 acf pep %$/ Jsn =Q& 72 5.72 ~”dlL-/ c1yg‘
-r).i7e4cdJlI37 737x3 ytJ si 5-p p9Ld3g yy
-ydG;2N-3S/lfM 9312f -2p~2-3//7~~~~ ~BL
r, I 37/
*gWgsra&> LSt/3 wp 2/Q/{ / -pa aww
--29dn, c- a3Hccqw Z%?d/&!?v~ 35u2y7j ----- -- -- -
:erlaq~uaurl!~,uno3 -1g3a
36gII!A OU!ug3 - 10-96 3Z/ZO--t.6 Vd9 :w44ns
*a 36~~ PWI-’~~ 0091
I!?uno3 &!3
80026 V3 ‘Pa4GiJg3
P4VQ SFQ ‘%!3
0 *
:GO2JppV A 80026 v3 ’awasiw3
snoum -w Iutauv snotuvM -r sswvr
Oatf3S3d VIA LOZE
/--vn &/ myv :oaurqq /’< ‘KpJaD u !s 7-
7@3
_I---p
I?
< 2- 7!4?V@
,/,+ F7 ?T/”
-?-?/-+--??@7.*M&iG- 29 7/79 Fy -7y- 74/@5,? -JY 0-pWZ’~~ “,“--?7y-WV I 7
7 %?--/:--=- yg y y-7 ’-7 - ”7 /&?pZ-&q 2 7-q. (-ym-jp ”72’
07H p+- H-2 1%4y,) 7”Yi
. &! F7?/ ?% B‘T d d $?T-a-=-T 0-7 y:-fjp 1 %pfz+/
77kF-p g~;fl’P~&,‘7~ “/szy y-p-7
;P-y?--?fl t
//? <- .’7/? OyT a .“;“fly
@@--y r*ld/ ,7 27 /(/&2?4Tp’ /-=+/r 3’7/’7%7 “a! -p-M---&
/4/ / yfl fl j3.3-*-, ,r?2p *S--?-7T%?27 Q PbWG r d Y 52/fl Fp’
n ,B
, $-ip T-7- n ‘ ,7d ?-r-q@-P-f flfl
-p w
/
~P;*cz&-7- gyy ?’a y-y-/w=- LV’+ 7 27 f&- *07AW rF/w T?ePw - 3
-2*72 ”7YJ
”7 -7 fi9- y-Fyg q-: cL-37’wY&/Zs& O’&/ 77-nT / d [p--.v ,177.2-~n71 n
+’x!/ d. * -
4 p-72
17 ’-- 9 7-4 7-c9 -g, p mafv ,>w/g -3-
7%-
:?q ~ 3=‘2-7q7/& Tw T-FP -=4qG-Te?y
- - --.---
:o.raquraurlpuno3 .read
a6glI!A OU!we3 - 10+6 32/20+6 Vd9 :w44ns
80026 V3 ‘PS4SlJQ
.XI 26all!A W4’+g3 0091
Pa451-4 g3 30 &!3
[!gun03 &!3
0;
\
-
-
b
96glI!A OU!uS3 - 10+6 3Z/ZO--b6 Vd9 :Waf4 n s
80026 V3 'Pg4'Vg3 '-la 96gli!A Pg4QI-lg3 0091
Pg4WP3 $0 A3!3 a
* I!Dunq h!3
0 0
* P
I
?
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
GPA 94-0UZC 94-01 - Camino Village
.
I
I
~ ~ --v ~~~
.
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject;:
Dear Council mem be rs:
GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01 - Carnino Village
- - L bEilede de- h3-d al?C~F~ cpce+
mack&T or-) EL- klnd>k-- 7-k don15 frn3rW
is r;\UciE? - d-00 53ma.i 1, de&../ d,-FClc;! 14- 4-0 qm- &&
And OdT 0-q and io0 *OdCLl&. -- J--C h~~orne~ \r't=?z\f ~~~r-~~~-Lnq & hdue-L
4
_c -
-$,arzC-M?osE- 5-1+oa+,dn5' rnk&&In?G ;oO;i oEecl 4-0 90 -
.&.€id&E q~~o~~~ &@-.E. -
py-C3aosw- '- -It*dJ WE SkZEd 'I+ - ! -n?ank7dou'-6& C anitd& oq 4-h~ & (Dean 3
-- - - -
".
-.
_.
Sincerely, Ifla * d\Aq 0 &En dJ4 mqn ;<;a R
Name5: ~,&Kkg~ViS-c
(-3&+2~5ba, Ffi- qc3008
Address:
-----
A A- -"..Aa+pb 1 p
1.
I--
cJy -hF aa-t?y?fl
-----
:o~aquiauilpuno3 myj
:A rrnfr +-,9cs
80026 V3 'Pg4V3
'JU 96Ell!A PE4Wg3 0091
Pg45l-W 30 &!3
36k?i1!,1 CUj%k?2 - iG-fi.6 3z/zo+6 '+Jg
I!3uno3 &!3
e 0
I r
.I
f
- \
0
3452A ppv
/@PA42 fl Fy-5
2flP&=ZZ PFF + 4, P 2~~yd:w#3N
4Al~~~9 u ! s b=e"4 /
-
:GJaq'wau~!3"no3 .!!ma
ghi!A OU!WW - 10-476 32/ZU+6 VM 39ar4n~
*-la ~~WI PW-W 0091
I!Dunq &!3
80026 V3 'P~4~l-W
PO40 I-' Q3 30 h!3
r
. e W
Ci$y Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carisbad, CA 92006
5ubject: GPA 94-0UZC 94-01 - Camino Village
Dear Councilmembers: A 1.b /: is dZ< /LC‘ &+/--{p[& j ----
”-7- -3 -- &,f-d 5 fig ,-: if- r tL3 &- p*+f 7 r/ 2 ,A: &- >A& .LJ+>/ Kc 4
LL4%@7 4 -4 ,7p,Q+7 ‘Tc/5-TL;/LTL5rC 5 && y $PL7 ,o(L / i -
1- v ‘) r .M
/)*nv<@ $;. /< I / ,? /%.& c LL7-7 JLj& L/”?y_( &-.
I
F
Sincerely, -
Names: ,/c w5-3L; cc/
Address:
\
City Council
City of Ca rlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5ubject:
Dea r Coun ci I members:
GPA 94-OUZC 39-01 -,Gamin0 Village
- ------ --_L---
-
Sincerely, 0
Names: J.( s&a?
Address: 22x2 //&& A* 92q
W w
Carlsbad, CA 92008
GPA 94-UUZC 34-01 - Camino Village ,
Dear Councilmembers:
-v
7 w w 4.
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Garlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5ubject;: GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
-------- -
5 ncerely,
Na me5 &Vb'b~L ?!h'U!LL(*lp
Address:
<
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5u bje&
Dea r Cou n ci I members:
GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
we rt the new marlcet on El CaminO. The fact that
Albertson's is willing to pay for the signal themselves
is a great boon to us and the extra income in taxes to
city is an added value.
1- --
T am unable to attend the meeting on the 21st as I am
an airline pilot and will be out of town, but please
consider my opinion in favor of approving the site.
Traffic is a concern to all of us, but I believe the
immediate area will the the area served mostly and although
traffice will increase in that immediate area, perhaps it
will influence those that use El Camino Real for commuting
through Carlsbad, to use alternate routes.
We are also very concerned about speed of automobiles on
Avenida de Anita between Marron Road and Carlsbad Village
Drive. Something should be done to slow down cars traveling
through this neighborhood as a shortcut. The speed limit
is 25mph and often cars are doing 45 mph through here,
appreciated Sincerely,
-
- ,-
-
-
-- .-,--.- - ~ --
arolyn Jackson w
3020 Via De Paz
Carlsbad CA 92008
Address:
-
1
--
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5 u bject:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
/
c Qh OF fern Y 'rccsfu&eA by Af? ~ h, ik AF
SCr\:1 u5, '1 +,.e V&<d\% ldvhP LIGL4 70 n - VI C$9roLC?- -& 7 64 --euvjw ~/bet-!t:o~u +!Q FLfiiHO
v? IIIJe < .. -.
- &Y w f& ?tu5 (R.2/J-(bf \s (fdd4 fa 5.b%d/ -f$rde m&' I'f-
-J
-- -
-
I----
- --
--
-- -
-
Sincerely,
Names: Y6$+b?
27/7 Ad&%& Be Al,&] +/2f-
C
e -- Address: afh b~d,~ & ?&by
/
r'
4 *
4
'4
Y
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01 - Carnino Village
\ N&e Ize&A(- 1 Lk- 5rUA L+ +he- SiZ 78 4,
E] cps,v)q \no R%L\, &a w 0-5 L &rnieF) '
Sincerely,
Names: GT d, d.+
Address: 2'30'~ RISZ~S~ G L-e, Cd~q *33Cb
C"a\l&CZC\ :et.& q-e\%
)
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 32008
5ubject: GPA 94-OZZC 94-01 - Camino Village
5i ncerely yLk4c&J
Names:
Address:A@r &A flf% i,, &%-&?.AdJ y-8 IC
~
.
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
4ubject: GPA 24-UUZC 94-01 - Gamino Village
5i ncerely,
Names: Ik//)~?L26e?ri cw kAJ+J
Address: 28&* LA%&&;, ,/hd~d / ?Z#&
e w
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5 u bj ea:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
Sincerely, toll 7 ic.l I'
Names: een o RGT
dice da9G
Address: Ishad; GL 9200s
W 0 F
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
b 0 m
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5ubject:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-0UZC 94-01 - Camino Village
j?l 1 y Jk m/jY 1.I 04-yC/pLt1RcI\ ILL &etJe< c;-t' r'c.,
I r ;>ad ,;-Clt?.VTJJGblf J JWt, ~/~d/,',K, j'&, u4-y /&YC/<, &&
J'-.A c4 74- m,/ JAcc4/. - /:fiK&"p L)b-#'GeJ 0G-e :&.ey.
u& LZ. LL+ cr' 6, L * *c 1: d%&.MJ, - 2% i &,$ LL (, L
ilh(,"-ufA. L4. x2 dld h,/d u -, I JL UQ,/iLGk+/J & t1-J 4L.r &-cc
( ,9diiY,,IcI A-
I /,
liw- "e& P- L-L~ (IC-/@ 40 tLlcz.pq 4~:~
Id[
h,
< -'i --__L-- -_ ~~-
I /
6 sincerely, J~ ,&&-
Names: ~I.A-I L.* Qb-ref-
Address: TIM /idL &LL* k I @,dr4, J QL,,Q a39
b W
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
4ubject: GPA 94-021ZC 94-01 - Camino Village
Address: &$AdK UM5
La dlTE 88 - D0NYT SAY Li (j'!
Date 3/2 /
0 Reply Wanted
UNO Reply Necessary
To F, LF
From Cr Ti' CC&ZIC
d
'-A
LryI. - 7- J a+,%-
pLw--=-AJ--Q--&--
P-J' .b -& -.
PRlN
c W 0 *
. TO: Bonnie Dominguez
From: Lee Rautenkranz
Subject: Opposition to Albertson's
Date: 3/21/95 Time: 4:04p
I received a telephone call from Ernestine Ryan, who indicated she li\ Tanglewood (phone number 729-3828). She wanted her opposition to
Albertson's to be part of the record.
Lee
e Oc: CJ-y COC
@ik/ ~VIQ
Thomas & Kathleen David
2534 Via Astuto
15 March 1995 Carlsbad CA 92008 q&
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad CA 92008
Subject: GPA 94-02EC 94-01 Camino Village
To The Honorable Mayor and Council Members:
As an ownerhesident of a townhome in the Tanglewood development, which directly
adjoins the proposed Camino Village shopping complex, I would like to register my
objection to this project. I am concerned with the impact of a zoninn change on
surrounding neighborhoods, as well as the addition of a traffic signal on El Camino Real
between Carlsbad Village Drive and Hosp Way. This concern was obviously shared by
members of the Planning Commission and staff, who voted in January to reject the
proposal.
To detail my reasons for concern over this project:
1. The intersections of El Camino Real and Marron and El Camino Real and Carlsbad
Village Drive become heavily congested at peak hours. Drivers wishing to avoid the traffic
between these two points frequently continue through the intersection of ECR and CVD
heading east, then turn left onto Avenida de Anita through the Tanglewood development.
The same is true for persons traveling down the hill (westbound) on Carlsbad Village
Drive. The lack of traffic signals or stop signs through this area make it an attractive
"shortcut" for drivers wishing to avoid the intersection (even in off-peak hours). Though
the posted speed is 25 mph through this residential area, even casid observation
indicates that cars travel through this area at higher speeds. The potential for increased
traffic through this area by adding another traffic signal at Hosp Wa..: (and thus, another
delay for drivers to avoid) also increases the potential for an accident in the Tanglewood
area. Tanglewood is a family-oriented development and children are usually present.
e
Avenida de Anita is not designed as a major traffic artery but it is culrently used as such
Adding a major shopping complex in this vicinity will almost certainly add to this traffic
pattern.
2. As stated above, there are already significant slowdowns during peak hours at the
intersections listed above. The project developers contend that the addition of this
commercial development will not significantly impact increased traffic in this area. Yet
they also state that based upon their own demographic studies, several thousand
families in the general vicinity of this planned development are iinderserved by existir
grocery facilities. To serve these needs, the developers contend that currently these
shoppers nusi go to other shoppicg cmters, siich as Ralph’s ai Poinsettia Lane. If
these cars are currently routing away from these intersections, md if the intent of
placing this new center is to attract these shoppers, isn’t it reasonable to assert that
there will be an INCREASE in traffic into this intersection?
3. The addition of a left turn lane from southbound El Camino Real between Carlsbad
Village Drive and Hosp will create further delays at the intersections. The project
developers claim that the addition of a traffic light will lessen the impact of traffic by
creating a ”platooning effect.” Common sense seems to indicate otherwise. If traffic,
which currently backs up with the current light pattern, is given another delay by the
addition of this light, the traffic will back further up ECR northbound. The major
problem seems not to be with the capacity of El Camino Real to handle the increase in
traffic but with the outdated design of the ECR/Route 78 intersection. If this
intersection is not upgraded to handle an increase in traffic, the addition of a traffic
signal as proposed will only further delay the flow of traffic.
4. An office development does not create traffic, noise or congestion after regular
business hours. A grocery store on the other hand will almost certainly result in 24
hour activity and noise with incoming trucks, trash vehicles, and atc. The Vons
shopping center, less than a quarter mile from the proposed site, already has a
security problem and attracts the transient population. This is usually not the case with
an office development.
5. There currently exists a grocery store and a pharmacy at the Vons shopping center at
El Camino Real and Marron. While I find shopping at this Vons frustrating at times,
due to its cramped aisles and relatively small size, I do not think that we need another
supermarket complex within 250 yards of this site. I think that the need is Albertson’s,
. 0 0
who perceive a demographic demand and wish to exploit it in disregard for the overall
impact to the residents of the area. This is the same store who wished to place a
facility at El Camino Real and Tamarack but was rejected by these residents as well.
6. I believe that a zoning change is not in the best interest of the residents of this area of
Carlsbad. The justification for allowing the zoning change and for approving the
proposed traffic signal between Carlsbad Village Drive and Hosp Way cannot be founl
by viewing existing traffic patterns through this frequently conge: .ted area.
I am not opposed in principle to the development of this area. However, I am concerned
with altering what I believe is a good General Plan for interests based more upon greed
than the good of Carlsbad residents. If it can be shown that this zoning change and
proposed development will not significantly increase traffic delays through the
intersections surrounding it, and that traffic routings through the Tanglewood area will not
increase, I could embrace this project. However, nothing that I have seen or heard from
the Orange County developers of this project have convinced me yet. I ask the City
Council to support the recommendation of staff and the Planning Commission and deny
the zoning change and the installation of the traffic signal between Hosp Way and
Carlsbad Village Drive.
Since rely,
c 7MM
Thomas K. David
rayr e- -. . . . . - . _ . -__ -. . - . - . ____, - . - ._- -- - __~ .. ._ Jatc. ai IIIJJ IIIIIC. IL.LU. I I
. Ct’ q- q m54
7402 Ramona Lantana Reasons Terrace @” ”-a/ Carlsbad, CA 92009
61 9-431-0333 FX 619-929-9327
March 17, 1995,
Mayor Claude “Buddy” Lewis
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
re: GP-4 94-2,’ZC 94-1 ’SDP 94-2 - Camino Village
Dear Mayor Lewis,
I am writing to you and city council members to urge you to deny the appzal filed bj, the
developers of the Camino Village project on El Camino Real.
I own property above the proposed project (nhere my daughter and onl>- grandchild live) and am
concerned for the residents in the area. The neighborhood is alread). impacted bj. healy traffic
cutting through the residential area at high speeds to avoid the clusting traffic signals on El
Camino Real. The health and safeb. of the residents are seriously at risk now and the risks n.ould
be even greater if this project is approled. The addition of another traffic signal on El Camino
Real would be perilous. In addition, Carlsbad does not need an)- more strip malls.
You have heard me say many times I am not opposed to someone developing their property but
the development must not affect the neighborhood in a negative waj‘. I trust that you and all the
council member will consider my comments bcfore making a decision of the appellant.
Sincerely,
Rcvms/nxx/ Rm
Ramona Reasons
fax cc: Michael Holtzmiller,
Planning Director
of our playground if an easementhoad is built.
from our playground. Another concern is if Hosp Way becomes congested it will our parents to pull in and back out directly into a busy road. There are a lot of be a problem fo safety issues if ;
0 e
City CounGil
City of Garlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
Dear Councilmembers:
GPA 94-0UZC 94-01 - Carnino Wage
-,I-_ -_-
-- * +a Sincerely,
Names:
Address: 333 di?L && LdWldnd w
I 9md
W e /
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
5ubject;: GPA 94-OUZC 94-01 - Camino Village
5 Names: i nce rely, 44 +-&%e
Address: 2539 dlh k5VJF
0 0 r1
City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject:
Sear Council members:
GPA 34-UUZC 34-01 - Camino Village
-L h;~ filr~/+ c&dL*r &E me de5,;&2&~- ~0.y- a
@Wd b/-%&% '& # XIS, /"/ wH&~d+~d~ (72 df $&&/
d
/
/ 'I &5%7 +4& /L- fWW+ A
JJ I /I i/ --
+.&f ~w--& k/&&S& 4 # h'k &df %eEA i yi& ff
5 i ncerely, 27 *&/L
Address: Pd.b&& Gy yag
Names: " /frnJrn
i $@33 .&& l's;. / f%w*4 .I'
I I
-a e
March 15th, 199 c: City Council
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject GPA 94-02/ZC 94-01 - Camino Village
Dear Councilmembers.
We would like to be put on record as favoring; the Albertsons pro-iect on El Camino Real.
just North of the intersection with Carlsbad Village Drive
There is no other modern, kll service grocery in the Northern part of Carlsbad. Right
now, we are often forced to drive to La Costa or Vista to be able to get the selection of items th
has become the rule established by the more up-to-date grocery marts
The addition of Albertsons would give the surrounding population a much needed place
do discriminating grocery shopping Remember that everyone shops for groceries regularly
The establishment of another signal, half way between Carlsbad Village Drive and Hosp
Grove would at first thought be impeding traffic However, the considerable slow down alread:
existing in the El Camino Real section between Hosp Grove all the way North to Via Las Rosas
only means that an additional signal South of Hosp grove would just extend that slower section.
The solution to this traffic bottle neck is a proper timing of the signals We are sure that
the computer controlled signals can be adjusted to allow a better flow through this sectior, than
has at present
Particularly, when other important arteries are opened, such as the extension of College
Blvd to the South and the opening; of the frontage road Haymar Drive on the South side of 78
the traffic near the El Camino Real/ 78 intersection will be greatly relieved, especially during
commuter hours
i li,pv& Sincerely
Walter & Sylvia Hmchberg
3355 Seacrest Carl sb ad Drive
L Ap&/?h
e 0
j 1
cp f "-4 <)(SA
d Lq-:
%/
i I
311 5/95 Tk+: QL-* Q Cq &L
J
I
I
I
i , I 1
I
Mr. Buddy Lewis Mayor
City of Carlsbad
1600 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carisbad, CA 92008
Subject: Camino Village on the agenda for Tuesday
Qear Mr. Lewis:
Thank you for taking the time to see us recently.
For the council hearing on Tuesday, John O'Meara and I have a concise
presentation, and we will be as brief as possible. This zone change has many
issues, and twenty minutes may not be adequate time for us. If we run over, we
would appreciate a reasonable extension of time.
We have done a lot of work to inform the people who live in the area about our
proposed development.
I
I I
&a*-, I
i David A. Dunn i
1 1 I
I i 1 i
I I I
REAL ESTAITF, BROKEPdGE cui DEVELOPMENT
1782 Twry ILynn Lmc. iwta Ana, CA 9270'3
(/I J-i li 38-06 IO * I ,lY i,l 41 5J4-0t!l 0
David A. Dunn
-c_I 0
311 6/95
Christer Westman
Carlsbad Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Subject: GPA 94-021ZC 94-01 - Camino Village
Dear C hrister:
Some of the residents of Tanglewood have expressed concern about an existing
traffic condition on Aveniaa De Anita. They claim to have exhausted all their
options in getting the city to help them slow down traffic on their street. Our
traffic engineer has suggested ‘humps’. The city of San Diego has been using
Humps in similar situations, with considerable success. I would appreciate it if
you would have the staff review the material on Humps that I have enclosed. We
are suggesting to the management of Tanglewood, at least one Hump on
Avenida De Anita.
Without getting into the full report, before our site plan is up for consideration, I
am happy to say that Robert Kahn, John Kain & Associates, has completed an
Acoustical Analysis which shows that there will be no significant increase in
noise generation from the project. The analysis indicates that the proposed
development will realize no increase in dBA over the office development, an
increase of 0.1 dBA over residential development. and 0.2 dBA over no-project.
Three full percent is generally considered to be the point at which people can
begin to notice noise, and this project should only generate 6% bf that amount.
Albertsons will mitigate to satisfy all noise and aesthetic issues. AI1 their loading
and unloading is done entirely within their building, but they build a truck
enclosure is shown on the site plan. They will not have deliveries between 10
P.M. and 6 A.M., sweeping from 9 PM to 7 AM. and the operatim of their
compactors as necessary to mitigate any noise issues.
We have attempted to meet with the management and or residents of
Tanglewood. We have gone door to door to reach those residences that face the
project. All have some visual screening, some screening is already solid. Others
can have their view corridor amended to their own taste, provided that it is
approved by the management of Tanglewood. We are prepared to landscape
Associate Planner
REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE & DEVELOPMENT
1782 Terry Lynn Lmc Scinta Ana, CA 92705
\ CW3-12 DOC (71 4) (138-061 0 . FAX (71 4) 544-0131 0
e 0
Christer Westman
1/8/95
Page 2
our site or their open space in any reasonable way. Albertsons will also use only
down lighting on their parking lot.
As an expression of our confidence that the traffic signal and the market use will
be well received, we are willing to hold our pad building off the market for 1 year.
If the traffic is objectionable, or the market use is causing problems for the
neighbors that we have not been able to mitigate, we will hold that parcel off the
market until such time as the city feels that those conditions do not exist.
Additionally, if the traffic signal for this site is producing traffic problems that are
greater than it is solving, we are prepared to remove the traffic signal at our
expense.
Based on our demographic report, you could approve our market proposal, and
an expansion of the existing Vons, and you would still have a large enough
population to support your existing properties that are zoned neighborhood
commercial at El Camino Real and College Blvd. and Carlsbad Village Drive and
College Boulevard.
While we have heard no specific objections to any of the findings of the traffic
report done by Urban Systems Associates, we wanted to know if there was some
aspect of that report that might be flawed. We asked WPA Traffic Engineering,
Inc. to review the USA report as to its approach, choice of analytical tools, and
findings. Their analysis accompanies this letter. Please share this additional
information with the traffic engineering department for their review.
We request that your office display the colored elevations and site plan given
you on previous meetings.
Sincerely, L
David A. Dunn
Copy: Councilmembers
Hoyt Pardee
John O'Meara
Don Agatep
CW3-12 DOC
-1WI I @I 01 0 ,..--.-.. r -.-.. __
/----J--+--
------- ' WPA Traffic Engineering, Inc.
E-LLlZI TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION Eh
March 15, 1995
Mr. David A. Dunn
Diinn 8c Company
1782 Terry Lynn Lane
Santa Ana, CA 92705
SUBJECX CAKISBAD VILLAGE
Dear Mr. Duun:
In response to your request, we have reviewed tile traffic fktor-s re1ait.d io rl~ pop
conimercial developrnent on the east side of' El Camirio Real between Hosp JVay
Carlsbad Village Drive in the City of Carlsbacl, 'The review included reports prep
by Urban System Associam, hc,, as well as Planning Coiiirnissioii rliiiiutcs.
It is understood that a major concern is the signalization of the project driveway o
Camino Real. l'his locatio11 does not coriforni to the City's Policy relative to the spa
of traffic signals. An artalysis was completed by Urban Systems Associates, Iric. w
examined signal operatioris along El Cainino Keat l)etweeii the S.K. 78 !Yestbound R
intersection and Carlsbad Villagc Drive. The procedure utilize-d in this analysis is a
(lociitnciit~-cl arid acccpttid pi oy,i-am. I his pi.oct-.tliire ~~S-~JCXI~ utilized previously i1
analyses of similar condiiions and the results accepted by Caltraris and other jurisdict
.l'he City's l%licy is bascd upon a "Kule of'.l'humb", which is valid in most coiidit.ion
docs not. precl tide ot)tainirig acccptable operations with other spacings lmc-tl upon spc
,-
enginecriiig analyscs, 'l-ratlic signal coortliiiariori is a cornplcx rclalioriship that is affc
0 0
by iiiaiiy ractors. hs SLIC~, a specific analysis ora signal sysiein uiider kilowii fdCL0l.S
better indicator t.han a "Rule of Tliunib".
Coinmercial type driveways, when sigiiali zcd, oilel-1 havc i I isi grr i Gcar i t i mpac(s u
existing arterial signal progression. Norl-nally, very little or ihe owrall cycle lerigi
required to accomniodate lefi LUI'IIS entering the site and those vehicles exiLing the
At T-shaped intersections, such as the proposed site access, the I& turri pliase OJIIY s
one direction of arterial flow on El Carnino Real. The southhund flow on El Can
Real would continue to move. Inierruption of northbouiid El Caiiiiiio Kcal flow c(
he beneficial by lielpii>g to platoori traffic toward the inure coriceritr-ated ta.affic flow ;
around the S.R. 78 ramps. Using vehicle detection delay tiriiers to screen right tun
vehicles exiting the sit@ would help to reduce interruptioris to El Camiiio Real f
Prohibiting pedestrian crossings of El Cainino Real at the project site sigrial would a!
the signal timing to focus on vehicular ~iiovemerits only, which would provide
iiiaxiiiiuiii green time for El Carnino Real.
When exanlining the time-space diagrams, with respect to cross-strcct green tiinr
Carriirio Real pliasc splits, it becomes apparent that traf'iic flow restrictions occur at 1'
Drive and hiiarruri Road. Simal L. spacing along with conipIcx traffic rriovcrnent aro
the S.R. 78 ramps and into the City of Oceamide coiitiriue to degrade trafIic flow. '
proposed site access signal between Hosp \Yay and Carlsbad Village Ijrive would l-
little or 110 impact on El Camino Real traffic progression. '.I'he signal would be bcnel'
in that it would provide safer site access and reduce ~i~idesiralde le!t aiid 'CT-rurn
acljaccnt signalized interseciioiis. Tying the proposcd signal into tlie cxistirig k,l Can
Real system would be necessary to irisure that proper ofIsers aid split tirriiugs
maintained. Coordination of the new signal with cxistiiig signals would guarai
optimum traffic fiow on El Camino Keai.
0 a
Another concerri is the use of Avenida l3c Anita to the east of thc site as a bypass
Caruilio Real. This atrect serves as a collector road, connecting a significant residc
area with the arterial street system. The design of this street system would I-~SL
higher traffic; volunm than woiild generally be desira1)le. ‘l’rafic couiits by U
Systenrs hsociatcs, Inc. iriciicate daily volumes of 5,000 vehicles. This is an cxi:
problem and not dii-cctIy irlaied to the 1)roI)cised developmeiit.
‘l‘he project could hclp to mitigate the bypass problem by providing shop
oppor~iariitics closcr- to rcsideriti:il areas. This would reduce the nurnber sf drivers u
Avenida De Anita to reach coiiiinercial areas. As disciissctl iihovcf, sigiializario~~ ol
project driveway would not. worsc‘I1 traffic operations on El Camirio Real and shoulc
increase tile voluiric of bypass traffic. It is also noted that there arc methoc
discouraging bypass trafic, sucli as cliverters, traflic circles, speed humps, and o
devices, Since this bypass IralTic is an cxistiiig problcin, it would appear 111:
iieigliborhood traffic coritrol study should be utitlcrtakeri by the City in ariy case.
Iii siiiiimai.y, our review of thc proposed corriiriercial de1.~elopmerit on the cast side c
Camino Real, northerly of Chrlsbad Village Drive, did not irlcntify any sigriificaiir :r
impacts. ‘The (letailed exaniinatioii of tr-aiGc operations indicates ttm a rral‘fic sip;
he project driveway would not have a negative inipact. A curreiit coi~cur~i with by]
trafic on Averiida Ile iinita should be the suljject of‘a neighborhocid traltic study in
case. It. wuiild iwt I)e exlxcted tliat tlie project wcjuld increasc bypss traffic arid c‘c
reduce it by provitlirig ai: dtt-riialive slioppiiig location.
* * * * * * *
0 0
M7e trust that these comnicim will be ofassisiairice to yoti. If you have any questioi
req ui re add i ti o 11 a 1 i I 1 Tor rr 1 at i o 11, 111 ease contact us.
Respect fully sub I I I i t terl,
WPA TRAFFIC EN(;INEEKINC;, INC.
,&.g$/$
\veston s. P Illgle, P.E.
Registered Professiorial Eiiginccr
State of California Numbers CJ 16828 ik ‘TK565
cc. Mr.. John O’Mcara
WSP : c a
#9502630
,1
Vons - (Small) Tamarack v- 11
Y !*I Ii 11
Lucky - Vista 2I+fi -x$ Albertsons - Vilkge I if E 11 I3 I Ralphs - Poinsetia Smiths -Vista I
From: David A. Dunn
Dunn & Co.
13352 Loretta Drive
Santa Ana, CA 92705
Save Time !
Scribble a response on this page and fax it back. No cover page necessary.
W a
Negligible Impact on Traffic
Level of Service - (LOS)
One pad building was recently removed from our project. The revised plan
produces 106 fewer cars in the A. M. Peak hour, and only 38 more cars in the
P. M. peak hour than was approved in SP 182A, the preceding office plan. With
the help of just a few cars from pass-by considerations, this project will not cause
the Level of Service for traffic to go below B at Carlsbad Village Drive in the P.M.
Peak between now and build out of the city. Here is what happens.
L
LEVEL OF SERVICE DURING THE PM PEAK:
Only 70 cars below Level 8
New and improved roads leading out of the Palomar Industrial
Complex, are taking commuters off of El Camino
While the traffic on Palomar Airport Road East of El Camino Real has gone up
54% in the last two years due to improvements, Traffic on El Camino Real North
of Hosp Way has gone down by 14%, because of a reduction in comrriuter
traffic.
pfl~S6fl~O m GLIJclb qaI/SS
0~~14 ?U &-LC bffGAK146 at/ ne?. 0’MWCA REM~~~ONC
THE DP’VCLnP€<
-1
From: David A. Dunn
Dunn & Co.
13352 Loretta Drive Santa Ana, CA 92705
Save Time !
Scribble a response on this page and fax it back.
No cover page necessary.
Tiburon earZsba P 0
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION
31 15 Avenida de Anita
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Tel (61 9) 729-3048
March 21, 1995 FAX (61 9) 729-4909
City of Carlsbad
City Council Members
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Subject: GPA 94-2/ZC 94-1/SDP 94-2 - Camino Village
Dear Counci 1 Members :
The Tiburon Carlsbad Homeowners Association represents the 486 property owners
Tanglewood community, located directly east of the proposed project. At its J
17, 1995 meeting, the Board of Directors of the Tiburon Carlsbad Home
Association, on behalf of its members, unanimously approved a resolution to oppo approval of the Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and
Development Plan for the proposed commercial development, Camino Village. Some reasons for this action are given below.
The proposed development does not adhere to the City Council approved and long st
(since the early 1980's) document "El Camino Real Corridor Development Stand Specifically, it does not conform to the 'Development Standards - Private Fro requirements that median breaks occur only at major intersections and tha anticipated land uses do not change from the existing Land Use Plan at the ti standards were approved. The majority of the property owners in our community af
by the proposed development did not expect a change in the future land use of th from Residential Medium/Office to Commercial, with its inherent increase in activ
Several of our units face directly into the proposed market site. The effects
increased noise on these units, from night delivery trucks that would be asso with the market operation and the increase of daily traffic, should be studied.
As the staff reports points out, average daily trips would increase from 1,
9,000 as a result of this project, should the land use be changed. This increase have a tremendous effect on the traffic patterns in an already congested are
mention is made in the staff report of the effect this increase in traffic woul on Avenida de Anita, which traverses our community. This street is already u motorists from outside our community to by-pass El Camino Real with its traffic s and its congestion. If approved, the increase in traffic because of the la change would make a bad situation worse. We feel that a traffic study shou conducted regarding this problem.
Based on the above two reasons, we urge the {City Council to deny any approval
would change the existing land use designation that would negatively affec character of the Tanglewood community, and that %would create a greater safety haz
an already over-used local street.
the
Peffrs $ GhGSm-i
DU R cd~t PLtGLfC if& President and Member of the Tiburon Carlsbad Homeowners Association Board of Directors
OJ J/ai/qs- ,
.i m
March 21, 1995
Mayor and Council Members:
First, I want to say that I feel Carlsbad is one of the best rui and best planned cities in North County. My husband and I move( to the area in 1974. After living for many years in the Fire Mountain section of Oceanside, it has been a real pleasure to bt in Carlsbad.
I am opposed to changing the general plan to allow for an Alberi Market between Hosp Way and Carlsbad Village Drive.
I have three major concerns:
The first is the number of traffic lights and the congestion all present along that stretch of El Camino Real. It is nearly gric bewteen 4 and 6 p.m. on weekdays and most of the weekend.
Part two of my traffic concern is Avenida de Anita which winds through the Tanglewood Development. Already a number of driver: heading for the mall or the freeway cut through on Avenida de AI
to avoid the lights along El Camino. An additional light plus 1
volume of traffic a supermarket generates would exacerbate an already dangerous sitution. Dangerous because of the many chilc in Tanglewood, the near-blind exits from some of the vias, and the general ignoring of the 25 mph limit.
My second concern involves security. Transients are drawn to
supermarkets. Many of these transients may use Tanglewood as a cut through from the Buena Vista Creek area. Security problems
have already prompted the Vons center to fence the back of its property and hire security. Th-e Villa Real apartments above tht Smart and Final center have also put up a Mimeter fence.
Finally, I believe the city should keep faith with the resident:
just up the slope from the proposed market who bought their property believing --according to the general plan- that non- commercial use would be made of that land but who are now faced with the sight, smells, noise, and other problems inherent in a large market.
The area does need a full-service market; this seems to be a qui project; however, this is the wrong place for it. I urge the c:
and the developers to work together to identify a less congestec less populated area for this project. The proposed site is not the right place.
Sincerely ficfio 3 PRESFsrED J)(4(
P46LIC Hrn'rJ G OhS -? 7GLVc &-@d Karen Crawford 2532 Via Astuto Carlsbad 92008
7- 3
7- 4
c 3"
Name: Pd dw Phone: ydd- 54~1
Address: --?d51 && && RC.&,?
Name: L&&?L - - 4 Phone: ?SDOUOS-
P
Address:&&ox /k, 13, d,:L %g
Address: 27~4 DE hLT@ e- 43 C&LS &3, Ob
Name: \h \\ &&& Phone:
I3
Petition
DEAR PLANNING COMMISSIONER OR COUNCIL MEMBER
I am a resident of Carlsbad.
We need a FULL SIZE SUPERMARKET convenient to where we live.
We urge you to approve the Albertsons at El Camino and Carlsbad
Village Dr. We think a traffic signal between Hosp Way and Carlsbad
Village Dr. will make it easier for us and to get in and out safely.
Name: R Phone: s /
I/ 1
Address: J(/L7 f A, WPdJ-J - a%2--fMF
Phone: 72q-S& chJ&- DL
, Phone: %~!-C&J \ .\ 1.w
#. q
DEAR PLANNING COMMISSIONER OR COUNCIL MEMBER
I am a resident of Carlsbad.
We - need a FULL SIZE SUPERMARKET convenient to where we live.
We urge you to approve the Albertsons at El Camino and Carlsbad
Village Dr. We think a traffic signal between Hosp Way and Carlsbad
Village Dr. will make it easier for us and to get in and out safely.
Address: 2703 A,,, nn An,, CL A21
Phone: -72 7$"-3?
Phone: 7&3 dJ 7 7 f
Address:9703 A.di Jz' ,Q
Phone: Yz3L;r--SiC7 7
Phone: 7 &9-- +Sa 3
Phone:s75r-o-73?5
I Contact: David A. Dunn - Dunn & Co. - 1782 Terry Lynn Lane - Santa Ana, CA 92705 - 714 838-0610 I
37
38
35
90
YI
43.
43
I
Pet it ion
DEAR PLANNING COMMISSIONER OR COUNCIL MEMBER
I am a resident of Carlsbad.
We need a FULL SIZE SUPERMARKET convenient to where we live.
We urge you to approve the Albertsons at El Camino and Carlsbad
Village Dr. We think a traffic signal between Hosp Way and Carlsbad
Village Dr. will make it easier for us and to get in and out safely.
I_ lp hyp(fldm Phone: 7 zo a '' c ql(j b
'I [%/\ { fi-ii VI ~ b7 1 q2i?b $
Name: E*/L\[\ (;:
Address: od@G ,hu? k &- , , , . ,
Address: 2 T@h?%45kv4/ /E /~1/79 7%. 6;7
Address: g?d 7 k&d& &- hi&$/? c~,+-&?p
Address: &?LO/ - .&?&+g,&!fl - VI /-
Name: LJG~WI o \ &+5 Phone: 75$Ll/35
Address: fqy? A0-Q ~ J4,'+&7fl L 7 >At
Address: 2603 kue de &if6 + 6-0
% ~--
f\ 1
Name: C?#fi&%(Z5 ~IFU~ / Phone: 72 P- $1 Q 0
Name: l/($,!T;F3 fi4 /&%P Phone: 73*9&@-
5z-2-23
Name: / ,/I $n/ [H~yh&) Phone: 9?J/-fJ 7/ /
Name: C&T%"%SOd (f3 l Phone: 93%v7
Name: Phone: 72 0 -2373 I 1
Address: v;&&@/$?(
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Contact: David A. Dunn - Dunn & Co. - 1782 Terry Lynn Lane - Santa Ana, CA 92705 - 714 838-0610 ]
I
Petition /w
DEAR PLANNING COMMISSIONER OR COUNCIL MEMBER
I
I am a resident of Carlsbad.
We - need a FULL SIZE SUPERMARKET convenient to where we live.
We urge you to approve the Albertsons at El Carnino and Carlsbad
Village Dr. We think a traffic signal between Hosp Way and Carlsbad
Village Dr. will make it easier for us and to get in and out safely.
Name:,,v? <-- ‘d Phone: 720 --/EA’C
Address: 3 7 oJ/ /&q+ n? -7% 77L Qf /
Phone: 72d c iZ Y‘fi
3 Name: ALsl Erick5t e Phone: 7w~-t9?4
/%- # Address: 2?/-) Au 4Y1dcf De Av?lln-i-&
Address: ’a[ 1~- ;iL& &L& +&a
37 I@ hfNb? & #/d 1-m *e;6
Y Name: n& &L& Phone: 4.3 q3Fa I
5- Name: hU iL --, r G;,Ltk- A-- 4
Phone: 937 -&75 I
Address:
6 Name: -/ ’7 ii -7 Phone:y2 r --s - r
/ c I -2 Address: 3 ’3 /LC1 ’
7 Name: --PLG;/~ e< *+./ i Lu/-~FL*~ Phone: 95 Y-PJ-97
Address: 2. ysl~”@b? ,QC &iz~ Fz- 4
h‘ Name: pQP&&&& fi G&~p/~-x Phone: +FY‘ *f7~r
Address: ~2cr@z. ,LZG&-Y/T *zf
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
3 Name: Phone:
Address:
I Contact: David A. Dunn - Dunn & Co. - 1782 Terry Lynn Lane - Santa Ana, CA 92705 - 714 838-0610 1
6-
8
I
4-
4
r, 0 0
DEAR PLANNING COMMISSIONER OR COUNCIL MEMBER
I
I am a resident of Carlsbad.
e need a FULL SIZE SUPERMARKET convenient to where we live.
e urge you to approve the Albertsons at El Camino and Carlsbad
ddress: 6 awdL 0d-C~ 't
I Contact: David A. Dunn - Dunn & Co. - 1782 Terry Lynn Lane - Santa Ana, CA 92705 - 714 838-0610 1
/
2
3
-
Pet it ion
DEAR PLANNING COMMISSIONER OR COUNCIL MEMBER
I am a resident of Carlsbad.
We need a FULL SIZE SUPERMARKET convenient to where we live. 1
We urge you to approve the Albertsons at El Camino and Carlsbad
Village Dr. We think a traffic signal between Hosp Way and Carlsbad~
Village Dr. will make it easier for us and to get in and out safely.
Name: G&\ h.177 , WuzlZLmz Phone: 7Z$> 4Sflo
Address: 0 Gc/NIU/&eC\DG ; @m 4=%-7ym -
\
Phone:
-Il4 K!A- "&?-her' 10. Cs+Jd q&Q&g Name: bC
Address: &!37 g c 'I D t" ; q VL'LC
Name: 52~15 /!3zOLl/z Phone:
I
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Name: Phone:
Address:
Contact: David A. Dunn - Dunn & Co. - 1782 Terry Lynn Lane - Santa Ana, CA 92705 - 714 838-0610 I