HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-09-17; City Council; 13814; Carlsbad Company Stores. .
. . p 2 d 0 5 s
/c4 hr .
CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
AB# )3/g /cl m: DEPT. Hb. -tg$k&
MTG. 9117196 CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES - SDP 96-03 CITYATTY. B6p
DEPT. PLN ti CITY MGRap
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. 54 -. I/ 0 , APPROVING SDP 96-03.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On August 7, 1996, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and
recommended approval (6-1, Monroy) of the Carlsbad Company Stores Project, which
is located at the southeast corner of Paseo Del Norte and Car Country Drive within
Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan in the Coastal Zone and Local
Facilities Management Zone 13. In approving the project the Planning Commission
added three additional conditions to Planning Commission Resolution No. 3965 as
shown below.
26. No shopping carts shall be allowed in the parking lot.
43 e). Traffic signal at Paseo Del Norte and Cannon Road. A Reimbursement
Agreement may be requested by the developer for a proportionate share
of the cost associated with this signal.
49. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits the developer shall enter into a
lien contract with the City for the future design and construction of a fully
actuated traffic signal at the main entrance on Paseo Del Norte.
The Carlsbad Company Stores Project is a 300,000 square foot specialty retail center
proposed for a 26.65 acre site . The project is proposed to be built in multiple phases
and consists of four, one-story buildings with surface parking for 1,536 vehicles. The
building floor plans indicate that in excess of 100 tenant spaces will be provided.
Tenants will consist of retail stores, art galleries, restaurants and other specialty retail
uses consistent with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The project site is located
west of the Flower Field Planning Area. The project has been designed to be
sensitive to views of the adjacent flower fields at Carlsbad Ranch. The project as
designed complies with all applicable plans, ordinances and policies. More detailed
information is included in the attached staff report to the Planning Commission.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The proposed use was analyzed in the Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR
94-01) certified for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and related
applications on January 9, 1996 by the City Council. Mitigation measures required for
the grading plan and final map for Master Tentative Map 94-09 have been applied.
Applicable mitigation measures have also been incorporated into this Site \
,
. /4 - c
;)AGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. / si 8 1 y
Development Plan. The environmental analysis for the Site Development Plan
included an Initial Study (Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part II) focusing
on any changes from approved plans and the project contemplated in the EIR to what
is proposed with this Site Development Plan. No additional significant adverse
impacts were identified in the initial study for this project, therefore, no further
environmental review is required. A Notice of Prior Compliance was prepared for the
project and published in the newspaper. A Notice of Determination will be filed upon
the final action being taken on the project.
FISCAL IMPACT:
All required improvements are to be funded by the developer. The Facility Financing
Section of the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan lists the facility financing
techniques being used to guarantee the public facilities needed to serve development
within Zone 13.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS:
Facilities Zone I13 II
Local Facilities Management Plan
Growth Control Point
Net Density
Soecial Facilitv Fees
13
N/A
N/A
Park Fee 40 cent&a. ft.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. %-3/O
2. Location Map
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3965
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 7, 1996
5. Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes, dated August 7, 1996
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 96310
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN SDP 96-03 FOR A 300,000 SQUARE FOOT SPECIALTY RETAIL CENTER ON 26.65 ACRES
GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER
OF PASEO DEL NORTE AND CAR COUNTRY DRlVE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 6 OF THE CARLSBAD RANCH
SPECIFIC PLAN.
APPLICANT: CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
CASE NO: SDP 96-03
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the municipal code the Planning
Commission did, on August 7, 1996 consider said request on property described as:
Lot 3 of Carlsbad Tract No. 92-7 Carlsbad Ranch Unit I and II
per Map No. 13078 and Lot 2 of CT 94-09.
WHEREAS, on August 7, ‘I996 the Carlsbad Planning Commission held a
duly noticed public hearing to consider a proposed Site Development Plan for a 300,000
square foot Specialty Retail Center on 26.65 acres of land, and adopted Resolution No.
3965 recommending to the City Council that the Site Development Plan be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad held a duly noticed
public hearing on September 17, 1996 to consider the recommendation and heard all
persons interested in or opposed to SDP 96-03; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared for the project and it was
determined that the project was in Prior Compliance with the Program Environmental
Impact Report (EIR 94-01) certified, for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and
related applications, on January 9, 1996 by the City Council,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of
Site Development Plan 96-03 is approved and that the finding and conditions of the
Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3965, on file with
the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the
City Council along with the following additional conditions:
a. That Condition No. 26 of Planning Commission Resolution No.
3965 is amended to read as follows:
“Shopping carts shall be permitted to be stored and located
only in those locations approved by the Planning Director.”
b. That Condition No. 49 of Planning Commission Resolution No.
3965 is amended to read as follows:
“Prior to the issuance of building permits, the developer shall
enter into a future improvement agreement which shall be a lien on the subject real property
for the future design and construction of a fully actuated signal at either the main entrance
on Paseo del Norte or Car Country Drive as determined by the City Engineer.”
c. That the Site Development Plan is approved with the revised color
scheme as presented by the applicant at the public hearing on September 17, 1996 in
neutral, earthtone and sandstone color and material, or equivalent. The applicant may use
other colors and materials in order to provide greater contrast, accent and variety on the
exterior of the surfaces of interior locations which are not exposed to the public view from
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 2 g mum 527 sag 13
s;:: juum SO=JS 14 >_lZ e's8 SOS" 15 S&pi
%S+: 16 052 L a:? c-5 l7 b 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- .
from public streets upon written approval of the Planning Director. Once completed, such
color schemes and materials may be maintained but not changed for the existence of this
project without prior written approval of the Planning Director.”
3. This action of approval is final the date this resolution is adopted by the
City Council. The provision of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limits
for Judicial Review” shall apply:
“NOTICE TO APPLICANT”
- “The time within which judicial review of this decision must be
sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section
1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of
Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any
petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in
the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following
the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if
within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for
the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required
deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of
preparation of such record, the time within which such petition
may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth
day following the date on which the record is either personally
delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he
has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of
the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of
Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village drive, Carlsbad, California
92008.”
Iii
it
Ill
Ill
ill
Ill
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 2 g mua yz-;
980 g 13
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 17 th day of SEPTEMBER 1996, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Kulchin, Finnila, Ial
NOES: None
ABSENT: None A
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
EXHIBIT 2
% ??L . \ %
/ I I \ \ \ \ \ \
\ PALOMAR AIRPORT RD
CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
SDP 96-03 s
c
II
EXHBIT
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3965
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. SDP 96-03
FOR A 300,000 SQUARE FOOT SPECIALTY RETAIL
CENTER ON 26.65 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PASEO DEL NORTE AND CAR
COUNTRY DRIVE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 6 OF THE
CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
CASE NO.: SDP 96-03
WHEREAS, Craig Realty Group has filed a verified application with the City of
Carlsbad which has been referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site Development
Plan as shown on Exhibits “A” - “Q”, dated August 7, 1996, on file in the Planning
Department and as provided by Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning
Commission did, on the 7th day of August 1996, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider
said application on property described as:
Lot 3 of Carlsbad Tract No. 92-7 Carlsbad Ranch Unit I
and II per Map No. 13078 and Lot 2 of CT 94-09.
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to SDP 96-03.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
W That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Site Development Plan, SDP 96-03, based
on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: cp
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
Findinw:
1. That the requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and environmental
settings, is consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, will
not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area in which
the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroundings or
traffic circulation, in that the project design complies with the requirements of the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and all other requirements applicable to the site,
significant building setbacks and required landscape setbacks have been
incorporated into the project design. The project is consistent with numerous
policies of the General Plan including Commercial Policy C.3 which requires that all
commercial centers be comprehensively designed to address common ingress and
egress, adequate off-street parking and loading facilities; Policy C.4 ensuring that
commercial architecture emphasize establishing community identity while
presenting tasteful, dignified and visually appealing designs compatible with their
surroundings; Policy C.5 ensuring that all commercial development provides for a
variety of courtyards and pedestrian ways, landscaped parking lots and the use of
harmonious architecture in the construction of buildings; and C.6 permit the
phasing of commercial projects to allow initial development and expansion in
response to demographic and economic changes.
2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, in
that as all applicable code requirements have been met as well as the provision of
additional parking spaces, 5.9 percent of the parking area will be landscaped while
only 3 percent is required, and building coverage is proposed at 25.8 percent.
3. That all the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping and other features necessary to
adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be
provided and maintained, in that screen walls, berming and landscaping are proposed
to screen loading areas and adequate vehicle circulation has been provided to
accommodate truck turning movements. The southern most access to the site will
be shared with the Flower Fields (Planning Area 7) as the existing Flower Fields
driveway will be closed and relocated to the location shown. The project is
proposed to be developed in phases and the rear of structures which will be visible
until the completion of the second phase will receive additional architectural
treatment as is proposed for the buildings parallel to the project’s eastern lot line.
4. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic
generated by the proposed use, in that the proposed use is consistent with the use
analyzed in the circulation analysis prepared for Program EIR 94-01 for the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
5. Planning Commission finds that:
a) there was an EIR certified in connection with the prior Specific Plan
Amendment (SP 207(A)) and related actions;
b) the project has no new significant environmental effect not analyzed as significant
in the prior EIR, and 1
PC RESO NO. 3965 -2-
.
.
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
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
-
C> none of the circumstances requiring Subsequent or a Supplemental EIR under
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15 162 or 15 163 exist.
The Planning Commission finds that all feasible mitigation measures or project
alternatives identified in EIR 94-01 which are appropriate to this subsequent project have
been incorporated into this subsequent project.
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the
applicable local facilities management plan and all City public facility policies and
ordinances since:
The project has been conditioned to ensure that building permits will not be issued
for the project unless the District Engineer determines that sewer service is
available, and building cannot occur within the project unless sewer service
remains available, and the District Engineer is satisfied that the requirements of
the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been met insofar as they
apply to sewer service for this project.
b) Statutory School fees will be paid to ensure the availability of school facilities in
the Carlsbad Unified School District.
4 All necessary public improvements have been provided or are required as
conditions of approval.
d) The Developer has agreed and is required by the inclusion of an appropriate
condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performance of that contract and payment
of the fee will enable this body to find that public facilities will be available
concurrent with need as required by the General Plan.
The project has been conditioned to pay any increase in public facility fee, or new
construction tax, or development fees, and has agreed to abide by any additional
requirements established by a Local Facilities Management Plan prepared pursuant to
Chapter 2 1.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure continued availability of
public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the project.
This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part of the
Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13.
The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the
McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April 1994. The project is compatible with the
projected noise levels of the CLUP; and, based on the noise/land use compatibility matrix
of the CLUP, the proposed land use is compatible with the airport, in that the
southern half of the site is within the 60 CNEL contour and the proposed use is
compatible with this noise level.
That the project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual, adopted by City Council
Resolution No. 90-384.
The project complies with the development standards and design guidelines of the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207(A)).
PC RESO NO. 3965 -3-
.
.
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
A
13. A growth management park fee of 40 cents per square foot of non-residential
development will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. This fee will
be used to construct recreational facilities to offset the demand created by employees
within Zone 13.
14. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the
Developer contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the
exactions are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the
project, and the extent and the degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to
the impact caused by the project.
Conditions:
Planning:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of the Site Development
Plan for the Carlsbad Company Stores project entitled “SDP 96-03“. (Exhibits “A”-
“Q” on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, dated August
7, 1996), subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorised and directed to
make or require the Developer to make all corrections and modifications to the Site
Development Plan documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and
conform to Planning Commission’s final action on the project. Development shall occur
substantially as shown on the approved exhibits. Any proposed development
substantially different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state and local
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
The Developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar copy of the
Site Plan as approved by the final decision making body. The Site Plan shall reflect the
conditions of approval by the City. The Plan copy shall be submitted to the City
Engineer and approved prior to building, grading, final map or improvement plan
submittal, whichever occurs first.
The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a
reduced legible version of the approving resolutions on a 24” x 36” blueline drawing.
Said blueline drawing(s) shall also include a copy of any applicable Coastal Development
Permit and signed approved site plan.
Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the
District Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of application
for such sewer permits and will continue to be available until time of occupancy.
The Developer shall pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on July 28,
1987, (amended July 2, 1991) and as amended from time to time, and any development
fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 2 1.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth management system or Facilities
and Improvement Plan and to fulfil1 the subdivider’s agreement to pay the public
4
PC RESO NO. 3965 -4-
.
l
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
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
-
facilities fee dated February 15, 1996, a copy of which is on file with the City Clerk and
is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not paid, this application will not be
consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will be void.
The Developer shall provide proof of payment of statutory school fees to mitigate
conditions of overcrowding as part of the building permit application. The amount of
these fees shall be determined by the fee schedule in effect at the time of building permit
application.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required
as part of the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits, including, but not limited to the
following:
a) A growth management park fee of 40 cents per square foot of non-residential
development will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. This
fee will be used to construct recreational facilities to offset the demand
created by employees within Zone 13.
Prior to the issuance of the Building Permit, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice
of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction
of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the
City of Carlsbad has issued a Site Development Plan by Resolution No. 3965 on the real
property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property
description, location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of
approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of
Restriction. The Planning Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment
to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by
the Developer or successor in interest.
Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a six-foot high masonry wall with gates
pursuant to City standards. Location of said receptacles shall be approved by the
Planning Director. Enclosure shall be of similar colors and/or materials to the project to
the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
An exterior lighting plan including parking areas shall be submitted for Planning Director
approval. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any impacts on
adjacent homes or property.
No outdoor storage of materials shall occur onsite unless required by the Fire Chief. In
such instance a storage plan will be submitted for approval by the Fire Chief and the
Planning Director.
The Developer shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in conformance with
the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City’s Landscape Manual. The plans
shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the Planning Director prior to the
approval of the final map, grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first. The
Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved plans, and
maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and
debris.
ro PC RESO NO. 3965 -5-
.
.
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
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
4”-
The first submittal of detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be accompanied by the
project’s building, improvement and grading plans.
Building identification and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings
so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identification and/or
addresses shall contrast to their background color.
The Developer shall provide a bus stop to service this development at a location and with
reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of the North County Transit District and the
Planning Director. Said facility shall at a minimum include a bench, free from
advertising, and a pole for the bus stop sign. The bench and pole shall be designed to
enhance or be consistent with the basic architectural theme of the project.
The bus shelter design shall be compatible with the project architecture. Plans for
the bus shelter design shall be submitted to the Planning Director and North County
Transit District for review and approval. The bus shelter shall be constructed prior
to occupancy of Phase One.
Prior to approval of the Building Plans, the Developer shall receive approval of a Coastal
Development Permit that substantially conforms to this approval. A signed copy of the
Coastal Development Permit must be submitted to the Planning Director. If the approval
is substantially different, an amendment to the Site Development Plan shall be required.
Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice
that this property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from
McClellan-Palomar Airport, in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and
City Attorney (see Noise Form #2 on file in the Planning Department).
The project is approved to be constructed in three phases as shown on the project
exhibits. Modifications to the proposed phasing can be made subject to Planning
Director and City Engineer approval. Building permits for Phase 1 must be issued
within 18 months of the date on which the Site Development Plan receives final City
Council approval or this approval shall expire. Building permits for any future
phase must be issued within 5 years of the date on which the Site Development Plan
receives final City Council approval or the future phase approval will expire.
Prior to building permit issuance a lot line adjustment application for Lot 3 of CT
92-07 and Lot 2 of CT 94-09 must be submitted, receive approval and be recorded.
The applicant is aware that the City is preparing a non-residential housing impact
fee (linkage fee) consistent with Program 4.1 of the Housing Element. The applicant
is further aware that the City may determine that certain non-residential projects
may have to pay a linkage fee in order to be found consistent with the Housing
Element of the General Plan. If a linkage fee is established by City Council
ordinance and/or resolution and this project becomes subject to a linkage fee
pursuant to said resolution, then the applicant for this project or his/her/their
successor(s) in interest shall pay the linkage fee. The linkage fee shall be paid at the
time of issuance of building permits, except for projects involving a request for a
non-residential planned unit development for an existing development, in which
case, the fee shall be paid on approval of the final map, parcel map or certificate of
PC RESO NO. 3965 -6-
.
.
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
-
compliance, required to process the non-residential PUD, whichever pertains. If
linkage fees are required for this project, and they are not paid, this project will not
be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will become null
and void.
23. Landscape plans prepared for this project shall show landscaping as required by
Section E.3-1.2-2.1~ of the Landscape Manual for the area labeled as “Phase 2” and
“Phase 3” due to the high visibility of this area to the public.
24. The Developer shall submit a solid waste management plan for review and approval
by the City of Carlsbad. This plan shall provide the following:
a>
b)
C)
4
9
The approximate location, type and number of containers to be used to
collect refuse and recyclables.
Refuse and recyclable collection methods to be used.
A description and site plan for any planned on-site processing facilities or
equipment (balers, compactors).
A description of the types of recycling services to be provided and
contractual relationships with vendors to provide these services.
The estimated quantity of waste generated and estimated quantities of
recyclable materials.
This plan shall also evaluate the feasibility of the following diversion
programs/measures:
i> Source separated green waste collection.
ii) Cardboard recycling.
iii) Programs which provide for the separation of wet (disposable) and
dry (recoverable) materials.
iv) Where feasible, providing compactors for non-recyclables to reduce
the number of trips to disposal facilities.
V) Glass recycling in restaurants.
25. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Agricultural Conversion Mitigation
Fee for Lot 2 of CT 94-09 shall be paid by the Developer as required by the Mello II
Segment of the Local Coastal Program.
26. No shopping carts shall be allowed in the parking lot.
. . .
PC RESO NO. 3965 -7- \%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- _-
Engineering:
General
Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following engineering conditions, upon the
approval of this proposed Site Development Plan, must be met prior to issuance of a Building
Permit or Grading Permit.
27. This project is approved specifically as no more than 3 (three) phases of
construction. All paving, drainage, access, hard-scape and landscape shall be
constructed with Phase 1 of this project. The only portion of development that may
be phased is the actual buildings.
28. The Developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at all street intersections in
accordance with Engineering Standards and shall record the following statement in the
project’s Lease and Maintenance agreement:
“No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign or other object over 30 inches above the street
level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance
corridor in accordance with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.3.
The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition.”
Fees/Agreements
29.
30.
The Developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required.
The owner of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the City harmless
regarding drainage across the adjacent property.
31. The owner shall execute a hold harmless agreement for geologic failure, ground
water seepage or land subsidence and any damage that may occur as part of this
development.
32. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, the owner shall give
written consent to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the
subdivision plan into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping
District No. 1 on a form provided by the City.
33. The owner shall grant a covenant of easement for Drainage (the private drainage
system across the development) as shown on the Site Development Plan.
34. The owner shall grant a covenant of easement for Access ( the offsite driveway at the
south end of the project) as shown on the Site Development Plan.
II ‘ Grading
35. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site
within this project, the developer shall submit to and receive approval from the City
Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and
requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation.
. . .
PC RESO NO. 3965 -8- \3
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
36. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the
developer shall submit proof that a Notice of Intention has been submitted to the State
Water Resources Control Board.
37. Upon completion of grading, the developer shall ensure that an “as-graded” geologic plan
is submitted to the City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology as exposed
by the grading operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and
must be based on a contour map which represents both the pre and post site grading. This
plan shall be signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist. The plan
shall be prepared on a 24” x 36” mylar or similar drafting film and shall become a
permanent record.
38. No grading for private improvements shall occur outside the limits of the project unless a
grading or slope easement or agreement is obtained from the owners of the affected
properties and recorded. If the developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope
easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case the developer must
either amend the site plan or modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the
project site in a manner which substantially conforms to the approved site plan as
determined by the City Engineer and Planning Director.
39. The developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provide best
management practices as referenced in the “California Storm Water Best Management
Practices Handbook” to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge
to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer.
Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants of
the following:
a) All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with
established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and
hazardous waste products.
b) Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil,
antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such
fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain
or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides,
herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet
Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective
containers.
C) Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants
when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements.
Dedications/Improvements
40. Additional drainage easements may be required. Drainage structures shall be provided or
installed prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit as may be required by
the City Engineer.
28 PC RESO NO. 3965 -9-
l
.
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
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
. . .
. . .
The owner shall make an offer of dedication to the City for all public streets and
easements required by these conditions or shown on the site plan. The offer shall be
made prior to issuance of any building permit for this project. All land so offered shall be
granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without cost to the
City. Streets that are already public are not required to be rededicated.
Paseo De1 Norte shall be dedicated by the owner along the project frontage based on
an approved design of the deceleration lane and the NCTD bus turnout in
conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all public improvements shall be
prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In accordance with City Standards, the
developer shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as provided
by law, improvements shown on the site plan and the following improvements:
a) Deceleration lane on Paseo De1 Norte.
b) NCTD bus turnout on Paseo De1 Norte.
c>
4
e>
Signing and striping plan for Paseo De1 Norte.
Sewer, water and storm drain connections or relocations.
Traffic signal at Paseo De1 Norte and Cannon Road. A Reimbursement
Agreement may be requested by the Developer for a proportionate share of
the cost associated with this signal.
The Developer shall install sidewalks along all public streets abutting the project in
conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards prior to occupancy of any buildings.
Prior to occupancy of any buildings, the developer shall install wheelchair ramps at the
public street comers abutting the project site in conformance with City of Carlsbad
Standards.
The structural section for the access aisles must be designed with a traffic index of 5.0 in
accordance with City Standards due to truck access through the parking area and/or aisles
with an ADT greater than 500. The structural pavement design of the aisle ways shall be
submitted together with required R-value soil test information and approved by the City
as part of the building site plan review.
Prior to issuance of Grading or Building Permits the developer shall complete the
Lot Line Consolidation, the Adjustment Plat, and the Williamson Act Land Buyout.
Prior to the opening to the public of the proposed Specialty Retail Development,
Cannon Road interchange improvements to meet growth management standards
shall be completed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Prior to issuance of Building Permits, the Developer shall enter into a lien contract
with the City for the future design and construction of a fully actuated trafftc signal
at the main entrance on Paseo De1 Norte.
PC RESO NO. 3965 -lO-
.
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
Building:
50. The project shall comply with latest codes adopted.
51. The project shall have minimum plumbing fixtures per 1994 UBC Appx. Chapter 29.
52. “Enhanced paving” must comply with UBC Section 1124B (State amendments).
53. The project shall comply with the latest Disabled Access State Regulations.
54. Individual structural plans shall be processed for the “pieces” (phase) of buildings
intended to be built. Buildings will then be structurally independent on separate building
permits.
Water:
55. The entire potable water system, reclaimed water system and sewer system shall be
evaluated in detail to insure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demands can be
met.
56. The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which will be
collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The San Diego
County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of application for
meter installation.
57. Sequentially, the Developer’s Engineer shall do the following:
a) Meet with the City Fire Marshal and establish the fire protection requirements.
Also obtain G.P.M. demand for domestic and irrigational needs from appropriate
parties.
W Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the Planning
Department for processing and approval.
c) Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and reclaimed water improvement plans, a
meeting must be scheduled with the District Engineer for review, comment and
approval of the preliminary system layouts and usages, i.e. GPM - EDU.
58. This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits will not be
issued for development of the subject property unless the water district serving the
development determines that adequate water service and sewer facilities are .available at
the time of application for such water service and sewer permits will continue to be
available until time of occupancy.
59. Submit all private onsite irrigation plan checks to the City’s Landscape Consultant at the
Planning Department.
Fire:
60. Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be approved by
the Fire Department.
61. An all weather, unobstructed access road suitable for emergency service vehicles shall be
provided and maintained during construction. When in the opinion of the Fire Chief, the
110 PC RESO NO. 3965 -1 l-
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
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
access road has become unserviceable due to inclement weather or other reasons, he may,
in the interest of public safety, require that construction operations cease until the
condition is corrected.
All required water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances shall be operational before
combustible building materials are located on the construction site.
Prior to final inspection, all security gate systems controlling vehicular access shall be
equipped with a “Knox”, key-operated emergency entry device. Applicant shall contact
the Fire Prevention Bureau for specifications and approvals prior to installation.
Prior to building occupancy, private roads and driveways which serve as required access
for emergency service vehicles shall be posted as fire lanes in accordance with the
requirements of section 17.04.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Plans and/or specifications for fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, automatic fire sprinkler
systems and other fire protection systems shall be submitted to the Fire Department for
approval prior to construction.
An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in buildings having an
aggregate floor area exceeding 10,000 square feet.
General:
67. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time; if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of
this Site Development Plan.
Standard Code Reminders:
68. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section
20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
69. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of the
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building
permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
70. The project shall comply with the latest non-residential disabled access requirements
pursuant to Title 24 of the State Building Code.
71. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and
concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, in
substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the
Directors of Planning and Building.
72. Compact parking spaces shall be located in large groups, and in locations clearly marked
to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
\I PC RESO NO. 3965 -12-
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
- -
73. All landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared to conform with the Landscape
Manual and submitted per the landscape plan check procedures on file in the Planning
Department.
74. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance
with the City’s Sign Ordinance and the Sign Program approved for the project and
shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such
signs.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 7th day of August 1996, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Compas, Commissioners Heineman, Nielsen, Noble,
Savary and Welshons
NOES: Commissioner Monroy
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
WILLIAM COMPAS, Chairp&son
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
\ 7
bb. I ,
MICHAEL J. HaZMI’LLER
Planning Director
-
PC RESO NO. 3965 -13-
- EXHBlT 4
. The City of CARLSBAD Planning Department
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
,
Item No. 5 0
Application complete date: June 28, 1996
P.C. AGENDA OF: August 7,1996 Project Planner: Don Neu
Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham
SUBJECT: SDP 96-03 - CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES - Request for a
recommendation of approval of a Site Development Plan for a 300,000 square
foot specialty retail center on 26.65 acres located at the southeast comer of Paseo
De1 Norte and Car Country Drive within Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan in the Coastal Zone and Local Facilities Management Zone 13.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3965
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of SDP 96-03, based on the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
This application proposes developing a vacant retail site in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan
located west of the Flower Field planning area. The project as designed complies with all
requirements of the specific plan including a maximum single story parapet height of 28 feet in
addition to a maximum of 2 percent of the total building square footage proposed as architectural
features not to exceed 42 feet. These height limitations reduce the area of the flower field
planning area that will be obstructed from view by the development at locations west of the site.
In addition the substantial conformance exhibit approved grades for the site will result in the
property elevations being lowered from 1 to 8 feet from existing grade and 3 to 12 feet from
grades approved on the Master Tentative Map for Carlsbad Ranch (CT 94-09).
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a site
development plan for the Carlsbad Company Stores specialty retail center proposed for the
southeast comer of Paseo De1 Norte and Car Country Drive in Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan. The 26.65 acre project is proposed to be built in multiple phases and
consists of four, one-story buildings totaling 300,000 square feet and surface parking for
approximately 1,536 vehicles. The building floor plans indicate that in excess of 100. tenant
spaces will be provided. Tenants will consist of retail stores, art galleries, restaurants and other
specialty retail uses consistent with the specific plan.
* -
SDP 96-03 - CARLSBh,, COMPANY STORES \ AUGUST 7,1996
PAGE 2
-
The buildings are designed in the mediterranean style and include building materials in
conformance with the specific plan guidelines such as stucco walls, clay tile roofs with an
architectural feature with a metal roof, clear glass storefronts and windows, ornamental grilles
and gates, wood shutters and fabric awnings. Buildings are oriented to minimize the amount of
rear building elevations visible to the public. The rear building elevation visible along the
eastern side of the project has received additional treatment and will be further screened by the
grade change along this property line and the landscaping which will be planted on the slope.
The project has been designed to be sensitive to views of the adjacent flower fields at Carlsbad
Ranch. This includes: 1) lowering of the existing grades and lowering building parapet heights
to allow views over the tops of the buildings to the flower fields on the hill beyond, 2)
maximizing views by limiting architectural features over 28 feet in height to no more than 2
percent of the total roof area with a maximum height of 42 feet, 3) consolidation of the buildings
to the east and the north end of the site to maximize flower field view angles, 4) selective use of
trees and landscape material to avoid visual obstruction of the flower fields, and 5) introduction
of a 50 foot wide flower field view corridor/retail mall that will connect to the pedestrian
pathway through the flower fields to Armada Drive. A sidewalk is also provided through the
project site to the south to connect to the flower field parking and information/retail area.
GeneraP Plan, Zoning & Existing Land Use for the Site And Adjacent Property
The following table lists the general plan, zoning and existing land use for the site and adjacent
properties:
Site Description
The project site is currently a vacant pad on the western 10.7 acres. Land previously used for
agricultural production and a palm tree nursery comprises the balance of the site. No sensitive
native vegetation exists on the property as a result of the agricultural and nursery uses.
Prior Actions
On January 9, 1996 the City Council approved the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment
(SP 207(A)) and related applications. The project site is designated as Planning Area 6
(Specialty Retail) in the Specific Plan. The plan allows for the development of a maximum of
300,000 square feet of retail and related uses. The Planning Commission in addition to
SDP 96-03 - CARLSBp,, COMPANY STORES
AUGUST 7,1996
PAGE 3
recommending approval to the City Council of the Specific Plan Amendment on December 6,
1995 approved the Master Tentative Map (CT 94-09) for Carlsbad Ranch. The master tentative
map creates Lot 2 with an area of 15.95 acres which will be consolidated with the existing 10.7
acre lot. The mass grading of the project site will be accomplished under CT 94-09.
The Tentative Partial Cancellation of the Williamson Act Land Conservation Contract approved
for Lot 2 will become final prior to Final Map recordation for the lot or issuance of a grading
permit. The final cancellation action is tied to the approval of the Final Map and Grading Plans
for Unit I of CT 94-09 and is projected to be ready for City Council action this summer.
Applicable Regulations
The proposed project is subject to the following plans, ordinances and standards as analyzed
within the following section of this staff report:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
IV.
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207(A);
Regional Commercial (R) General Plan Land Use Designation;
General Commercial, Qualified Development Overlay Zone (C-2-Q);
Carlsbad Municipal Code, Chapter 21.06, Section 21.06.020 - Site Development Plan
findings required by the Qualified Development Overlay Zone;
Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport;
Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Plan;
Growth Management Ordinance (Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 13); and
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Program EIR (EIR 94-Ol), the Environmental
Protection Procedures (Title 19) and the California Environmental Quality Act.
ANALYSIS
The recommendation for approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project’s
consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. Therefore this section will
cover the project’s compliance with each of the regulations listed above in the order in which
they are presented.
A. CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan establishes the permitted uses for the site as well as the
development standards and design guidelines. The project plans comply with the requirements
of the specific plan. The permitted uses for the project site include retail business uses,
SDP 96-03 - CARLSBha COMPANY STORES
AUGUST 7,1996
PAGE 4
restaurants, office uses, in addition to other uses. The uses proposed for the site are within the
list of permitted uses.
The development standards of the specific plan have also been complied with as demonstrated in
the following table:
;a , _’ ’ ,;,‘ST&j$$j)++;, _: ,‘$;,i,: !$“i‘t:j
Building Height
Building Coverage
Parking Standards
Signage
Service/Loading Areas
Trash Enclosures
Open Space Transition Areas
Building Setbacks
Landscape Setbacks
28 ft. single story
38 ft. two story
42 ft. architectural features
2% max. two story &
architectural features
28 ft. & less - single story
N/A
42 ft. architectural features
2% of bldg. area max.
architectural features (5,998
square feet)
50% - If all surface narking 25.8% 1
1,500 spaces 1,536 spaces
Sign Program Required to be Sign Program proposed is in
approved with the SDP conformance with SP 207(A)
Architecturally detailed and Screen wall proposed with
screened additional landscaping
6 ft. high masonry wall with 6 ft. high masonry wall with
gates. Color and/or materials gates . Color and finish similar
similar to the project to the project.
Earth berms and landscaping Berming or grade change
along the agricultural interface proposed with landscaping
Front yard - 25 ft. 225 ft.
Street side yard - 25 ft. 93 ft.
Interior side yard - 25 ft. 425 ft.
Rear yard - 25 ft. 70 ft.
Front yard - 25 ft.
Street side yard - 25 ft.
Interior side yard - 15 ft.
Rearvard- 15 ft.
25 ft.
25 ft.
15 ft.
15 ft.
Design Guidelines
The specific plan also contains design guidelines applicable to the project site. The guidelines
address building orientation, architectural character, building materials, roofs, and circulation.
The project design complies with the design guidelines of the specific plan.
B. & C. GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
The existing General Plan and Zoning designations for the site were adopted concurrently with
the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan to achieve consistency. The Regional Commercial (R)
General Plan Land Use Designation provides for the proposed use. The specific plan implements
)L -
SDP 96-03 - CARLSBti COMPANY STORES
AUGUST 7,1996
PAGE 5
the General Plan on the project site and includes required circulation improvements and
provisions for alternative modes of transportation such as bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
Zoning for the site is General Commercial, Qualified Development Overlay Zone (C-2-Q). The
zoning designation also permits the uses subject to approval of a site development plan. The
specific plan was established with the requirement that each site require approval of a site
development plan and the zoning reflects this criteria.
D. SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINDINGS REOUIRED BY THE O-OVERLAY
ZONE
The Qualified Development Overlay Zone (Q-Overlay) which is part of the zoning designation
for the property requires that a site development plan be approved for the proposed use prior to
the issuance of any building permit. Four findings are required by the Q-Overlay Zone. The
required findings with justification for each are contained in the Planning Commission resolution
for the project. This section summarizes the necessary findings and support for each.
The requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and environmental settings as the
project design complies with the requirements of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan as
demonstrated in section “A” of this report. Significant building setbacks in addition to required
landscape setbacks have been incorporated into the project design. The site is also adequate in
size and shape to accommodate the use as all applicable code requirements have been met as well
as the provision of additional parking spaces, 5.9 percent of the parking area will be landscaped
while only 3 percent is required, and building coverage is proposed at 25.8 percent.
All features necessary to adjust the use to existing and permitted future uses will be provided.
Screen walls, berming and landscaping are proposed to screen loading areas. Adequate vehicle
circulation has been provided to accommodate truck turning movements. The southern most
access to the site will be shared with the Flower Fields (Planning Area 7) as the existing Flower
Fields driveway will be closed and relocated to the location shown. The project is proposed to be
developed in phases and the rear of structures which will be visible until the completion of a
future phase will receive additional architectural treatment as is proposed for the buildings
parallel to the project’s eastern lot line. The entire parking lot will be developed with the first
phase and landscaping of the future phase building pads will occur as required by the Landscape
Manual as staff has identified the area as highly visible to the public and it therefore warrants
immediate treatment (Landscape Manual Section E.3-1.2-2.lc.). The planned street system is
adequate to handle all traffic generated by the use. The proposed use is consistent with the use
analyzed in the circulation analysis prepared for Program EIR 94-01 for the Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan.
E. COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN FOR MCCLELLAN - PALOMAR
AIRPORT
The project site is located within the Airport Influence Area for McClellan - Palomar Airport.
The southern half of the project site is located within the 60 CNEL noise contour for Palomar
Airport. The site is approximately 8,800 feet west of the airport. The airport land use plan
identifies the use as being compatible with the noise levels for the site. The project was sent to
13
-
SDP 96-03 - CARLSBI~ COMPANY STORES
AUGUST 7,1996
PAGE 6
SANDAG staff and the Palomar Airport Manager for review. An avigation easement was
requested by SANDAG staff A condition requiring the granting of an avigation easement has
not been included for the project. Page 10 of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for
McClellan-Palomar Airport requires an avigation easement only when a use is listed as
“conditionally compatible”. The proposed use is compatible with the CLUP and therefore an
avigation easement is not required pursuant to the approved plan.
MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
As designed the proposed project is consistent with the relevant policies of the Mello II Segment
of the Local Coastal Program. The project site has been previously disturbed by agricultural
activity and is approved for grading. No steep slopes or native vegetation exist onsite. The
project will not have drainage impacts on coastal resources as the project includes an oil and
grease interceptor in the parking lot drainage plan. The project will require the approval of a
coastal development permit.
The suggested modifications for the Local Coastal Program Amendment for the Carlsbad Ranch
were accepted by the City Council on June 11, 1996. The Coastal Commission is scheduled to
effectively certify the Local Coastal Program Amendment for the Carlsbad Ranch at its August
13-16, 1996, hearing.
G. GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE (LFMP - ZONE 13‘1
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 13 in the
northwest quadrant. The impacts on public facilities created by this project and compliance with
the adopted performance standards are summarized as follows:
1 Drainage
I Circulation
1 Fire
!i_ c.;;;.,::(iF :j~g($@j,L <‘!,., \, _: ,,__. j ,, ,, ,>; ,,__:,‘^; 1’: _’
,I ‘,_ ’ ,,: : .’ S’, , ,si _:, __ _%’
N/A
..&gpq@Jj*c~ wfl7H’
, ._;__ .+g$&$~s,;,;,,~, _‘
Yes
$.4O/sq. ft. I I Yes
N/A Yes
15,000 ADT Yes
Station 4
N/A
Payment of non-residential
school fee at bldg. permit
issuance
Yes
Yes
166.67 EDU I I Yes
166.67 EDU 1 Yes
\ -
SDP 96-03 - CARLSBti COMPANY STORES
AUGUST 7,1996
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed use was analyzed in the Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 94-01)
certified for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment and related applications on January 9,
1996 by the City Council. Mitigation required for the grading plan and final map for Master
Tentative Map 94-09 has been applied. Mitigation measures incorporated into this Site
Development Plan include preferential parking spaces for carpools, adequate on-site circulation
to reduce vehicle queuing, bicycle parking facilities, showers for bicycling employees’ use,
pedestrian connections to the site, review by the Police Department of security plans for the
project, use of reclaimed water for landscaping watering and the provision of trash enclosures
large enough to accommodate recyclables. As a result, the environmental analysis for the site
development plan included an Initial Study (Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part II)
focusing on any changes from approved plans and the project contemplated in the EIR to what is
proposed with this site development plan. No additional significant adverse impacts were
identified in the initial study for this project, therefore, no further environmental review is
required. A Notice of Prior Environmental Compliance was prepared for the project and
published in the North County Times Newspaper. A Notice of Determination will be filed.upon
the final action being taken on the project .
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 3965
Location Map
Background Data Sheet
Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
Disclosure Form
Prior Environmental Compliance
Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part II
Exhibits “A” - “Q”, dated August 7, 1996.
DN:bk
. -
BACKGROUND DATA SHEE 1
CASE NO: SDP 96-03
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
APPLICANT: Craig Realtv Groun
REQUEST AND LOCATION: 300,000 sauare foot snecialtv retail center on 26.65 acres
located at the southeast comer of Paseo De1 Norte and Car Countrv Drive
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 3 of Carlsbad Tract No. 92-7 Carlsbad Ranch Unit I and II
per Man No. 13078 and Lot 2 of CT 94-09
APN: 2 1 l-022-03 & nortion of 2 l l -022- 15 Acres: 26.65 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: N/A
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: R (Regional Commercial)
Density Allowed: N/A Density Proposed: N/A
Existing Zone: C-2-O Proposed Zone: C-2-O
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoning
Requirements)
Zoning
Site C-2-Q
North C-2-Q & C-2
south o-s
East O-S
West C-T-Q
Land Use
Vacant pad & agriculture
Auto Dealerships
Flower Fields Parking
Flower Fields
Vacant & Hotel /
Restaurant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 166.67
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: Februarv 15. 1996
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
cl Negative Declaration, issued
cl Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
lxl Other, Prior Compliance with EIR 94-O 1 certified Januarv 9. 1996
, - --r.
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: SDP 96-03 - CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 12 GENERAL PLAN: R
ZONING: C-2-Q
DEVELOPER’S NAME: Craig Realty Group
ADDRESS: 1500 Quail Street, Suite 5 10, Newport Beach. CA 92660
PHONE NO.: (714) 224-4115 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 21 l-022-03 & portion of 21 I-022-15
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 26.65 Acres, 300,000 SQ. Ft.
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = N/A
Library: Demand in Square Footage = N/A
Wastewater Treatme,lt Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) N/A
Park: Demand in Acreage = $.4O/ss. ft.
Drainage: Demand in CFS = N/A
Identify Drainage Basin = N/A
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADTs = 15.000
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = 4
Open Space: Acreage Provided = N/A
Schools: Non-res. School fee
(Demands to be determined by staff)
Sewer: Demands in EDUs 166.67
Identify Sub Basin = N/A
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: Demand in GPD = 166.67
The project is not proposing any dwelling units thereby not impacting the Growth
Management Dwelling unit allowance.
.
DISCLOSL'RE STATEMENT
A?PLlCANTS STnTEUEm 3F YSCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP IWERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL qCb,fi~
2ISCR~IONAilY ACTION ON ThE PART Of THE Cm COUNCIL OR ANY APPOINTED BOARD. COMMISSION OR CCMM~EE
I
;P/ease Prmr)
.- . :: - P.\, ., , bL ,._..
The followmg information must be disclosed: FEB 1 5 f995
1. ADDkant
List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
Steven L. Craig
1500 Quail Street, Suite 510
Newport Beach, CA 92660
2. Owner
L6t the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
a Californiaimi ted -nPrshi r\
5600’Avenida
Carlsbad, CA 92008
3 If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above
addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of tl
interest in the patinership. Carltas Cmpany
a Callkorma limited partnership
WJU Avenlda Encinas #100
Carlsbad, CA 92008
is a corporation or partnership, list the names ant
78 shares in the corporation or owning any panne ‘rsnm
Palcmar-C-n Pa-n
C/O
14241 E. Firestone Blvd., #400
la Mirada, CA 90368
4. If any person identilkd punuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names and
addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary
of the trust.
FTWooo13 W90
2075 Las Palmas Drwo - Carlsbad. Calitornla 92009-4859 - (619) 436-l 16 1 245
- .
DisclosurO Statement
5.
!Over)
Page 2
Have you had more than 5250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, zca:z;
CornmIssions, Committees and Council withln the past twelve months?
Yes No Xx If yes, please Indicate person(s) - -
recw~er. ryndlcata. thtr ana my other couny. ey ana county. cf?y munmprmy. 01Mnct of 0mw p0ln1ca ruodrv~s~on. or any Otnw 7rOb0 0’
comowwon l crrng u l untt’
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)
*,:$i ,” +iY&
/- /,’ ‘-Mnature of apptlunfldere / ,*’ 2
Steven L. Craig
Print or type name of applicant
Fsq4oool3 8/90
PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
Please Take Notice:
The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of the project described
below have already been considered in conjunction with previously certified environmental
documents and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be required and a notice of
determination will be filed.
Project Title: Carlsbad Company Stores
Project Location: Southeast corner of Paseo De1 Norte and Car Country Drive
Project Description: A Site Development Plan for a 300,000 square foot specialty retail center
on 26.7 acres
Justification for this determination is on file in the Planning Department, Community
Development, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public
are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within thirty (30)
days of date of publication.
DATED: JUNE 51996
CASE NO: SDP 96-03
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES ,
PUBLISH DATE: JUNE $1996
Planning Director
.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: SDP 96-03
DATE: Mav 30.1996
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Carlsbad Comuanv Stores
2. APPLICANT: Steven L. Craig
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPICANT: 1500 Quail Street. Suite 5 10, Newnort
Beach, CA 92660 (714) 224-4115
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: Februarv 15.1996
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTON: A Site Develonment Plan for a 300.000 sauare foot specialtv retail
center on 26.7 acres located at the southeast comer of Paseo De1 Norte and Car Countrv Drive
within Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
H Land Use and Planning H Transportation/Circulation H Public Services
0 Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources q Utilities & Service Systems
0 Geological Problems q Energy & Mineral Resources q Aesthetics
El Water
q Air Quality
Ix1 Hazards IXI Cultural Resources
cl Noise cl Recreation
0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96 3’
.
DETERMINATION.
-
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
cl
0
Cl
cl
El
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An Negative
declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier environmental impact
report (EIR) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been voided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
Planner Signature
6-3-c/6
Date
. .
Planning Direc‘fb$s Sigkkure Date I
-
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human
factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to
use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
l A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each
question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A
“No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
a “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted
general standards and policies.
l “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level.
0 “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant.
l Based on an “EIA-Part II”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
effect on the environment, but glJ potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon
the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
0 When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of
Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
a A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
l If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this
case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated”
may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
l An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has
not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and
the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than
significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant impact has
not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR, (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce
the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not
possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant
effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined
significant.
. -
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
4
b)
e)
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): (1; pg. 5.7-l through 5.7-18)
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? (1; pg.5.4-5 through 5.4-13,5.7-l through 5.7-
18, and 5.12-l through 5.12-7)
Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
(1; pg. 5.7-8 and 5.7-9)
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses? (1; pg. 5.1-l through 5.1-16)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? (1; 5.7-l through 5.7-18)
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a>
b)
c)
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? (1; pg. 7- 1 through 7-4)
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (1; pg. 7-8 and 7-
9) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (1; pg. 7-8 and 7-9)
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( 1; Appendix A)
b) Seismic ground shaking? (1; Appendix A)
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (1;
Appendix A)
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (1; Appendix A)
e) Landslides or mudflows? (1; Appendix A)
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (1;
Appendix A and pg. 5.12-6 and 5.12-7)
g) Subsidence of the land? (1; Appendix A)
h) Expansive soils? (1; Appendix A)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? (1; Appendix A)
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? (1; pg. 5.12- 1
through 5.12-7)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (1; Appendix A)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
cl
cl
cl
lxl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Cl
0
cl
cl
cl
cl
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
Less Than
Sign&an
t impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
No
Impact
Ia
lxl
IXI
cl
lz
El
lx
El
cl Ix1 cl lxl cl lxl
cl lx cl lxl cl Ix]
cl Ix1 cl El cl Ix1
cl IXI
cl El
-
. .
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
c>
4
e)
fl
?a
h)
0
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (1; pg. 5.12-I through 5.12-7)
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? (1; pg. 5.12-l through 5.12-7)
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? (1; pg. 5.12-l through 5.12-7)
Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? (1; pg. 5.9-13 through 5.9-22 and 5.12-1
though 5.12-7)
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (1;
pg. 5.12-I through 5.12-7)
Impacts to groundwater quality? (1; pg. 5.12-l through
5.12-7)
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? (1; pg.
5.9- 13 through 5.9-22)
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (1; pg. 5.2-l
b)
through 5.2-8)
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (1; pg. 5.2-1,
5.2-4, 5.2-6, and 5.2-7)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? ( 1; Appendix A)
d) Create objectionable odors? ( 1; Appendix A)
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
4
b)
c>
4
4
0
g>
proposal result in:
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (1; pg.
5.5-l through 5.5-29)
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)? (1; pg. 5.5-l through 5.5-29)
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
(1; pg. 5.5-l through 5.5-29 and 5.9-l through 5.9-4)
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (1; pg.
5.5-25 and 5.5-26)
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (1;
Appendix A)
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (1; pg.
5.7-16)
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (1; pg. 5.7-l
through 5.7- 18)
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
Potentially
Significant
Impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Ix1
cl
cl
cl
l-8
cl
q
Cl
cl
cl
0
cl
Potentiallv
SignificaA Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
cl
cl
cl
cl
El
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Less Than No
Significan Impact
t Impact
0 Ix]
cl Ix1
cl lzl
cl El
cl lzl
cl (XI
0 [x1
cl cl
cl Ix1
cl I8
cl [XI
cl cl
cl IXJ
cl ta
0 Ix]
cl El
cl IXI
cl El
cl El
- -
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
b)
cl
4
e>
VIII.
a)
b)
cl
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? (1; pg. 5.4- 1 through 5.4- 13)
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (1; pg.
5.4-l through 5.4-13)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (1; pg. 5.4-l through 5.4-
13) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
(1; pg. 5.4-l through 5.4-13)
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (1; pg. 5.4-l
tbrougb 5.4-13)
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (1;
Appendix A)
Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ( 1; Appendix A)
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? (1; Appendix A)
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? (1; pg. 5.6-l through 5.6-7)
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? (1; 5.9-l through 5.9-4)
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? (1; pg. 5.6-l through 5.6-7)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? (1; pg. 5.6-l through 5.6-7)
e) Increase fne hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? (1; pg. 5.7-8 and 5.7-9)
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? (1; pg. 5.8-l through
5.8-7)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (1; pg. 5.8-l
through 5.8-7)
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
a)
b)
cl
d)
e)
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
Fire protection? (1; pg. 5.9-l and 5.9-2)
Police protection? (1; pg. 5.9-2 through 5.9-4)
Schools? (1; pg. 5.9-7 through 5.9-13)
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (1;
pg. 5.7-2, 5.7-3, and 5.7-16)
Other governmental services? (1; pg. 5.7-2 and 5.7-16)
Potentially Significant Impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
cl
Potentially LessThan No
Significant Significan Impact Unless t Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Cl
Cl
IXI
cl
0
cl
cl lz Cl cl
cl
cl Ix]
cl El
cl txl
cl Ix1
cl lz
cl Ix1
cl lxl
cl El
cl El
cl lxl
cl cl
cl IXI
cl lrxl
cl lxl
- -
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
XII.UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
a) Power or natural gas? (1; Appendix A)
b) Communications systems? ( 1; Appendix A)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? (1; pg. 5.9-4 through 5.9-7)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (1; pg. 5.9-4 through 5.9-7)
e) Storm water drainage? (1; pg. 5.12-I through 5.1’2-7)
f) Solid waste disposal? (1; pg. 5.10-l through 5.10-5)
g) Local or regional water supplies? (1; pg. 5.9-13 and
5.9-22)
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (1; pg.
5.1 l-l through 5.11-7)
b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (1; pg.
5.1 l-l through 5.1 l-7)
c) Create light or glare? (1; Appendix A)
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? (1; pg. 5.3-l
though 5.3-B)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? (1; pg. 5.3-l through
5.3-B)
c) Affect historical resources? (1; pg. 5.3-l through 5.3-B)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (1; pg. 5.3-
1 through 5.3-B)
e) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (1; pg. 5.3-l through 5.3-B)
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? (1; pg. 5.7-2
through 5.7-3 and 5.7-16)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (1; pg. 5.7-2 through 5.7-3 and 5.7-16)
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife 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
Potentially
Significant Impact
cl
Cl
0
Cl
cl
cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
0
Cl
0
Cl
cl
cl
Cl
Cl
cl
Potentially LessThan No
Significant Significan Impact Unless t Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
0 Cl Cl
Cl cl Ix1 El
0
Cl
Cl
lxl
Cl
Cl Cl
Cl
Cl
0
IXJ
Cl Ix1 cl Ix1 Cl El
Cl lxl cl Ix1 Cl Cl Cl cl
Cl lxl
Cl Ix1
0 El
cl 0
Cl El
0 El Cl Ix1
0 [x1
cl Ia
Cl El
0 cl
3%
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially
Significant
Impact
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
1x1
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a 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)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, Cl
either directly or indirectly?
Potentially LessThan No
Significant Signitican Impact
Unless t Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
Cl 0 0
IXI 0 0
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
9 Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
4 Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,“ describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
9
-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Carlsbad Company Stores is a specialty retail center proposed for the southeast corner of Paseo
De1 Norte and Car Country Drive in Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The
26.7 acre project will be built in multiple phases and consist of four, one-story buildings totaling
300,000 square feet and surface parking for approximately 1,500 vehicles. There may be in
excess of 100 tenants that will consist of retail stores, art galleries, restaurants and other specialty
retail uses consistent with the specific plan. The buildings are designed in the mediterranean
style and will include building materials in conformance with the specific plan guidelines such as
stucco walls, clay tile roofs, clear glass storefronts and windows, ornamental grilles and gates,
wood shutters and fabric awnings.
The project has been designed to be sensitive to views of the adjacent flower fields at Carlsbad
Ranch. This includes: 1) lowering of the existing grades and lowering building parapet heights
to allow views over the tops of the buildings to the flower fields on the hill beyond, 2)
maximizing views by limiting architectural features over 28 feet in height to no more than 2
percent of the total roof area with a maximum height of 42 feet, 3) consolidation of the buildings
to the east and the north end of the site to maximize flower field view angles, 4) selective use of
trees and landscape material to avoid visual obstruction of the flower fields, and 5) introduction
of a 50 foot wide flower field view corridor/retail mall that will connect to the pedestrian
pathway through the flower fields to Carlsbad Ranch.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The proposed project was evaluated in the “Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final
Program Environmental Impact Report, dated November 1995 (EIR 94-Ol).” EIR 94-01
evaluates the environmental effects of the development and operation of: The Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan; improvements to the I-S/Cannon Road Interchange; and the development of a 24.2
acre parcel immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the specific plan site. The Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan is a planning document which will guide the development of a 447.40 acre
area through the provision of a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations, and implementation
programs. The proposed land uses for the Specific Plan include office, research and
development, related light manufacturing, commercial, hotel, destination resort, golf course,
agriculture, a vocational school campus, and LEGOLAND Carlsbad. The 24.2 acre parcel
adjacent to the northern boundary is proposed as a continuation of the Specific Plan golf course.
EIR 94-01 analyzed the following environmental issue areas: Agricultural Resources, Air
Quality, Archaeological and Paleontological Resources, Biological Resources,
Traffic/Circulation, Hazardous Waste/Pesticide Residue, Land Use Compatibility; Noise, Public
Services and Utilities, Solid Waste, Visual Aesthetics/Grading, and Water Quality. The Initial
Study prepared for the Specific Plan Amendment is contained in Appendix A of EIR 94-01 and
analyzed additional issues which were determined not to have a significant environmental
impact. EIR 94-01 was certified by the Carlsbad City Council on January 9, 1996. At that time
Candidate Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation and
Monitoring Program were approved. All mitigation measures applicable to the Carlsbad
Company Stores project proposed for Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch have been
incorporated into the project design or are required as conditions of approval for the project.
- -
References to the applicable section of EIR 94-01 are provided next to each item on this
environmental impact assessment form. A brief explanation is provided in the following section
for each item checked as having a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant
unless mitigation incorporated’:
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING
d) Agricultural Resources
The project site includes approximately 15.95 acres that were approved for tentative
cancellation of a Williamson Act Land Conservation Contract. The analysis in EIR 94-
01 concluded that no mitigation measures are necessary as project impacts will be
reduced to level less than significant through the payment of fees consistent with the
coastal program, the preservation of 53 acres on-site, and through the implementation of
policies contained in the specific plan.
The EIR analysis concluded that the conversion of the existing agricultural lands on the
Carlsbad Ranch and cumulative areas to urban uses will result in a significant incremental
impact to agricultural resources. A statement of overriding considerations was adopted
for this cumulative impact.
V. AIR QUALITY
a) Air Quality
No significant impacts as a result of construction activity are anticipated. Implementation
of the air quality mitigation measures will lessen long-term operation air quality impacts
to a level less than significant. It was concluded in the analysis for EIR 94-01 that the
development anticipated under the proposed specific plan amendment together with the
development of other related projects will have a significant and unavoidable cumulative
impact on the region’s air quality. A statement of overriding considerations was adopted
for this cumulative impact.
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION
Increased Vehicle Trips
A series of circulation system improvements are required as part of the development of
the Carlsbad Ranch property. With the implementation of the improvements identified in
EIR 94-01 all of the analyzed intersections and street segments are projected to operate at
acceptable levels of service. It was determined that the Carlsbad Ranch project in
conjunction with cumulative build-out forecasts, will result in a significant cumulative
impact to the I-5 freeway and SR-78. A statement of overriding consideration was
adopted for this cumulative impact.
.
IX. HAZARDS
d) Exposure to existing sources of potential health hazards
Evidence of surface staining and possible pesticide contamination was observed at
several locations on the project site. Although no significant levels of soil contamination
from pesticides or herbicides were detected during soil testing in 1989 and 1995, the
potential for undetected contamination does exist due to the fact that the project site has
been historically used for agricultural production. Exposure of persons to unremediated
soils is a potential impact. Implementation of mitigation measures listed in EIR 94-01
will reduce this potential impact to less than significant. The mitigation measures
require soil monitoring and remediation of any affected soils during site development.
These mitigation measures will be implemented during the mass grading for Tentative
Map 94-09.
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES
W Police protection
The EIR analysis concluded that the conversion of an agricultural area to an urban area
which will attract visitors will require additional law enforcement and crime prevention
services. The potential increase in demand on police services is a significant impact.
This demand for police protection will be reduced through implementation of a
mitigation measure requiring security measures to be incorporated into the proposed
developments. The applicant has prepared a security plan which has been submitted to
the Carlsbad Police Department for review and approval.
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
0 Solid waste disposal
The generation of additional solid waste is a potentially significant impact. The
mitigation measure identified in EIR 94-01 which has been applied to the project will
reduce this impact to a level of less than significant. The mitigation measure requires the
submittal of a solid waste management plan to address the project’s needs for recycling
facilities and diversion programs/measures which can be implemented.
s> Local or regional water supplies
The project will require the construction of onsite water lines. The impacts of buildout of
the Carlsbad Ranch project to water supplies are potentially significant. Implementation
of the mitigation measures contained in EIR 94-01 will reduce impacts to a level of less
than significant. The mitigation includes utilizing reclaimed water for landscaping on the
project site.
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES
b) Paleontological resources
Areas of the Carlsbad Ranch contain geologic formations with a high potential for
yielding significant paleontological resources. Mitigation measures requiring a
paleontological monitor are required for the project and will be implemented during the
mass grading for Tentative Map 94-09.
SOURCE DOCUMENTS - (NOTE: All source documents are on file in the Planning Department
located at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92009, Phone (619) 438-1161)
1. “Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program Environmental Impact Report, City
of Carlsbad, November 1995.”
EXkWT 5
5. SDP 96-03 - CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES - Request for a recommendation of approval of a Site
Development Plan for a 300,000 square foot specialty retail center on 26.65 acres located at the
southeast comer of Paseo Del Norte and Car Country Drive within Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan in the Coastal Zone and Local Facilities Management Zone 13.
Chairman Compas announced to the applicant, Commissioners and public that this item, if approved, will be
forwarded to the City Council for its consideration.
Project Planner Don Neu gave a background, overview, and analysis of the Carlsbad Company Stores. This
item is located within Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, which was approved by the City
Council on January 9, 1996. Specifically, this site is located at the southeast comer of Paseo del Norte and
Car Country Drive. Additionally, the two adjacent Planning Areas to the east are for the flower fields and a
future golf course.
The 26.65 acre project is proposed to be built in three phases and consists of four, one-story buildings
totaling 300,000 square feet, and surface parking for approximately 1,536 vehicles. The building floor plans
indicate that in excess of 100 tenant spaces will be provided. Tenants will consist of retail stores, art
galleries, restaurants and other specialty retail uses consistent with the Specific Plan.
The buildings are designed in the Mediterranean style and include building materials in conformance with the
Specific Plan guidelines such as stucco walls, clay tile roofs with an architectural feature with a metal roof,
clear glass storefronts and windows, ornamental grilles and gates, wood shutters and fabric awnings.
Buildings are oriented to minimize the amount of rear building elevations visible to the public. The rear
building elevation visible along the eastern side of the project has received additional treatment and will be
further screened by the grade change along this property line and the landscaping which will be planted on
the slope.
The project has been designed to be sensitive to views of the adjacent flower fields at Carlsbad Ranch. This
includes:
1) lowering of the existing grades and lowering building parapet heights to allow views over the
tops of the buildings to the flower fields on the hill beyond;
2) maximizing views by limiting architectural features over 28’ in height to no more than 2% of
the total roof area with a maximum height of 42’;
3) consolidation of the buildings to the east and the north end of the site to maximize flower field
view angles;
4) selective use of trees and landscape material to avoid visual obstruction of the flower fields;
and
L PLANNING COMMISSION August 7, 1996 Page 4
5) introduction of a 50-foot wide flower field view corridor/retail mall that will connect to the
pedestrian pathway through the flower fields to Armada Drive.
A sidewalk is also provided through the project site to the south to connect to the flower field parking and
information/retail area.
Access to the site is provided by three access points on Paseo del Norte, one will be a shared access with
the flower fields Planning Area. The existing driveways to the flower fields Planning Area will be closed and a
deceleration lane constructed to the shared driveway location. In addition, two access points are also
proposed on Car Country Drive.
Staff has determined that this project is consistent with applicable policies and regulations that it is subject to,
including the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan; Regional Commercial (R) General Plan Land Use Designation;
General Commercial, Qualified Development Overlay Zone; Carl&ad Municipal Code; Comprehensive Land
Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport; Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Plan; Growth Management
Ordinance; and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Program EIR and CEQA.
The street system with the required improvements identified in the Carlsbad Ranch EIR will be adequate to
accommodate the traffic generated from the project.
When the Specific Plan was approved by the City Council at the January 9, 1996 meeting, and by the Coastal
Commission in April 1996, it established the Carisbad Ranch Plan as the implementing document for this
property. As such, compliance with the Specific Plan also establishes compliance with the Local Coastal
Program.
Mr. Neu called to the Commission’s attention some proposed changes regarding the Resolution for the
project. The first one deals with Condition No. 18, which is the requirement to obtain a Coastal Development
Permit, and strikes the words “issued by the California Coasbl Commission.”
Mr. Wojcik called the Commission’s attention to the August 7, 1996 memo from the Engineering Dept. that
had been distributed tonight as well, which contained clarifications of Conditions No. 42 and 47 of Resolution
No. 3966. Condition 47 requires the developer to meet the Growth Management standards for the Cannon
Interchange Improvements. These improvements include the signalization of the Cannon Road and Paseo
Del Norte (PDN) intersection as well as improvements to the CalTrans controlled interchange of l-5 and
Cannon. The signal at Cannon and PDN is needed with the development of this project and can precede the
Cannon Interchange improvements. Therefore, Condition No. 42 should be amended to require that signal.
Item (e) has been added to Condition No. 42 to include the following language: “Traffic Signal at Paseo De/
Norte and Cannon Road. A Reimbursement Agreement may be requested by fhe developer for a
proportionate share of the cost associated with this signal.” Mr. Wojcik added that a portion of the signal
may be reimbursed from Public Facilities Fees at a date when, in the City’s Capital Improvement Program,
the signal is to be constructed. An additional portion may be reimbursed from the developer of property on
the North side of Cannon.
Mr. Neu concluded his presentation and recommended approval from the Commission,
Chairman Compas asked the Commissioners if they had questions of staff.
Commissioner Welshons queried if it was anticipated that a traffic signal would ever be placed at the entrance
to allow southbound traffic to turn left into the site and for vehicles leaving the site to turn left and go
southbound. Mr. Wojcik answered that with the existing analysis of the project staff did not see an immediate
need for a signal. However, if the Planning Commission desires this for the future, a recommendation would
be to do this with a future improvement agreement rather than requiring improvements and requiring the
developer to post bonds. He added that a future improvement agreement is a lien that is placed on the
MINUTES ctc3
.
. PLANNING COMMISSION
-. es. -8 &J
August 7, 1996 Page 5
property, but spares the developer the cost of annual bond fees. Commissioner Welshons asked if this could
be done as Condition No. 48, to which Mr. Wojcik confirmed.
Commissioner Welshons queried what the anticipated number of employees would be for the anticipated 100
stores in this mall. Mr. Neu answered he did not know, but that the applicant may be able to provide an
estimate. Commissioner Welshons queried who the 40 spaces in each of the courtyards were designed for,
customers and/or employees. Mr. Neu answered that these spaces were intended to be used for employee
parking. Commissioner Welshons asked about the logistics of getting in and out of the area. Mr. Neu said
staff has not seen the final design which will detail how the large roll down door is operated. Commissioner
Welshons noted the insufficient parking and associated problems experienced by the restaurants located on
Avenida Encinas, and her concern over the crime element that employees and customers could be faced
with. She wanted to know if it the Commission could place a condition on this project that.would designate
parking for employees and establish security patrol that could escort them to their cars. Mr. Neu answered
that the applicant had prepared a security plan, which was required by the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan EIR.
The plan does provide for on-site security staff.
Commissioner Noble queried about what the assurances were that this project didn’t end up with 40’ trees
and 28’ buildings decades into the future. Mr. Neu answered that the staff reviewed the landscape plans with
the applicants landscape architect who selected the various species with this in mind. Mr. Neu added that
staff wanted to stay away from any requirement that monitor the height of trees in the project.
Chairman Compas asked if there were any more questions of staff. Seeing none, he asked the applicant to
wme forward.
Steven Craig, 31 Morning View, Irvine, CA, gave his presentation to staff that highlighted and illustrated the
proposed project as was detailed in Mr. Neu’s presentation.
Chairman Compas asked how long it would take to get to build-out. Mr. Craig answered that it would take
approximately 2.5 - 3 years. Chairman Compas asked what the timeline has been with other shopping center
projects. Mr. Craig answered that a comparable project that began 1.5 years ago finished it’s first phase,
consisting of 225,000 sf. and full build-out will be complete within three months. Mr. Craig added that much of
this is contingent on demand from retail tenants, but he feels very encouraged and has a strong following.
Chairman Compas asked what the probability estimate of completing this in the time-frame that is anticipated,
to which Mr. Craig answered that 5060% that it would be complete in 1.5 - 2 years.
Commissioner Monroy queried, since the flower fields were such a motivating factor in choosing this sight for
the mall, why none of the buildings faced the Rower fields. Mr. Craig answered that retail generally faces the
corridor of traffic, which is Paseo Del Norte and l-5. Additionally, Mr. Craig noted that the flower fields were
only in bloom 6-8 weeks per year. Commissioner Monroy asked why the project was to be done in three
phases. Mr. Craig answered so that they could be more selective in choosing their retail tenants.
Commissioner Monroy asked Mr. Craig if he would consider opening up a space of approximately 25,000 sf
or 10% of the project on the north and south ends of the buildings 1100 and 1200 respectively, to provide for
a garden area that would look out on to the flower fields. Mr. Craig answered that he would not be in favor of
such a change, but would consider it. He noted that the landscaping that is incorporated in this project, which
in some places such as the parking lot is 100% more than required by the City’s standards, provides what
Commission Monroy is talking about. Commissioner Monroy stated that he is still concerned about the lack
of integration with the flower fields.
Commissioner Heineman asked about the 100 stores, and how many stores were in the Camarillo project
that included 350,000 sf. Mr. Craig estimated there were 75-80. Commissioner Heineman asked if the
applicant was aware of any center aside from a major mall that housed so many retail stores. Mr. Craig said
he was not aware of any, but added that there is a tremendous demand now for smaller stores as opposed to
ones taking up more square footage. Commissioner Heineman queried how many of these stores would be
outlet stores, to which Mr. Craig answered he estimated between 40-50% of the project. Commissioner
MINUTES &IO
. -
PLANNING COMMISSION August 7, 1996
Heineman asked if this would be comparable to the center at San Ysidro. Mr. Craig answered that the two
centers are not really comparable because of the make-up of outlets within each center. Mr. Craig added that
he could go through more detailed usage of the outlets at a later time.
Commissioner Heineman asked how much of the flower fields would be obscured by the planting in the
parking lot. Mr. Craig answered his estimate was between S-10%. Wtth reference to the trees, Mr. Craig
added that the model of the project has provided them with a good study tool in improving the final design of
the project.
Chairman Compas queried whether or not a Trader Joe’s or grocery store would be added as an outlet to this
project. Mr. Craig said he would rule out a grocery store, but would consider a Trader Joe’s Mr. Craig added
that Harry & David, which is based in Medford, Oregon, contacted him about leasing 3,000 sq. ft.
Commissioner Nielsen asked whether shopping carts would be used at this project site. Mr. Craig said only
one, which would be West Point Pepperel, but that the shopping carts were not allowed in the parking lot.
Commissioner Nielsen asked for an estimate on the number of employees, to which Mr. Craig answered
approximately. 400 people. Additionally, Mr. Craig said on-site parking would be made available as well as a
special bus turnout and lockable bicycle cabinets and showers.
Commissioner Nielsen asked the applicant if a condition could be added to modify the colors. Mr. Craig said
he would like to be treated the same as any other applicant with a project, and not be subjected to color
restrictions if it has not been the case for other applicants. While his preference is to leave the colors as is,
he would be open to further discussion on this topic with staff.
Commission Savary suggested the colors be toned down by about ten shades so as not to compete with the
colors of the flower fields. Mr. Craig said the tones they came up with were natural earth tones.
Commissioner Savary said she was more concerned with thecolor of the awnings. She added that she felt
they would blend better with the project and the flower fields if they were muted. Mr. Craig said he would be
willing to come back with alternate awning fabric samples that might be acceptable.
Commissioner Noble agreed with Commissioner Savary and added that the applicant would be treated the
same as other applicants, and used the example of when MacDonald’s was told to tone down their proposed
colors and they did.
Commissioner Savary said the colors that were depicted in the applicants slide presentation of pictures taken
of Italian buildings were muted by age and the sun. Mr. Craig said this was a factor they used in selecting
color. This was one of the concerns in using certain colors because they will fade.
Commissioner Welshons asked about the door that leads into the two parking bays for the employees in the
interior courtyards. Mr. Craig addressed the access and safety issues, respectively. Mr. Craig noted that this
mall will be a fully operated and manned center, complete with General Manager, Asst. General Manager,
Operations Director who will double as head of security and a full time security staff, including people on
bicycles who roam the parking lot with walkie-talkies. With regard to access, there would be cameras at both
front and back doors, key pads to initiate entrance or employee cards, exiting would include a pad system as
well. Additionally there will be a microphone control system that would require someone coming in to identify themselves before entrance would be granted. There will also be gates to minimize get-away points. Wtth
regard to safety for employees, employees would be escorted to their cars during evening hours when the
parking lot is basically deserted. A night depository drop will be installed within the center to minimize the
chance of robberies.
Commissioner Welshons asked the applicant to discuss employee parking and how it will be designated. The
applicant answered that preferential parking is designed for customers, however toward closing hours such
MINUTES l-0
-
PLANNING COMMISSION August 7, 1996 Page 7
as 6:00, employees would be allowed to bring their cars closer to the mall. During peak hours employees are
encouraged to park to the rear of the building.
Wrth regard to circulation and Condition No. 42, Commissioner Welshons asked the applicant if he accepted
this condition. Mr. Craig said he was supportive of this condition. Commissioner Welshons asked if the
applicant was supportive of the newly proposed condition as well, which would be entering into a contract with
the City for a future improvement agreement. Mr. Craig answered that would be acceptable.
Commissioner Welshons asked about the backside of the building and the lack of view toward the flower
fields as brought up earlier by Commissioner Monroy and if it would be possible to install tinted glass that
makes it appear to have windows on this backside. Mr. Craig said that steps were taken to make the backs
of these buildings aesthetically pleasant for those people who visit the flower fields each year. Commissioner
Welshons asked if the doors to the backs of the buildings opened up, to which Mr. Craig answered yes.
Commissioner Welshons said she thought people may use this area as a sort of secret parking lot, and that
by changing the look of it would lessen the fact that it was the backside of the buildings. Mr. Craig said he
was working on making the back look better, and said Chris Calkins was talking about planting flowers to
enhance the area.
Commissioner Welshons queried about the location of the vineyards for the Culbertson’s. Mr. Craig
answered that it would be the westerly end of the golf course and serve as a one-acre demonstration
vineyard. Mr. Craig added that he would like to see what could be done with some of the slopes in that area
as vineyards do well on slopes.
Commissioner Welshons referenced Resolution No. 3965 Condition 55 (d) reclaimed water and queried
whether or not reclaimed water would work for the vineyard. Mr. Craig said no, it wouldn’t.
Chairman Compas opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
The first speaker was Darrell Pines, 2011 Lee Court, Carlsbad. Mr. Pines stated that while he thought this
was a nice project, he was very concerned about the negative impact of increased traffic congestion and the,,
fact this mall would discourage people from patronizing Plaza Camino Real as well as shops in the
Redevelopment area. In closing, Mr. Pines said that Los Angeles and Orange County traded their quality of
life for the above problems with the hope of prosperity and generating tax revenues.
The next speaker was John Tighe (Chief Operating Officer of the flower fields) of 5600 Avenida Encinas,
Carlsbad. Mr. Tighe stated that he felt the project is complimentary to the flower fields, which he would like to
see opened on a year-round basis. Mr. Tighe believes that this project will support efforts to preserve and
protect the flower fields for future generations. Additionally, he felt that this project would increase visitors
and the tourist base, benefiting all of Carlsbad’s businesses.
Commissioner Monroy queried when Mr. Tighe saw the flower fields as being year-round. Mr. Tighe said he
was working on that right now. However, the nature of the ranuculas flowering crop is such that it takes a full
year to harvest and prepare the fields for the following crop year. Commissioner Monroy asked if the crops
could be alternated in rows of alternative flowers to extend the color and achieve this goal. Mr. Tighe
answered that this was being worked on in steps right now, but no other crops can offer the color to that of
the ranuculas. Commissioner Heineman asked for confirmation that growing ranuculas requires year-round
preparation, so that really there is no way to grow ranuculas year-round. Mr. Tighe answered that was
correct, but they were trying to grow smaller patches to create color, but it won’t be nearly as dramatic as the
main area that they are currently grown in.
The third speaker was Jane E. Beaver, 6677 A Paseo Del Norte, Cartsbad. Ms. Beaver had five questions
she wanted addressed by the applicant or staff. 1. What about the culvert and the water that runs off there.
2. Will there be sidewalks along there. 3. How late will the center be open. 4. She liked the idea of the
MINUTES r-\f
h . ,
. PLANNING COMMISSION August 7, 1996 Page 8
garden proposed by Commissioner Monroy. 5. Traffic will be a nightmare. In closing she added that she is
not looking forward to all the traffic that this development, LEGO, and the Price Club will generate.
The fourth speaker was Chris Calkins of 5600 Avenida Encinas. Mr. Calkins stated that he was in support of
the project and was very pleased by what the applicant has proposed. He added that every City standard
has been met and even exceeded.
Commissioner Monroy asked Mr. Calkins to elaborate on the comment made earlier (by Mr. Pines) that there
is the idea the flower fields would not be here in lo-15 years. Mr. Calkins answered that he has a very strong
commitment to ensuring flowers in perpetuity. He added that this project will help ensure the attractiveness
and marketability of the flower fields.
Commissioner Savary asked Mr. Calkins how he intended to improve the current parking lot of the flower
fields and the temporary buildings. Mr. Calkins said that they are in the process of developing a plan to
address this, and said that there would be a full deceleration lane installed north of Palomar Airport Road and
it will be a major entrance that will be paved to avoid the dust problem.
The fifth speaker was Gene Forsyth, 2740-A Roosevelt Street, Carlsbad. Mr. Forsyth stated that he was in
support of the project and was quite impressed with all the work and insight that had gone into it. He believes
that this project will have a positive impact on the mall and the Village Faire area by encouraging these stores
to keep up with the new project. Mr. Forsyth also agreed with a statement made by Mr. Craig earlier that the
trend was to go to smaller stores, which keeps overhead down, thereby reducing prices and attracting more
customers. Mr. Forsyth was particularly impressed with the uniqueness of the architecture.
The next speaker was Robert Payne, P.O. Box 3073, Carlsbad. Mr. Payne asked the following question: In
the LEG0 and Carlsbad Ranch mailings that went out prior to the election, this area was designated as
specialty retail. At the time, however, it was community retail, 160,000 sf with traffic impact. Mr. Payne’s
question was, when did this project go to Planning ? Mr. Payne gave a letter to the Minutes Clerk for the
record, entitled, “Hidden Information?
The last speaker on this item was Audrey Rude, 4793 Endeavor Lane, Cartsbad. Ms. Rude said she
attended a presentation given by the applicant at the Senior Center and stated that she was very excited
about the project and looking forward to it. Ms. Rude added that she had been a Carlsbad resident for five
years and way very impressed with how the City was progressing. She said that she didn’t believe this
project would take business away from Plaza Camino Real. Finally, Ms. Rude said she returned from a trip to
Italy two months ago and thought the colors were spectacular, and that they would not overshadow the flower
fields because of their vibrant colors.
The applicant, Mr. Craig came forward to address issues that had been raised during public testimony. With
regard to Mr. Pine’s concerns about traffic, Mr. Craig stated the regional designation and the associated
traffic warrants that came with it showed a 3.5% reduction of the original amount of traffic projected in the
1992 Specific Plan. With regard to Ms. Beaver’s issues, a drainage system will be created that is large
enough to carry the surface water as well as the excess water that goes on the flower fields, to address the
culvert situation; it will be underground. Sidewalks will be placed on the site throughout the exterior perimeter
along Paseo Del Norte, as well as interior sidewalks. With regard to store hours, Mr. Craig anticipates a
10:00 a.m. opening and an 8:00 p.m. closing. This will depend on demand, however. With respect to the
point of making a park, Mr. Craig went on record to state he would be willing to put $50,000 towards a 4-acre
park on the west side of Paseo Del Norte. With regard to traffic, based on the EIR and traffic impact studies
that have been done, as well as interchange improvements that have been completed, Mr. Craig does not
believe there will be a problem.
Commissioner Monroy told the applicant he was not suggesting a park, but rather decreasing the size of the
project by approx. 1 O-l 1% by moving the north and south buildings apart to make room for a garden area and
pedestrian walkway. Commissioner Monroy asked if Mr. Craig would accept a condition that would
MINUTES 47
- *
PLANNING COMMISSION August 7, 1996 Page 9
accomplish this. Mr. Craig said he would be happy to work with staff to accomplish this goal, but not by
taking out 11% of the project. Mr. Craig said there is a large store that has indicated an interest in this
particular area and it would not be in good faith to alter the size of it, and it would also affect the economics of
the project. Mr. Craig added that there was 6% of 26 acres available for landscaping to accomplish this goal.
Commissioner Monroy said he was just suggesting that the buildings be spread out.
Commissioner Noble asked the applicant how much it cost per acre for the 4 acre property on the west side
of Paseo Del Norte, to which Mr. Craig answered $300,000 per acre.
Commissioner Welshons asked Commissioner Monroy to clarify which piece of the project he was referring
to. Specifically, this would mean widening the center corridor on the east side of the building between the
north wing and the south wing. widening it, which in essence would mean either taking out smaller units north
or south and maintaining the same size but just widening that corridor.
Chairman Compas closed the public testimony and asked staff if they had anything to add.
Mr. Wojcik referred to Mr. Pine’s comments on traffic, and said concerns raised were taken into account in
the EIR and traffic analysis and emphasized that Carlsbad takes an extremely conservative look at traffic
generation and staff feels confident that they have not underestimated the traffic impacts, but rather have
perhaps overestimated the traffic impacts. With regard to Mrs. Beaver and her wncem about the culvert and
drainage, the drainage of the site as well as drainage of the flower fields will be going through NPDES
elimination methods and there will be a pollution mitigation at the base of the flower fields as well as at the
base of the golf course. There will also be structures built into the storm drain system that will absorb oils and
other fluids from cars and nutrients from the fields connecting to the open drain on the west side of Paseo Del
Norte.
Mr. Neu responded to Mr. Payne’s question of when this project went into Planning. Mr. Neu stated at one
point staff was probably overlooking the issue of building height in this particular Planni,ng area and how that
related to the flower fields. Once staff got further into the plan, more focus was placed in this area and
development standards were established. The actual application of this project was submitted in January
1996.
Chairman Compas asked Mr. Neu how he responded to the 160,000 sf. comment made by Mr. Payne. Mr.
Neu answered that the previous Specific Plan that was approved in 1992 designated 10.7 acres as
community commercial and permitted 140,000 square feet of commercial. When the most recent
amendment was approved, the Planning Area was increased from 10.7 to 26.65 acres and square footage
went from 140,000 to 300,000.
Chairman Compas asked the Commission if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Noble queried about the drainage ditch and problems associated with it backing up because of
the reeds that go into the drain at Cannon Lake. Mr. Wojcik said that staff was very aware of the situation
and that improvements had been done to the drainage channel to eradicate such future problems. He added
that this storm drain runs under SDG&E’s property and that the ultimate solution is to get SDG&E to increase
the facility. Commissioner Noble asked if he could call SDG&E the next time the drainage ditch back-ups,
and Mr. Wojcik said SDGbE probably would not agree with that. Commissioner Noble asked who would be
called - Parks & Recreation? Mr. Wojcik said he did not know exactly which department would be the
appropriate department.
Chairman Compas asked for Commission discussion and that the process of making a motion and
amendments get started.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Welshons, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution No. 3965 recommending approval of SDP 96-03, based on the findings and
MINUTES 60
. ,
PLANNING COMMISSION August 7, 1996 Page 10
ACTION:
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ACTION:
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
subject to the conditions contained therein including the errata sheet that was
distributed to Commissioners dated August 7, 1996 regarding Condition No. 42 which
adds number (e) traffic signal at Paseo Del Norte and Cannon Road, and item no. 5 on
the second addendum sheet on the Site Development Plan page 12 Condition 72
should become Condition 65 under a new heading of “General” with all subsequent
conditions renumbered accordingly, and revise Condition No. 18.
Motion by Commissioner Welshons, and duly seconded, to add a new Condition 48 and
renumber thereafter, stating that prior to issuance of building pennits that developer
shall enter into a lien contract with the City for the future design and construction of a
fully actuated traffic signal at the main entrance on Paseo Del Notte.
Commissioner Noble stated that he felt it was necessary that this condition be added
because when you’re heading north on Paseo Del Norte at peak hours and you get
down to Cannon Road, cars are backed up as far as 50 cars.
7-o
Compas, Heineman, Monroy, Nielsen, Noble, Savary, Welshons
None
None
Motion by Commissioner Welshons, and duly seconded, to add a new Condition 48 and
renumber thereafter, stating that prior to issuance of building permits that the developer
shall enter into a lien contract with the City for the future design and construction of a
fully actuated traffic signal at the main entrance on Paseo Del Norte.
7-o
Compas, Heineman, Monroy, Nielsen, Noble, Savary, Welshons
None
None
With regard to tree height, Commissioner Monroy said he had a problem with this because he felt it was
necessary to provide shade to the cars and the landscape. Even at 18’, views of the flower fields will be
obscured from the pedestrian walk of Paseo Del Norte. While Commissioner Monroy believes the height
should be limited, he doesn’t believe it can be lowered enough to have a significant impact. Commissioner
Welshons discouraged putting any restriction on the height because there is an implicit understanding that the
landscaping is necessary, and the trees diffuse the color of the asphalt. Chairman Compas added that the
effort had been made to keep a clear view of the flower fields, but noted that even if a park were created on
Paseo Del Norte, this would make it difficult to see the flower fields from l-5. No amendment was made
regarding tree height.
ACTION: Motion by Chairman Compas, and duly seconded, to restrict the area from grocery
stores and shopping carts in the parking lot.
VOTE: 7-O
AYES: Compas, Heineman, Monroy, Nielsen, Savary, Welshons
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Nielsen, and duly seconded, that the wlors be reviewed by the
Planning Director prior to the full scale application and a sample of a minimum 6’ x 6’ be
reviewed and approved for color at the site.
Asst. City Attorney Rudolf cautioned the Commissioners that the Specific Plan
regarding Planning Area 6 refers to a requirement of the Site Development Plan in
MINUTES Qj\
l .
PLANNING COMMISSION
-
August 7, 1996 Page 11
accordance with Chapter 21.06, except that it has to be ultimately approved by the
Council. In other words, the Commission’s approval or denial power would be just a
recommendory power. While the Commission has the authority to change certain
standards relating to setbacks, height and bulk, fences and walls, regulation of signs,
etc., the last sentence states that the review of the Site Development Plan shall not
include aesthetic aspects such as wlor, texture, materials, or adornments.
Commissioner Heineman said his understanding was that aesthetic decisions were not
the Commission’s, nor were such decisions within the purview, and therefore there
should not be an amendment to that effect.
Commissioner Savary stated that she believed the applicant accepted the idea that he
would reduce the color values of the awnings and she trusted that.
Commissioner Noble stated that while he had a problem with the color of the awnings he
didn’t think it should be handled as a motion, but rather to vote on the item and make a
minute motion to recommend to Council to do what is necessary to encourage the
applicant to use wlors that have been toned.down for the awnings.
Chairman Compas stated that no one wanted to make an amendment on colons.
Commissioner Nielsen disagreed and added that he took exception to the point Mr.
Rudolf made earlier with regard to colors, stating that it was not the Commission’s intent
to dictate color, but in asking for approvals, and he would withdraw the motion.
ACTION: Motion made by Commissioner Monroy to reduce the project by 1 O-l 1% to allow for a
garden. The motion died for lack of a second.
Mr. Wayne asked Commissioners before they went back to the main motion to help staff in drafting the
condition on the grocery store, Mr. Wayne wanted to clarify exactly what the Commission was referring to, i.e.
a full-service grocery store like Vons, Lucky’s, etc. Chairman Compas said he wanted to refer to grocery
stores that had shopping carts. Commissioner Nielsen said the Commission was referring specifically to
shopping carts. Commissioner Welshons said that the applicant had mentioned one tenant that may use
shopping carts, but that the carts would be kept out of the parking lot. Mr. Wayne asked for further
clarification. Mr. Rudolf asked if stores such as Boney’s or other farmers market-type stores were
acceptable. Mr. Neu asked if cart racks for storage would be acceptable. Chairman Compas said no,
shopping carts in the parking are not acceptable. Mr. Rudolf said the Commission needed to be clear about
this. Mr. Wayne asked if the real issue was shopping carts, and Chairman Compas confirmed. Mr. Rudolf
suggested that the Commission inquire of the applicant, while the public and applicant are still present, that
he is clear on this matter. Chairman Compas asked the applicant to return to clarify the matter. The
applicant returned and said he agreed with the Commission’s issue of no shopping carts. He said he would
make a provision that shopping carts could not enter the parking lot. Chairman Compas said bottom line, no
shopping carts in the parking lot. Commissioner Welshons said that an earlier motion had been made and
voted on that there were no grocery stores and no shopping carts. Chairman Compas said to amend the
previous motion and take another vote.
ACTION: Motion made by Chairman Compas, and duly seconded, to do away with “no grocery
stores” from a previous motion.
VOTE: 7-O
AYES: Compas, Heineman, Monroy, Nielsen, Noble, Savary, Welshons
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
MINUTES +’
PLANNING COMMISSION August 7, 1996 Page 12
DISCUSSION:
Commissioner Welshons said she felt it was a very nice project and that the applicant answered all questions.
It was apparent applicant worked closely with staff and team work was evident. She added that it was
unusual to see a project with four sides. She said the project had many pluses and amenities that had been
made. She reminded the applicant that he was on record for the $50,000 for a park, but how this would be
handled would be Up to City COUnCil.
Chairman Compas stated that Commissioner Monroy’s suggestion had a lot of merit and reminded the
applicant that he stated he would work with staff to try and accomplish these goals.
Commissioner Noble said he thought it was a good project and concurred with everything Mr. Forsyth said
earlier in his speech.
Commissioner Nielsen wanted to amplify on Commissioner Monroy’s comments and said he would have
supported the motion made by Commissioner Monroy if the Commission were in the initial stages of this
project, but that at this point it would place an imposition on the developer. Commissioner Nielsen added that
he felt the applicant had done an excellent job of PR in the neighborhood.
Commissioner Monroy stated that it was unfortunate that it was the Commission’s first opportunity to
comment and look at the project, but he realizes this is the process. Commissioner Monroy added that it is
obvious that the developer has worked hard to preserve the view of the flower fields, but the trees that are
essential to the project are what obstructs the view. Further, Commissioner Monroy said he could not support the project the way it is unless there is a better tie to the flower fields.
ACTION: Chairman Compas called for a vote on the main motion.
VOTE: 6-l
AYES: Compas, Heineman, Nielsen, Noble, Savary, Welshons
NOES: Monroy
ABSTAIN: None
September 23, 1996
Steven L. Craig
1500 Quail Street, Suite 510
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Re: Approval of SDP 96-3
The Carlsbad City Council, at its meeting of September 17, 1996, adopted
Resolution No. 96-310, approving SDP 96-3, Carlsbad Company Stores.
Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 96-310 for your files.
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, CM
City Clerk
ALR:ijp
Enclosure
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, California 92008-l 989 - (619) 434-2808
.
’ PROOF OF P”Br,ATION
I (2010 & 2011 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
North County Times
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the
Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of
California, under the dates of June 30, 1989
(Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times-
Advocate) case number 171349 (Blade-Citizen)
and case number 172171 (The Times-Advocate)
for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad,
Solana Beach and the North County Judicial
District; 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 following dates, to-wit:
September 7, 1996
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at California, this 7th day
of September, 1996
UQ w+ -- ------------ ---------- Signatur
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
This spat? for the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
Notice of Hearing SDP96-3 --------------------------
City of Carlsbad
----------_---------------
.
1 .
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
SDP 96-3 - CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
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 6:00 P.M., on Tuesday, September 17, 1996, to consider an application for a Site Development Plan for a 300,000 square foot specialty retail center on 26.65 acres of property generally located at the southeast corner of Paseo De1 Norte and Car Country Drive, in Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, in the Coastal Zone, and in Local Facilities Management Zone 13, and more particularly described as:
Lot 3 of Carlsbad Tract No. 92-7, Carlsbad Ranch Units I and II, per Map No. 13078, and Lot 2 of Carlsbad Tract 94-9.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Don Neu, in the Planning Department, at (619) 438-1161, ext. 4446.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at, or prior to, the public hearing.
APPLICANT: Steven L. Craig PUBLISH: September 7, 1996
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
--
I
\
n
\ PALOMAR AIRPORT RD
CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
SDP 96-03
Ci
h.
Carlsbad
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will
hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, August 7, 1996, to consider a request for a
recommendation of approval of a Site Development Plan for a 300,000 square foot
specialty retail center on 26.65 acres on property generally located at the southeast
corner of Paseo Del Norte and Car Country Drive within Planning Area 6 of the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan in the Coastal Zone and Local Facilities Management
Zone 13 and more particularly described as:
Lot 3 of Carlsbad Tract No. 92-7 Carlsbad Ranch Unit I and II per
Map No. 13078 and Lot 2 of CT 94-09.
Those. persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the
public hearing. Copies ot the staff report will be available on and after July 31, 1996. If
you have any questions, please call Don Neu in the Planning Department at (619) 438-
1 161, extension 4446.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice
or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public
hearing.
CASE FILE: SDP 96-03
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES
PUBLISH: JULY 26, 1996
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 - (619) 438-1161 - FAX (619) 438-0894 6B
C . . I
(Form A)
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROH: DON NEU
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached arc the materials necessary for you to notlde
CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES - SDP 96-03
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of
.
Thank you.
Assistant City Man--
8-20-96
Date
_ _ --^ --
1 ,
.
.
‘
c I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING zc""-Q
8DP 96-3 - CARLSBAD COMPANY BTORES w
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 6:00 P.M., on Tuesday, September 17, 1996, to consider an application for a Site Development Plan for a 300,000 square foot specialty retail center on 26.65 acres of property generally located at the southeast corner of Paseo De1 Norte and Car Country Drive, in
Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, in the Coastal Zone, and in Local Facilities Management Zone 13, and more particularly described as:
Lot 3 of Carlsbad Tract No. 92-7, Carlsbad Ranch Units I and II, per Map No. 13078, and Lot 2 of Carlsbad Tract 94-9.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Don Neu, in the Planning Department, at (619) 438-1161, ext. 4446.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office at, or prior to, the public hearing.
APPLICANT: Steven L. Craig PUBLISH: September 7, 1996
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL n
\ PALOMAR AIRPORT RD
CARLSBAD COMPANY STORES ~~~ . . .-?- . - , .,
SDP 96-03
.
’ I A.. - _-
7
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
8DP 96-3 - CARLSBAD COMPANY 8TORE8
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 6:00 P.M., on Tuesday, September 17, 1996, to consider an application for a Site Development Plan for a 300,000 square foot specialty retail center on 26.65 acres of property generally located at the southeast corner of Paseo De1 Norte and Car Country Drive, in Planning Area 6 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, in the Coastal Zone, and in Local Facilities Management Zone 13, and more particularly described as:
Lot 3 of Carlsbad Tract No. 92-7, Carlsbad Ranch Units
I and II, per Map No. 13078, and Lot 2 of Carlsbad Tract 94-9.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Don Neu, in the Planning Department, at (619) 438-1161, ext. 4446,.
If you challenge the Site Development Plan in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad City Clerk's Office-at, or prior to, the public hearing.
APPLICANT: Steven L. Craig PUBLISH: September 7, 1996
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
/JAcR[EmbANEp8TElf9 I’
3965 Hfilhland Dr.
carlsbad,CA 92008
L .
.
'CB. RANCH ENTERPRISES
STE 100
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
-
CARLSBAD RANCH CO
C/O CHRISTOPHER C CALKINS
STE 100
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARPENTERS PENSION TRUST FOR SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
C/O CARPENTERS SOUTHERN CA ADMN
520 S VIRGIL AVE
LOS ANGELES CA 90020
C PENTERS PENSION TRUST FOR SOUTHERN
~~;ERN CA ADMN
BROOKING DORIS TR
SILLERS ARCHIE & VERNA M LIVING TRUST
375 SKYLINE DRIVE
VISTA CA 92084
HOEN ASSOCIATES II
5566 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DIRTTA INVESTMENTS
C/O DAN HONEYCUTT
PO BOX 94303
PASADENA CA 91109
CARLSBAD RANCH CO
C/O CARLTAS CO
STE 100
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD PROPERTIES INC
C/O CARPENTERS SOUTHERN CA ADMN
520 S VIRGIL AVE
LOS ANGELES CA 90020
CARPENTERS PENSION TRUST FOR SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA
520 S VIRGIL AVE
LOS ANGELES CA 90020
DIXON VINCENT R
5555 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SHARP FAMILY LTD PTNSHP
C/O CHRYSLER REALTY
800 CHRYSLER DR
AUBURN HILLS MI 48326
HOEN GROUP THE
5454 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
-
.
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST
801 PINE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SAN DIEGUITO SCHOOL DIST
701 ENCINITAS BLVD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
VALLECITOS WATER DIST
788 SAN MARCOS BLVD
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
CALIF DEPT OF FISH 81 GAME
SUITE 50
330 GOLDENSHORE
LONG BEACH CA 90802
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
CITY OF CARLSBAD
ENGINEERING DEPT
SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DIST
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
LEUCADIA CNTY WATER DIST
1960 LA COSTA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SD COUNTY PLANNING
SUITE B
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NORTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
ENCINITAS SCHOOL DIST
101 SO RANCH0 SANTA FE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
OLIVENHAIN WATER DIST
1966 OLIVENHAIN RD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF ENCINITAS
505 S VULCAN AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF VISTA
PO BOX 1988
VISTA CA 92085
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY SANDAG
SUITE B SUITE 800
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD 400 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-l 331 SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COMMUNITY SERVICES
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
PROJECT PLANNER -_
’ ‘I \ ) \,,c ( i ‘.. .I’_
A
* ?
I-EGO MAILING LABLES AHLES, STEVE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DIST
INTERESTED PARTIES LIST (2196) PO BOX 682 ANDREW HAMILTON
H:\ADMIN\CORR\DNEU\LEGO\LE CARDIFF CA 92007 9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
GO MAILING LABELS 2 SAN DIEGO CA 92123
MAPADLER, ALICE ALFREDOS DOS ALLEN, JANE
6905 PEAR TREE DR 6030 PASEO DEL NORTE 5525 VICTORIA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3939 CARLSBAD CA 92008 RIVERSIDE CA 92506
ALEXANDER, GERRI ALVAREZ, JESS AMEIGEIRAS, PAIGE
PO BOX 1396 1220 STRATFORD LANE 4320 STANFORD ST
BORREGO SPRINGS CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008
ALTMAN, JANE ANDERSON, JULIE ANDERSON, ANGELICA
2387 TERRAZA GUITARA 6913 BLUE ORCHID LN 3075 BLENKARNE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008
AMERICAN OCCUPATIONAL MED ANSPACH, KAREN AOM
SUITE A 2343 TERRAZA GUITARA ROBERT CLIFFORD
5810 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009-6624 5810A EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92069 CARLSBAD CA 92009
ANDRE, JEANETTE
7303 LINDEN TERRACE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
REGULATORY BRANCH
10845 RANCH0 BERNARD0 RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92127
AVE RESIDENCE
868 MARIGOLD CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3822
ARMSTRONG, RUSSELL BAJADA, LARRY BAKER, LARRY
4006 SIERRA MORENA AVE 4461 GLADSTONE CT 614 NAVIGATOR CT
CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92009
AYCOCK RESIDENCE
1721 BONITA LN
CARLSBAD CA 92008-I 147
BARNES, TOM
7304 AZALEA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
BASMADJIAN, EDWARD
6559 CAMINO DEL PARQUE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
BARNES, BARBARA BEHRHORST, JACQUELINE BELKO, WILLIAM
7128 LANTANA TERRACE 2696 WATERBURY WAY 2005 PINTORESCO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARSLBAD CA 92009
BEAVER, JANE
6677A PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
BELL FAMILY PARTNERS
PO BOX 151
ANAHEIM CA 92815
BELLINGTON, JIM
7447 BATIQUITOS DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
h
BE.LL, STEPHEN
PO BOX 2125
BEAUMONT CA 92223
BENTSON, KRISTINA
SUITE 530
4275 EXECUTIVE SQUARE
LA JOLLA CA 92037
BENTLEY, DAVID BEYER RESIDENCE
SUITE 221 1854 TULE CT
3573 EAST SUNRISE DR CARLSBAD CA 92009-5138
TUCSON AZ 85718
BERGMAN, CARL BLEHA, PAT
2677 REGENT RD 3209 FOSCA ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92009
BILLADO, MARIJON BOSCO, JOSEPH
4021 ARCADIA WAY 2128 SUBIDA TERRACE
OCEANSIDE CA 92056 CARLSBAD CA 92009
BORNEMANN RESIDENCE BOYLAN, KAREN
1620 BITTERN CT 3213 VIA PESCADO
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008
BOWEN, J.T. BRODSKY, EDWARD
4060 SUNNYHILL DR PO BOX 768
CARLSBAD CA 92008 PALM SPRINGS CA 92263
BRETZLAFF, R.L. BRUCKNER, LESLIE
7787 PALENQUE ST SUITE 307
CARLSBAD CA 92009 1325 VALLEY VIEW RD
GLENDALE CA 91202-1737
BROWNING, MONICA CALABRESE, DALE
6855 VIA VERANO 1012 HOME AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008
BURNS, ELLEN CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL
6837 WATERCOURSE DR DISTRICT
CARLSBAD CA 92009 801 PINE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD VILLAGE AUTO BODY CARLSON, SHIRLEY
& PAINT 2642 HILLSBORO CT
3191 TYLER ST CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD CA 92008
EASLAND, RL
BERG, BOB
PO BOX 4024
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
BIDDLE, VONNA
1442 SWEETBRIAR CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
BOHLIM, JUDY
5140 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BOVAY, JULIE
2577 REGENT RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BRAVENDER, JOANNA
3952 JEFFERSON ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BROWN, ALICE
5157 SHORE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BRUSSEAU, SCO-lT
SUITE 350
5050 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CALSBEEK, JERRY
4647 E WASHINGTON BLVD
COMMERCE CA 90040
CARLSBAD ARTS OFFICE
CARLSON, BEATRICE
3390 ADAMS ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD CITY LIBRARY
REFERENCE DEPARTMENT
1250 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLTAS
SUITE 100
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CHANG, JAMES
MIEKO, BANDAI
4520 SALISBURY DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CHUNN, SUSAN
6835 CARNATION DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CLARK, VIOLET
4740 BIRCHWOOD CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
COOMBS RESIDENCE
1010 DAISY CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CPS PRINTING
CHRIS SOMMER
2304 FARADAY AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DAME RESIDENCE
7726 PALACIO DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DEFREITAS, GENE
3425 COVALLIS ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DONIGAN, JOE
7712 ROMERIA ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DOUGLAS, LARRY
7505 BRAVA ST
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
PO BOX 1604
CARLSBAD CA 92018-l 605
CHRISTENSEN, CHRIS & KAY
4026 GARFIELD ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
PLANNING DIRECTOR
300 N COAST HIGHWAY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
CLARKE, SHERI
811 WINDWARD LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CORTE, NORA
2507 LA GOLONDRINA ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4319
DACOSTA, DAVID
2922 VIA IPANEMA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DE JONG, ERIC
1308 PINE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DEWHURST, DON
3425 SEACREST DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DOYLE, MARK
4525 SUNNYHILL DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DUNBAR, R
5257 SHORE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CHAN, CLAUDE
1726 BLACKBIRD CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CHRISTOPH, C
1852 LOTUS CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CLARK, BOB
PO BOX 230566
ENCINITAS CA 92023
CONROY RESIDENCE
3334 SEACREST DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
COURTNEY, MIKE
5217 LOS ROBLES DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DAINTY, JOAN
SUITE 100
7030 AVE ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DEBAUN, LESTER
345’0 CORVALLIS ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DOMINGUEZ, BILL
4378 ADAMS ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008-4203
DRESSELHAUS, PATRICIA
2359 PI0 PICO DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
DUVICK, RICHARD
APT C
7335 ALICANTE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
- . .
‘DUJiAMEL, LOUISE
7772 PENDON CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DYCHE, JAMES
2566 S CENTRAL AVE
FLAGLER BEACH FL 32136
EDGEMON, CRIAG
1212 HYMETTUS AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
ELECTRA-MEDIA
PO BOX 3023
MANHATTAN BCH CA 90266
ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL
DISTRICT
101 S RANCH0 SANTA FE RD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
ENRIGHT, MICHAEL
72 FREMONT PL
LOS ANGELES CA 90005
FEARY, MAUREEN
2150 SUNSET BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92103
FIRST NATIONAL BANK
JOE SIMMONS
2365 MARRON RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FORD, SANYA
3322 PIRAGUA ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7841
FOUR-SHER DEVELOPMENT
SUITE 202
990 HIGHLAND DR
SOLANA BEACH CA 92075
-
EARNEST, ROBERT
7016 SNAPDRAGON DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
EDWARDS, BRUCE
3445 RIDGECREST DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008-2031
ELMENDORF, FRED
7121 MANZANITA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ENG RESIDENCE
6809 BRIARWOOD DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
EPSTEIN, JACKIE
3965 HIGHLAND DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FELTON, RP
4803 NEBLINA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FOLAND, JUDY
7555 ROMERIA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
FORMA
SUITE 250
8910 UNIVERSITY CTR LN
SAN DIEGO CA 92122
FOX, AW
2454 UNICORN10 ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
FULLER, MARGARET
4550 LA PORTAlADA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
EATON, N
SUITE 108A - 347
300 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
EIDELSON, LAURA
13144 JANETTA PL
SAN DIEGO CA 92130
ENCINA WASTEWATER
AUTHORITY
6200 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ENGELHARD, WILLARD
3484 DON LORENZO DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ESCOBEDO, OFELIA
3292 ROOSEVELT ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FIKES, JC
2371 BUENA VISTA CIRCLE
CARLSBAD CA 92008-I 604
FORBES& DONNA
7086 PRIMENTEL LANE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
FOUR SEASONS RESORT
SUITE 109
2796 LOKER AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FRENCH, GORDON
2913 LANCASTER RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008-6568
GAFFNEY, JEFFREY
7038 VIA CABANA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
. .
-
FRIENDS OF CARRILLO RANCH GALLUP, TOM
2622 EL AGUILA LN 2725 LYONS CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008-2127
GALLUP, DOLORES GA-l-l-1 RESIDENCE
2725 LYONS CT 1407 SANTIAGO DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
GASCOGNE, MELANIE
2620 MALLORCA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GERHARD, ANDREW
7008 ESTRELLA DE MAR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GEE RESIDENCE
2727 SPOKANE WY
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GIROUX, JOHN
SUITE A68-320
800 GRAND AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GILMORE, RUBY GOULD, MACK
2617 FIRE MTN DR 3320 CADENCIA ST
OCEANSIDE CA 92054-6164 CARLSBAD CA 92009-7808
GORDON, JOHN
711OAZALEA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GRINGLE, PAUL
2705 VIA JUANITA WY
CARLSBAD CA 92008-8351
GRIMM, MAXINE GRUBBS RESIDENCE
2535 CORTE CASITAS 3257 GARFIELD ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-5816 CARLSBAD CA 92008
GRUBB & ELLIS CO. HANSEN, DARIAN
SUITE 100 3296 AVENI DA ANACAPA
1921 PALOMAR OAKS WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HAMLIN, ROBERT
4543 CHANCERY COURT
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HARTMAN RESIDENCE
6744 CAMINO DEL PRADO
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3311
GARDNER RESIDENCE
3450 WOODLAND WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GAUKELS RESIDENCE
6964 SANDCASTLE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GILLASPIE, ROBIN
813 CAMINITO DEL SOL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GITTELSON RESIDENCE
6563 VIA BARONA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GREENWALD, MARILYN
2000 TUSTIN AVE
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
GROSSE, MARY
5850 SUNNY CREEK RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HALLORAN, JOSEPH
2805 FOREST VIEW WY
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HARLOW RESIDENCE
SUITE D
7523 JEREZ CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HARVEY, DIANA
SUITE 108A252
300 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008-2999
- h
- : .
,HAVENS RESIDENCE
2139 ARCHDALE ST
RIVERSIDE CA 92506
HENDERSON, JACK
7408 LANTANA TERRACE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HENRISH CARMEN, SUSAN
2739 BANNER
DEARBORN Ml 48124
HEINZE, KIMBERLY
APT C
7349 ALICANTE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HIGGINS, MICHAEL
87 NORTH RAYMOND
PASADENA CA 91103
HILL, JACK
4264 SKYLINE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HERTEL, JOSEPH
SUITE 307
5030 CAMINO DE LA SIESTA
SAN DIEGO CA 92130
HILL, BERNICE
2984 RIDGEFIELD AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HILLMAN PROPERTIES
SUITE 206
2011 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HILL RESIDENCE
3221 CALLE VALLARTA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HOENIGMAN RESIDENCE
2207 RECODO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HOODY, REGINA
9454 JONES ST
OMAHA NE 68114
HIRSCHORN, GERALD
7320 MUSLO LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HORTON RESIDENCE
SUITE 104-255
7040 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HOSSEINZADEH, DAN
3 HUGHES
IRVINE CA 92718
HOPKINS, ANNA
3020 BLENKARNE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HUBER, GENE
6407 EL PAT0 CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HUEBNER, PETER
3461 CORVALLIS ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HOUSER RESIDENCE
6703 ANTILOPE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HUMPHREY, J
2824 HIGHLAND DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HUMPHREYS, MARY
2604 VIA BOCAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008-l 381
HUGHES, N
4815 VIGILANT WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HYNAN, LYNDA
26432 BODEGA LN
MISSION VIEJO CA 92691
HYNES, TIM
4613 BUCKINGHAM LN
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HYDROSCAPE PRODUCTS
33012 CALLE AVIADOR
SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CA
92675
IREMONGER, VERA
SUITE 206
4572 VIA MARINA
MARINA DEL REY CA 90292
ISLAND GIRL
2603B EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
INDRIERI, DOROTHY
4992 VIA MARTA
CARLSBAD CA 92008
JACOBS, RICHARD
2726 CHESTNUT AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008-2125
JOHNSON, STANWOOD
7209 LINDEN TERRACE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
- ? ,
* IT’S ABOUT TIME
7ii340 HWY 111
PALM DESERT CA 92260
JOHNSON RESIDENCE
5031 TIERRA DEL OR0
CARLSBAD CA 92008
JOHNSON, CONNIE
1749 FOREST AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
JONES, GWEN
3515 HIGHLAND DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008-2527
KEARNS, MARY
809 WINDCREST DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KELM RESIDENCE
7319 E ALICANTE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KIESNER RESIDENCE
7925 AVENIDA DIESTRO
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KINKO’S COPY CENTER
JENNIFER ROBERTSON
1921 W SAN MARCOS BLVD
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
KNEPPER, DONALD
7247 ESFERA STREET
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7818
KOLDEN, JOHN R.
IO BLUE JAY
ALISOVIEJO CA 92656
JOHNSON, EDMOND
3211 IBSEN ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92106-1434
JONES RESIDENCE
6721 RUSSELIA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KAPIN, HERB & DOROTHY
6729 OLEANDER WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KELLEY, KENNETH
6538 CAMINO DEL PARQUE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2465
KENDALL, BARBARA
7103 LANTANA TERR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KIM RESIDENCE
7633 RUSTIC0 DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7919
h
KITZMILLER, JR
1488 WINDY MTN RD
WESTLAKE VILLAGE CA 91362
KNOX, PAT
2002 PINTORESCO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KRASNER, PAUL
16439 HARLOWE LN
HUNTINGTON BCH CA 92649
KRISTAL, HAROLD
3602 KINGSTON ST
LAMSON, SUSAN
PO BOX 2329
RANCH0 SANTA FE CA 92067
JOHNSON RESIDENCE
3344 CAMINO CORONADO
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JONES, RICCI
3620 AZURE CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KATICK, SALLY
4179 HIGHLAND DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KELLY RESIDENCE
6728 LUCIERNAGA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KENT, ALAN
6438 LA GARZA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4318
KIMBLER, JUDY
23458 ALTISMA WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KLATCHKO & KLATCHKO
177 S CIVIC DR
PALM SPRINGS CA 92262
KLOSS, CARL
APT 2
KOHNS, ROBERT
7959 CALLE POSADA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
KUBOTA, JACK
PO BQX 1095
CARLSBAD CA 92018
LANDA, STEVEN
7004 VIA PADILLA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LAWLER, STEVEN
3515 VALLEY ST
1
LAATSCH RklDENCE LEE, MIMI LEE RESIDENCE
321‘9 FOSCA ST 5924 BALFOUR CT 7232 DURANGO CIRCLE
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92009
LECAKES, DOREEN LERNER, MIRIAM LEVY, MARILYN
3531 LANDSFORD WAY 3355 CONCORD ST 7632 REPOSADO DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008-l 361 CARLSBAD CA 92009
LEFTON, DAVID LINNERTZ, TERRY & KAREN
6019 PASEO DEL NORTE 3383 GARIBALDI PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008
LIVINGSTONE, RITA
3028 HEMLOCK AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
LINEHAN, DONNA LOHMAN, GREG LONG RESIDENCE
4325 SEA BRIGHT DR 1725 CATALPA RD 3270 CAMINO CORONADO
CARLSBAD CA 92008-3627 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009
LOCKElT, RANDY
391 TAMARACK AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008-4064
LOPEZ, ROBERT
7912 TERRAZA DISOMA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LORENTSEN, FRED
4866 PARK DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008-3811
LOO, DAVID
7267 SPOONBILL LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LOW, RICHARD LUTZ, ANNA
3255 MCKINLEY STREET 4629 BUCKINGHAM LN
CARLSBAD CA 92008-I 923 CARLSBAD CA 92008
LOVULLO RESIDENCE MACLACHLAN, D.D. MALDONADO, DAVE
16825 BAJIO RD 7035 SNAPDRAGON DR 6816 ZINNIA CT
ENCINO CA 91436 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009
MACKEY, DORIS MARIOS, H MARKETING STRATEGIES
4721 AMBERWOOD CT 7752 MADRILENA WAY SUITE 2D
CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92009 7750 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MARCUS, MARY MARTICH, MARGE MARTYNS, LEONARD ,
6741 RUSSELIA CT 2657 VANCOUVER ST 635 E LEADORA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3339 CARLSBAD CA 92008 GLENDORA CA 91741
MARSH, OGDEN MCDANIEL, BEVERLY MCDONOUGH RESIDENCE
4306 HORIZON DR 1023 DAISY AVE 6831 MAPLE LEAF DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008-3652 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009
- - :, .
‘MAFTNY, MARCELA
1714 CATALPA RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MCGEE RESIDENCE
905 POPPY LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MCNALLY, JOHN
4755 BRYCE CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MEC ANALYTICAL SYSTEMS
ANNIE COPPOCK
2433 IMPALA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MENARD, RAYMOND III
4303 SIERRA MORENA
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MESKIN, HARVE
2733 LEVANTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MICKLEY RESIDENCE
4835 ARGOSY LN
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MILLER, JIM
3107 LEVANTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MIRELL, CONSTANCE
1713 CAMINO DE LA COSTA
REDONDO BCH CA 90277
MIZUNO, NATSUKO
6873 CARNATION DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MCKAY, GINGER
908 POPPY LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MCNULTY RESIDENCE
5156 CARLSBAD BLVD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MELILLO, NICK
3746 LONGVIEW DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MENEI RESIDENCE
734 ROGUE ISLE CT
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MESSINA, RALPH
4620 LAPORTALADA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MILES, CD
7016 LANTANA TERRACE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MILLER, LEON
3750 NAUTICAL DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MITCHELL RESIDENCE
6912 THRUSH PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MOFFAT FOR CITY COUNCIL
SUITE 9
2645 CARLSBAD BLVD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MORONG, T.M.
6747 NEPEZA WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MCKINNON, RL
7591 DEHESA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7704
MEC ANALYTICAL SYSTEMS
2433 IMPALA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MELLANO, MIKE
PO BOX 100
SAN LUIS REY CA 92068
MERGOITH, MARY
SUITE U177
315 FIRST ST
ENCINITAS CA 92024
MICHAELSON, LEWIS
13850 DAVENPORT AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92129
MILLER, LINDA
4007 ISLE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MILLIKEN, FLORENCE
4062-A GARFIELD ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MIZE, HAROLD
7125 SANTA BARBARA
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4630
MORGAN, JAYNA
SUITE 450
1920 MAIN ST
IRVINE CA 92714
MORROW DEVELOPMENT INC
PO BOX 9000-685
CARLSBAD CA 92018-9000
‘MORIN, ELIZABETH NAKAMURA, JAMES NASH, CLAUDE
4805 KELLY DR 2235 JANIS WAY 2957 GREENWICH ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008-3734 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008
MULLEN RESIDENCE NAUGLER RESIDENCE
2617 OCEAN ST 4010 SUNNYHlLLdR
CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008
NASH, SPENCER
PO BOX 2173
LEUCADIA CA 92024
NEGLIA, BART
1060 WIEGAND ST
OLIVENHAIN CA 92024
NEEDHAM RESIDENCE NORTH COUNTY TIMES
7922 CALLE SAN FELIPE COLIN HALEY
CARLSBAD CA 92009 1722 SOUTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
NORRIS, KATHLEEN NSDC ASSOC OF REALTORS
2327-4 CARINGA WY 754 SECOND ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-6344 ENCINITAS CA 92024
NOTRICA, SOLOMON OERUM, JOHN
926 ALYSSUM RD 2618 LA GOLONDRINA ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009-4322
O’HARA, JAMES
6545 VIA BARONA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ORTIZ, PEARL
7361 LINDSEY AVE
PICO RIVERA CA 90660
OGDEN, JEAN PAKULA RESIDENCE
2634 LEVANTE ST 1804 COTTONWOOD AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009-5140
OWPNICK, SUSAN
TAYLOR, DEE & JOHN
241 OLIVE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PARKER RESIDENCE
2620 ACUNA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PALOMAR TEXACO PASHLEY, BE-l-l-Y
MARK CONGER 2203 CAMEO RD
665 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD CA 92009
NEBLETT-, WILL
856 BLUEBELL CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
NEU, JOHN
CITY OF VISTA
PO BOX 1988
VISTA CA 92085
NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT
DISTRICT
311 S TREMONT
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
O’BRIEN RESIDENCE
4774 GATESHEAD RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
OGASAWARA, KOICHI
7509 GARDEN GROVE AVE
RESEDA CA 91335
OVEBECK, TINA
7030 EL FUERTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PALMER, WILLIAM
6642 TOWHEE LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PARKER, ALAN DALE
3111 LA COSTA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PAVIA, PAT
3352 STILLWATER CT
CARLSBAD CA 92008
-
‘PASCOE, STEPHEN
6888 SHEARWATERS DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3703
PAYNE, ROBERT
PO BOX 3073
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PERAINO, TONY
2105 BASSWOOD AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PAWLOWICZ RESIDENCE
4625 BUCKINGHAM LN
CARLSBAD CA 92008-6402
PERLMAN, MARC
SUITE 100
10179 HUENNEKENS ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92121
PESCHKE, BERNARD
812 CAMINITO DEL MAR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PERKINS, KENNETH
6406 CAMINO DEL PARQUE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PETTINE, ROSE
4405 TRIESTE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PHILLIPS, C.N.
2997 VIA DE PAZ
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PETERS, DEBBIE
911 ORCHID WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PLANNING SYSTEMS
SUITE 100
2111 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PLATT, JOSEPH
452WllTHST
CLAREMONT CA 91711
PINES, DARRELL
2011 LEE CT
CARLSBAD CA 92008
POLLAK, RICHARD
7520A JEREZ CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7440
PONSEGGI, BERNARD
6947 WHITECAP DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3747
PLAZA CAMINO REAL
SUITE 100
2525 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
POWERS, ELLEN
7063 ROCKROSE TERR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
PRITTEN, JOANNE
330 CHINQUAPIN
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PORTER, BARBARA
4605 DRIFTWOOD CIRCLE
CARLSBAD CA 92008-3717
PURDY, BILL
3402 SANTA CLARA WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PYNES, SUSAN
2746 INVERNESS DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PROKOP, JOHN
6422 CAMINO DEL PARQUE
CARLSBAD CA 92009-2463
RCD OF GREATER SAN DIEGO
PATTY MCDUFFEE
332 S JUNIPER ST
ESCONDIDO CA 92025
REAGLE, HAROLD
6731 RUSSELIA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3338
RAICEVIC RESIDENCE
2932 AVENIDA VALERA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
REED, JOE
7024 ROCKROSE TERRACE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
REICH, MARY
7610 PRIMAVERA WY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
REDDING RESIDENCE
2246 JANIS WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92008
REISER, CHRIS
2634 HALF DOME PL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
RHODES, FRED
7738 LUCIA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
-
. .
RE(FF: OLIVIA
2211 CALLE CIDRA
SAN CLEMENTE CA 92673
RICKS, VIRGINIA
919 MARGUERITE LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RIJ RESIDENCE
811 CAMINITO VERDE
CARSLBAD CA 92009
RHODES RESIDENCE
SUITE IH
2517 NAVARRA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ROAMR, MICHAEL
73 SOUTH PEAK DR
LAGUNA NIGUEL CA 92677
ROBERTS, BARBARA
6936 DUSTY ROSE PL
CARLSAD CA 92009
RJM DESIGN GROUP
SUITE 250
27285 LAS RAMBLAS
MISSION VIEJO CA 92691
ROBINSON, ESTHER
4178 HIGHLAND DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
RODGERS, GEORGE
6749 RUSSELIA CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ROBINSON, R.R.
2531 STATE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ROSE RESIDENCE
1060 CHESTNUT AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ROSE, D./K. LITTLE/J. LARKIN
P.O. BOX 1831
SAN DIEGO CA 92112-4150
ROGERS, CHUCK
1892 AVOCADO RD
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
ROYCE, ROBERT
PO BOX 6720
KETCHUM ID 83340
RUSSEL W GROSSE DEV
SUITE A
5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ROSENBAUM, WAYNE
3212 CELINDA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SAN DIEGO UNION TRIBUNE
AGNES ROLETTI
3156 VISTA WAY
OCEANSIDE CA 92056
SCALICE, ELIZABETH
5540 EL ARBOL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SALTZMAN, MARCIA
299 VIA SARASAN
ENCINITAS CA 92024
SCHARER, RANDEE
5914 SO LE DOUX RD
LOS ANGELES CA 90056
SCHESSLER, DEAN-ROSS
7525 GIBRALTAR ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-7460
SCHAD, HERBERT
338A HACKENSACK ST
WOODRIDGE NJ 07075
SCHLONSKY, K.J.
PO BOX 2725
CARLSBAD CA 92018
SCHREIBER, DALE
7290 PONTO DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SCHILLING, WILLIAM
PO BOX 417
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SCHWEITZER, VANCE
4650 TRIESTE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SDGE
SUITE 1428
5865 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008-4467
SCHULZ, K.R.
2648 MARMOL CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SHAH, KEN
_ CARLSBAD LODGE
3570 PI0 PICO DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SHANER, M
7204 LINDEN TERR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-4719
- . : .
‘SEAL RESIDENCE
2738 BERKELEY AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
h
SHAW, ROBERT
13751 GLADSTONE
SYLMAR CA 91342
SHEEN, THEOPA
4734 BIRCHWOOD CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SHARP, CORY
SUITE K
1317 SIMPSON WAY
ESCONDIDO CA 92029
SHERR RESIDENCE
1432 SWEETBRIAR CIR
CALRSBAD CA 92009
SHOURDS, MARIA
2628 MALLORCA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SHEETS, MADELYN
6725 CLOVER CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SIMPSON, CHRISTINE
7361 ALICANTE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SIMUN, RV
1019 LONGWOOD ST
LOS ANGELES CA 90019
SIM RETIREMENT CENTER
1400 FLAME TREE LANE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SISCO, LARRY
SUITE 100
5050 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SMITH RESIDENCE
4465 HIGHLAND DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SINGLETON, JOANNE
SUITE 26
20 OCEAN PARK BLVD
SANTA MONICA CA 90405
SOOHOO, HENRY
3682 HERMAN AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92104
SOPER, LINDA
3700 TRIESTE DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SMOLIN, VESSI
7156 TERN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SPANJIAN, R.S.
7315 EL FUERTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SPELLMAN, NEIL
3623 CHESHIRE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SPADA, FRED
4562 CAPE CODE CIRCLE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SPENCER RESIDENCE
4744 SUNBURST RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ST. AUSTIN
2438 UNICORN10 ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009-5320
SPENCER, J.J.
2588-D EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
STALEY, HUGH
3542 HASTINGS DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
STEPHAN RESIDENCE
4005 SYME DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ST. MARIE, STEVE
907 ALYSSUM RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
STEPHENS RESIDENCE
6813 SHEARWATERS DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
STEPP, JAMES T.
7107 AZALEA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
STEPHENS, ROSEMARY
4345 SUNNYHILL DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
STILLWELL, P.
3170 FALCON DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
STOLBERG, ROGER
2321 MARCA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92169
c4 . J .
STEVENS, EVERE-IT
3619 HAVERHILL ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008-2175
STUART RESIDENCE
3512 CELINDA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SULLIVAN, THOMAS
803 WIINDCREST DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SWANK, GERALD
1413 SWEETBRIAR CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
TAYLOR, CATHERINE
2564 CARLSBAD BLVD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
TELL, DARRYL & KATHY
2611 HIGHLAND DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
THOMPSON, WILLIAM
PO BOX 1601
OXNARD CA 93032
TULLOCH, BRIAN
7314 BORLA PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
UNION PACIFIC
SUITE 211
2945 HARDING ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
VASQUEZ, ERNIE
SUITE B
2444 SACADA CIR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SUCHOR, KATHLEEN
4507 ST GEORGE CT
CARLSBAD CA 92008-2880
SUNDERLAND, SHIRLEY
6919 SANDCASTLE DR
CARSLBAD CA 92009-3733
TANICO, SHEILA
2412-A ALTISMA WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
-
TAYLOR, LESTER
755 ALMA DR
PACIFIC PALISADES CA 90272
THE BLACKMORE CO
RONALD CLYDE
12626 HIGH BLUFF DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92130
TOSTO RESIDENCE
4904 VIA AREQUIPA
CARLSBAD CA 92008
TURNER, DAVID
1024 HYMETTUS AVE
LEUCADIA CA 92024
VALENTI, JOE
3491 LAWRENCE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
VILLAGE FAIRE
SUITE 108A331
300 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
WADDS, ANDREA
2804 VIA MAGIA
CARLSBAD CA 92008-I 345
SUGG, WILLIAM
2010 PINRORESCO CT
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SUNSET SENIOR APTS
PO BOX 5498
SAN CLEMENTE CA 92674
TATE, NORMA
16455 SOUTH 15TH STREET
PHOENIX AZ 85048
TECHBILT CONST CORP
TED TCHANG
PO BOX 80036
SAN DIEGO CA 92138
THOMAS, DAVID
7318 BLACK SWAN PL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
TROTT, KENNETH
DEPT. OF CONSERVATION
MS 13-71
801 K STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
TUTTERROW, ELAINE
4625 TRIESTE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
VAN EGMOND, P.J.
6833 PEAR TREE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009-3937
VI NZANT, MARIAN
5234 CARLSBAD BLVD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
WARD, DALE
2209 PLAZA DE LAS FLORES
CARLSBAD CA 92009
i’OLL, CLYDE
2938 AVENIDA THERESA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WARRICK, WILLIAM
7521 NAVIGATOR CIRCLE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WATT HOMES
SUITE 200
27720 JEFFERSON AVE
TEMECULA CA 92590
WHIPPLE RESIDENCE
4858 KELLY DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
WILLIAMS, RICHARD
2702 JACARANDA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ZIEGLER, RAYMOND
3110 VIA SOMBRA
CARLSBAD CA 92008
WASSEM, RAND
SUITE EB5C
101 ASH ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
WEATHERS, STEVE
SUITE 1850
701 BST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
WILLIAMS, GARY
943 DAISY AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WILSON, DONALD
3110 LEVANTE ST
CARLSBAD CA 92009
ZIGRANG, DAVID
7031 COLUBINE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92009
DAN POWELL
208 SOUTH RIOS AVE
SOLANA BEACH CA 92075
WATKINS, DON
3778 SKYLINE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
WESTFIELD CORP INC
SUITE 1200
11601 WILSHIRE BLVD
LOS ANGELES CA 90025
WILLIAMS, DON
3162 CARLSBAD BLVD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
YOUNG, JIM
3951 PARK DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
THE BEVERIDGE FAMILY
1642 MARBELLOC DRIVE
VISTA CA 92083