Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-04-07; City Council; 14624; Carlsbad Ranch Lots 9 And 10Cl); OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA b?LL /I3 hgIQ I AB# 14,624 TITLE- -- DEPT. HD. APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION MTG. &./.I f3.B APPROVAL OF SDP 97-14 CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 9 AND 10 DEPT. ENG RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council adopt City Council Resolution No. 98-99 denying the appeal and upholding Planning Commission decision to approve SDP 97-14 without removing Condition No. 37 requested by the appellant. ITEM EXPLANATION: On January 21, 1998, the Planning Commission approved Carlsbad Ranch Lots 9 and 10 at a regularly scheduled public hearing. The decision for approval was made after consideration and discussion of issues presented in the staff report, by the public in attendance and Commission members. The condition under appeal was discussed at that hearing. At the Planning Commission hearing, an addendum sheet with Condition No. 37 was submitted. The wording for that condition reads as follows: “This project is within the proposed boundary of the Cannon Road West Bridge and Thoroughfare Fee District. This project is required to pay a fair share contribution toward the construction of Cannon Road in accordance with the proposed fee program. Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City providing that, if the fee district has not been formed prior to issuance of building permits for the project, the owner shall pay a fee, in an amount currently estimated to be $210 per ADT attributable to the project, subject to potential increases or decreases at time of building permit (and correspondingly increased fee, or reimbursement), and shall enter into an agreement with the City not to oppose the formation of a fee district and pay the projects fair share contribution towards the construction of Cannon Road in accordance with that future adopted fee program.” That condition comes from the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13 in which this project is located. On January 30, 1998, the appeal was submitted to the City Clerk’s office regarding Condition No. 37. On Page 112 of the zone plan, for Zone 13, the construction of Cannon Road to full major arterial standards from the eastern zone boundary to El Camino Real is required. The timing specified in the zone plan reads “prior to recordation of a final map, issuance of a grading or building permit, whichever occurs first for any project within sub-areas TR-1 , TR-2, O/PI-l, or O/PI-2, of Zone 13, if the City Engineer determines that this improvement is necessary to maintain the Growth Management circulation standard, the developer of that sub-area shall financially guarantee its construction as set forth in the financing section of this plan.” The financing section shows on Exhibit 35 on Page 113, a facilities financing matrix for this facility. This matrix summarizes this individual project to be financed, its estimated cost and timing of construction, the estimated budgeted CIP money available for the facility, and the future funding options. On Page 113 of the zone plan, Exhibit 35 calls out the Cannon Road improvements from the easterly zone boundary to El Camino Real to have multiple funding options which include TransNet/CFD No. l/Fee Program/Developer funding. Several other developments within the proposed fee district have already paid their estimated fees and have signed the required agreement. Those projects include GIA on Lot 11 of the Carlsbad Ranch, Evans Point, Eagle Canyon, and Carlsbad Research Center Unit 5. Lots 9 and 10 are within sub-area O/PI-2 as identified in the zone plan. The City Engineer has made the determination that the improvement is necessary to maintain the Growth Management circulation performance standard because of the traffic congestion on Palomar Airport Road at the l-5 northbound on-ramp and the Palomar Airport Road and Paseo Del Norte intersection. Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 14.634 The requirement for payment of the fee is also noted on the recorded tract map, CT 94-09 Units 2 and 3, which contains the project lots. The wording on the recorded map states “The payment of Cannon Road West Bridge and Thoroughfare District fees are due at the time of building permit issuance”. This note and others on the final map were specifically called out in the appellants title report for the property. Also called out in the appellants title report is the Notice of Assessment recorded June 4, 1997. Within that report, it is noted that the property is within the Bridge and Thoroughfare Fee Study Area and a fee per ADT was recommended based on cost estimates done at that time. The traffic generated from this project will impact the surrounding Circulation Element roadways. To mitigate that impact, their fair share contribution to the fee district is appropriate and desirable. The current fee based on the latest cost estimate for the improvements is approximately $210 per ADT. The project is estimated to generate 2,960 ADT of the estimated 45,258 ADT for the proposed district. Therefore, the appellant can either choose to pay the estimated fee and sign the agreement in-lieu of the financial guarantee, or wait until the fee district is formed and fees established before obtaining building permits and paying the established fee. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: If the condition of approval for fee payment and agreement execution in-lieu of a financial guarantee is removed, the project would not be in compliance with the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) adopted for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP). It is that EIR, that the Notice of Prior Compliance for this project relies upon, to meet CEQA requirements. Therefore, without the agreement and payment, the project cannot be approved. FISCAL IMPACT: The project’s fair share contribution will be used towards the construction of a needed Circulation Element roadway, Cannon Road. If the fee is not paid, as appealed by the applicant, other funding sources will have to be found to pay for that construction. EXHIBITS: 1. 2. Location Map. City Council Resolution No. 98-99 denying the appeal and upholding Planning Commission decision to approve SDP 97-14 without removing Condition No. 37 requested by the appellant. 3. Appeal Form Received January 30,1998. 2 - LOCATION MAP i K UL Q-Y m/Ii AJRPC - Project Name: Project No. Carlsbad Ranch Lots 9& 10 SDP97- 14/GDP 97-3 1 EXHIBIT 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 RESOLUTION NO. 98-99 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL AND UPHOLDING A PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO APPROVE A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO CONSTRUCT FOUR TWO-STORY BUILDINGS ON THE EAST SIDE OF FLEET STREET BETWEEN ARMADA DRIVE AND LEG0 DRIVE WITHOUT REMOVAL OF THE CONDITION REQUESTED BY THE APPELLANT, SDP 97-14/GDP 97-31, CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 9 AND 10. WHEREAS, on January 21, 1998, the Carlsbad Planning Commission considered a request for approval of SDP 97-14/GDP 97-31 subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, the Carlsbad Planning Commission approved Site Development Plan 97-14 and Coastal Development Permit 97-31 without removing the condition requested by the appellant; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on April 7 , 1998 considered an appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve SDP 97-14/GDP 97-31 removing the condition requested by the appellant; and I WHEREAS, upon considering the request, the City Council requested all input including staff reports and public testimony from Planning Commission hearings and City Council hearing relating to the Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit and appeal, thereof, to include the appellant’s requested removal of a condition; and WHEREAS, the appellant’s requested condition removal would not further the project’s compliance with the General Plan, applicable Local Coastal Program, Local Facilities Management Plan and Zone Plan. 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 SDP 97-14/GDP 97-31 as approved and conditioned by the Carlsbad Planning Commission comply with all applicable plans, policies, and development regulations. 3. That the appeal of the Planning Commission decision to approve SDP 97-1WCDP 97-31 removing the requested condition by the appellant, is denied. 1 4. That the findings of Planning Commission in Resolution Nos. 4222 and 4223 on file 2 with the City Clerk, and incorporated herein by reference, constitute the findings of the City 3 Council in this matter. Condition No. 37 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 4222 is modified as follows: 4 “This project is within the proposed boundary of the Cannon Road West 5 Bridge and Thoroughfare Fee District. This project is required to pay a fair share contribution toward the construction of Cannon Road in 6 accordance with the proposed fee progrzim. Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City providing that, if the fee district has not been 7 formed prior to issuance of building permits for the project, the owner shall pay a fee, in an amount currently estimated to be $124 per ADT 8 attributable to the project, subject to potential increases or decreases at 9 time of building permit (and correspondingly increased fee, or reimbursement), and shall enter into an agreement with the City not to IO oppose the formation of a fee district and pay the projects fair share contribution towards the construction of Cannon Road in accordance 11 with that future adopted fee program.” 12 5. That SDP 97-14/GDP 97-31 is approved subject to all conditions of Planning 13 Commission Resolution Nos. 4222 and 4223. 14 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council 15 held on the 7th day of April , 1998 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Nygaard and Hall 16 NOES: None 17 18 Council Member Kulchin 19 20 21 22 ATTEST: 23 24 25 26 27 28 (SEAL) . . DATE: January 30,1998 TO: Bobbie Hoda’- Planner FROM Sherrie WonelI - Clerk’s O&e RI!: Carlsbad Rikch - SDP 97-M/CDP m-31 THE ABOVE XTEM EtAS BEEN APPEALED TO TEE CITY COUNCIL According to the Mmicipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council within 30 days of the date thattheappeaiwasfiled. (REMINDER Theitemwillnotbenoticedinthenewspaperuntiltheagenda bill is signed off by a parties.) Please process this item in aaxrdance with the pnxdums contained in the Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please caiL The appd of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council meeting oE . 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad, California 92008- 1989 l (760) 434-2808 IQ=11 FROI*KOLL R-L ESTATE CROUP ID.619 w-988 _’ .! .,; ;.J . . lQllk]app8al~ti~~ PACE 2/3 . . ..* r4:ll FROM~KOLL REAL ESTATE GROUP ID.619 642 0908 - KREGOC, L.P., a Catifomia fi partnership 8y: Kf?EGClperaMgCo.,aDelaware~, itSGWMYdPZlftWiX PAGE 3/3 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 - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4222 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. SDP 97-14 FOR FOUR TWO- STORY BUILDINGS CONTAINING A TOTAL OF 184,000 SQUARE FEET FOR OFFICE, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, AND WAREHOUSE USES ON 11.55 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF FLEET STREET BETWEEN ARMADA DRIVE AND LEG0 DRIVE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 2 OF THE CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN IN THE COASTAL ZONE AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13 CASE NAME: CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 9 & 10 CASE NO.: SDP 97-14 WHEREAS, KOLL Real Estate Group , “Developer”, has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by the Carltas Company, “Owner”, described as Lots 9 and 10 of Carlsbad Tract No. 94-09, Carlsbad Ranch units 2 and 3 per map no. 13408, filed April 1, 1997, in the Office of the County Recorder, as file no. 1997-147754, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A” - “L” dated January 21, 1998, on file in the Planning Department, Carlsbad Ranch Lots 9 & 10, SDP 97-14 as provided by Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 21st day of January, 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Site Development Plan. 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 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 Planning Commission APPROVED, Carlsbad Ranch Lots 9 & 10, SDP 97-14 based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findings: 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 such as all required building and landscape setbacks which have been incorporated into the site design. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan was found to be in compliance with the General Plan and contains a detailed description of the plan’s compliance with the General Plan in Section I. H. 2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, in that all applicable code requirements have been met. Required parking is provided onsite. Building coverage is proposed at 16.6 percent for lot 9 and 19.86 percent for lot 10 and the development standards of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan allow for up to 50 percent building coverage if all parking is provided at-grade. Approximately 11 percent of the parking area on lot 9 and 10 percent on lot 10 will be landscaped while only 3 percent is required and a total of 29 percent of the area of lot 9 and 20 percent of lot 10 will be landscaped. 3. That all 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 berming, landscaping, a screen wall and the building placement are proposed to screen the loading area. Berming and landscaping are also proposed to screen the parking areas except where it would conflict with sight distance requirements. Adequate vehicle circulation has been provided to accommodate vehicle and truck, turning movements on site. Access to the site will be provided from Fleet Street. Pedestrian connections to the overall pedestrian circulation system of the Carlsbad Ranch have been provided. 4. That the street systems 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. With required street improvements the project- PC RESO NO. 4222 -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 specific impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Overriding considerations were previously adopted for the cumulative impact to I-5 and SR-78. 5. The 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 C. none of the circumstances requiring Subsequent or a Supplemental EIR under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15 162 or 15 163 exist; 6. 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. 7. 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: a. The project has been conditioned to ensure the 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. C. 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. 8. 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 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure continued availability of public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the project. 9. This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as part of the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13. PC RESO NO. 4222 -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 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) for the McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April 1994, in that, as conditioned the applicant shall record a notice that the property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport. 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 project site falls outside the 60 CNEL noise contours and the proposed land use is a compatible use at these noise levels . 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. 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. 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)). Conditions: 1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Site Development Plan document(s), as necessary, to make them internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. 2. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 3. The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Site Development Plan, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non- discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. PC RESO NO. 4222 -4- 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 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 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 be 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 21.90 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 facilities fee dated July 30, 1997, 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 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. Approval of SDP 97-14 is granted subject to the approval of CDP 97-31. SDP 97-14 is subject to all conditions contained in the Planning Commission Resolution for CDP 97- 31. Prior to the issuance of the Building Permit, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be tiled 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 and Coastal Development Permit PC RESO NO. 4222 -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 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. - by Resolutions No. 4222 and 4223 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 prior to building permit issuance. Enclosure shall be shown on the building plans to be of similar colors and/or materials to the project to the satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to building permit issuance. An exterior lighting plan including parking areas shall be submitted for Planning Director approval prior to building permit issuance. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property. The maximum height of all light futures shall not exceed 30 feet. 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. 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. 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 the City Attorney (see Noise Form #2 on file in the Planning Department). The Developer 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 PC RESO NO. 4222 -6- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 e 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 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 ordinance and/or resolution, then the Developer, 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 development for an existing development, in which case, the fee shall be paid on approval of the final map, parcel map or certificate of 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. 20. Prior to building permit issuance the Developer shall submit a solid waste management plan for review and approval by the Planning Director. The plan shall provide the following: a) W c) 4 e) 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: 0 ii) iii) Source separated green waste collection. Cardboard recycling. 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. 21. Prior to occupancy the developer shall submit a final security plan for review and approval of the Carlsbad Police Department. The plan shall include information PC RESO NO. 4222 -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 about internal security programs, security systems and devices and any other information required by the Police Department. 22. Prior to building permit issuance the developer shall submit evidence that they will implement the following air quality mitigation measures: I 4 Provide commuter information areas on site for employees. b) Implement flexible or staggered employee shift start and finish times in order to reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the project during the morning and evening peak hour commute. Cl Develop a trip reduction plan to achieve 1.5 AVR (Average vehicle riders). 23. The Developer shall provide a bus stop to service this development at the location indicated on the project plans to the satisfaction of the North County Transit District and the Planning Director. Said facilities shall include a bus shelter, 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 design of the required bus shelter shall be compatible with the project architecture. Plans for the bus shelter design shall be submitted to the Planning Director and the North County Transit District for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit for the project. The bus shelter shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the project. 24. Compact parking spaces shall be located in large groups, and in locations clearly marked to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. Enpineering: NOTE: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following conditions, upon the approval of this Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit, must be met prior to issuance of any building permit. 25. 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. 26. The developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at all project driveways in accordance with Engineering Standards and the Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan and shall record the following statement on the mylar Architectural Site Development Plan (revise Site Note No. 4) and Preliminary Landscape Plan: PC RESO NO. 4222 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 “NO structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches above the street level or vegetation having a canopy of less than 8 feet high shall be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standards and the Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan of this plan set. The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition.” 27. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any buildable lot within the subdivision, the property owner shall pay a one-time special development tax in accordance with City Council Resolution No. 91-39. 28. The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required. 29. 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 to the satisfaction of, and by the City Engineer, in accordance with the following: A. Fossil type filters shall be installed at storm drain inlets/inverts, as shown on the Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan. 30. 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. 31. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements shall be executed with the developer and adjacent property owners for the shared driveway access along Fleet Street (at Lot 11). Depending on property ownership, these easements and agreements shall be executed in accordance with the following: a) If different property ownership - Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements shall be executed with the developer and adjacent property owner. b) If same property ownership - Covenants for reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements shall be executed with the developer. 32. The raised median %osen for the proposed northerly driveway for Lot No. 10, shall be relocated so that it does not encroach into the existing 10’ General Access and PC RESO NO. 4222 -9- 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 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. Public Utility easement. This revision shall be shown on the mylar Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan. All monument signs shall be installed at locations as shown on the Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan. In accordance with Condition No. 32 above, the proposed monument sign located on the south side of the proposed driveway for Lot No. 10, shall be relocated so that it does not encroach into the sight distance sight line as shown on the Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan. This revision shall be shown on the mylar Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan. All existing and proposed easements shall be shown on the mylar Preliminary Landscape Plan, in accordance with the Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan. The Architectural, Preliminary Landscape and Engineering Site Development Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan’s shall be combined and numbered as one Site Development Plan mylar plan set. This project is within the proposed boundary of the Cannon Road West Bridge and Thoroughfare Fee District. This project is required to pay a fair share contribution towards the construction of Cannon Road in accordance with the proposed fee program. Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City providing that, if the fee district has not been formed prior to issuance of building permits for the project, the owner shall pay a fee, in an amount currently estimated to be $210.00/ADT attributable to the project, subject to potential increase or decrease at time of building permit (and correspondingly increased fee, or reimbursed), and shall enter into an agreement with the City not to oppose the formation of a fee district and pay the project’s fair share contribution towards the construction of Cannon Road in accordance with that future adopted fee program.” Water: 38. The entire potable water system, reclaimed water system and sewer system shall be evaluated in detail to ensure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demands can be met. 39. 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. 40. Sequentially, the Developer’s Engineer shall do the following: PC RESO NO. 4222 ,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 41. This project is approved upon the express 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. This note shall be placed on the final map. Fire: 42. Prior to the issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be approved by the Fire Department. 43. Additional on-site public water mains and fire hydrants are required. 44. Applicant shah submit a site plan to the Fire Department for approval, which depicts location of required, proposed and existing public water mains and fire hydrants. The plan should include off-site fire hydrants within 200 feet of the project. 45. Applicant shall submit a site plan depicting emergency access routes, driveways and traffic circulation for Fire Department approval. 46. 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 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. 47. All required water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances shall be operational before combustible building materials are located on the construction site. 48. 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. . . . A. B. C. Meet with the City Fire Marshal and establish the fire protection requirements. Also obtain G. P. M. demand for domestic and irrigational needs from appropri- ate parties. Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the Planning Department for processing and approval. 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). PC RESO NO. 4222 -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 - 49. 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. 50. An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in buildings having an aggregate floor area exceeding 10,000 square feet. General: 51. 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 condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; 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: 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within two (2) years from the date of project approval. 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. The project shall comply with the latest non-residential disabled access requirements pursuant to Title 24 of the State Building Code. 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 Community Development and Planning. 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. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance with the City’s Sign Ordinance and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs. PC RESO NO. 4222 -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 The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: 59. The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent off-site siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st day of January 1998 , by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Heineman, Savary, Welshons, Compas and Nielsen NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: n l A4,X& BAILEY NOB&, Chairperson CARLSBAD PtANNINti COMMISSION ATTEST: . I ti@- ’ MICHAEL J. HmZMItiER Planning Director i PC RESO NO. 4222 -13- 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. 4223 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. CDP 97-31 FOR FOUR TWO-STORY BUILDINGS CONTAINING A TOTAL OF 184,000 SQUARE FEET FOR OFFICE, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, AND WAREHOUSE USES ON 11.55 ACRES OF PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF FLEET STREET BETWEEN ARMADA DRIVE AND LEG0 DRIVE WITHIN PLANNING AREA 2 OF THE CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13. CASE NAME: CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 9 & 10 CASE NO.: CDP 97-3 1 WHEREAS, Koll Real Estate Group, “Developer”, has tiled a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by the Carltas Company, “Owner”, described as Lots 9 and 10 of Carlsbad Tract No. 94-09, Carlsbad Ranch Units 2 and 3 per map no. 13408, filed April 1, 1997, in the Office of the County Recorder, as file no. 1997-147754, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Coastal Development Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “A” - “L” dated January 21, 1998, on file in the Planning Department, Carlsbad Ranch Lots 9 & 10, CDP 97-31 as provided by Chapter 21.201.040 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 21st day of January 1998, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to CDP 97-31. 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 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission APPROVES Coastal Development Permit CDP 97-31, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Findinps: 1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Certified Local Coastal Program and all applicable policies in that the project is in compliance with the relevant policies of the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program, the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan which serves as partial implementation for the Mello II Segment for the project site, and the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone. 2. The project complies with the requirements of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone as the project site has been previously graded pursuant to the Master Tentative Map (CT 94-09) for the Carlsbad Ranch. No sensitive vegetation exists on the project site. Drainage facilities to remove pollutants from site runoff are also provided. The time limitations on grading in the Coastal Zone have been applied as a condition of this permit. Conditions: 1. The Planning Commission does hereby APPROVE the Coastal Development Permit for the project entitled Carlsbad Ranch Lots 9 & 10, CDP 97-31 (Exhibits) “A” - “L” dated January 21, 1998 on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by this reference, subject to the conditions herein set forth. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Coastal Development Permit document(s), as necessary, to make them internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development substantially different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. 2. Building permits shall be issued for this project within two (2) years of approval or this coastal development permit will expire unless extended per Section 21.201.210 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Approval of CDP 97-31 is granted subject to the approval of SDP 97-14. CDP 97-31 is granted subject to all conditions contained in the Planning Commission Resolution for SDP 97-14. 4. All grading activity shall be prohibited between October 1 and April 1 of any year, or as otherwise allowed by the Mello II Local Coastal Plan. PC RESO NO. 4223 -2- I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Agricultural Conversion Mitigation Fee shall be paid by the developer for approximately 13.03 acres as required by the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and California Coastal Commission Permit Number 6-96-9. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 21st day of January 1998, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Heineman, Savary, Monroy, Welshons, Compas and Nielsen NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: . 4 La,, 71 G BAILEY NOBLE, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: MICHAEL J. HOTZMILYER Planning Director PC RESO NO. 4223 -3- April 13, 1998 2 KREG Operating Company Attn: Anthony C. Badeaux 4275 Executive Square, # 240 La Jolla, CA 92037 RE: APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL OF SDP 97-14 FOR CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 9 AND 10 Enclosed for your records is a copy of Council Agenda Bill No. 14,624 and Council Resolution No. 98-99 which denied the appeal and upheld the Planning Commission decision to approve SDP 97-14 without removing Condition No. 37 as requested. If you have any specific questions regarding this action please contact your project coordinator, Robert Wojcik, in the Engineering Department. Mr. Wojcik be reached by phone at (760) 438-l 161 ext. 4333. KATHLEEN D. SHOUP Sr. Office Specialist . ’ L Mayor Lewis & Co~&T~embers c April 3,1998 Page Two ii; We hope you share 6ur concern and that as an expression of that concem, you will communicate your i&rest and request that staff vork with the property owners to pare the budget for this deject to a reasonable and financially viable level. L sinccreiy, h Gemological Xnstitu+ of America It!&& Buschcr Chie@jial officer Anth&y C%deaux, Vice Resident KREf3 bperating Company, General Partner P. Haviluk, .i .* cc: Ray Pat&e r3 I1 Lloyd Hubbs, David Hauser, Sherri Howard, Galen Peterson 04/03/98 12~45 a , . @l001/004 SFlEPPnRD, MULLXW, RICETZR L RauPToN I&P A Partnership Including Professional Corporations Attorneys at Law 501 West Broadway, Nineteenth floor San Diego, California 92101 Telephone (619) 338-6500 Facsimile (619) 234-3815 San Dieao Office TELECOPY NUMBER TELECOPY COVER LETTER wR8-30773 TARGETED'TIME ATTORN EXT. EY/SECRETARY (619) 234-3815 ASAP CBN\530 WE ARE TRANSMITTING FROM A "SERIES 3" MACHINE l * mix3 mrzco~x !LmmccraaxoN WILL mm BE bmxm l * DATE: April 3, 3998 FROM: Christopher 8. Neils, Esquire TO: Claude E. Lewis, Mayor and Members of t City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-434-8367 Confirmation #: 760-434-2891 Lee Rautenkranz City Clerk, City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-434-1987 Raymond R. Patchett City Manager, City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-720-9461 Confirmation #: 760-434-2820 Ronald R. Ball, Esquire City Attorney, City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-434-8367 Confirmation #: 760-434-2891 e City Council ALL RECEIVE CfTY COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM # 11 Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer AND David Ha City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-438-1094 Confirmation #: 760-438-1161 Ext. 4391 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER LETTER): IF ALL PAGES NOT RECEIVED, PLEASE CALL (619) 339-6500 NAME OF SENDER !aaaAGE : Pamela TIME COMPLETED THIS MESSAGE IS IYTMDEO UILY FUR THE USE OF THE lNDlVlDlUL (111 ENTITY TO MHICW IT IS ADDRESSED, AR0 IWY mTAIR IRFWUTIDY TRRT IS PRIVILEGED, WRFIDEYTIM AR0 EXEWT FROl DtSCLOQJRE UllDER APPLICMLE IAU. IF THE READER OF THIS HESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, OR THE EMPLOYEE DR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELfVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YQ1 ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEHINATlON, DISTRISUTION OR COPYING OF THIS CORMUNlCATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YW HAVE RECEIVED THIS CWRUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE, AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE 10 US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. %lE HAVE A HEARING IMPAIRED EMPLOYEE WRKING IN OUR FAX ROOF4 AFTER 5:45 P.l4. OR UEEKDAYS. IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOUR FAX DURING THESE TIMES, PLEASE CALL (619) 338~6600.‘* 04/03/98 12:46 e “_ , WRITER’S DIRECT LINE (619) 338-6530 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP . UYllLD UUlCrn .UI”I”SWIC l”NID,“O Cmw”sm- ~“CO~rm”~ Al7ORNEYS AT LAW NINCTE~NTI-I FLOOR 501 WEST BROADWAY SAN OICGO, CALlFORNlA 62lOldSS6 TELEPHONE 16161 336-6500 FACSIMILE LBIS) 2343615 @I 002/004 OUR FILL NUM6ER WR8-30773 April 2,1998 Claude E. Lewis, Mayor Members of the City Council City of Carisbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Atmroval. SDP 97-14 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: We represent Koll Real Estate Group and its affiliates (XREG”), the applicant in connection with SDP 97-14, the subject of the appeal mentioned above. This letter is written to address the appeal, and we wish to clari@ a significant matter which is central to the appeal. We hope that this letter will simplify and clarify the issue. The draft Agenda Bill which we reviewed characterizes the appeal as an “all or nothing” issue as regards condition no. 37. In other words, the staff report reads as if KREG’s objection is to the entire condition. In fact, that is not the case. The objection, and the reason for the appeal, is because of the dollar figure of “$210.00 per ADT” which is contained in the condition. It is the KREG position that such dollar amount is incorrect, and should be stated at “$73.00 per ADT.” KREG believes that the imposition of any front end payment requirement, within the context of condition 37, in excess of $73.00 is both (a) inconsistent with the treatment of other projects, and unfair, and (b) not legally justifiable at this time. KREG will accept virtually all of the condition, including the provisions which will require the applicant to sign an agreement with the City, consent to the LOS ANGELES 5 ORANGE COUNTY m SAN DIEGO n SAN FRANCISCO 04/03/98 12:46 e @I 003/004 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP Claude E. Lewis, Mayor April 2, 1998 Page 2 formation of a fee district, and (within the agreement) acknowledge that the applicant will ultimately become obligated to pay a fee determined at the time that the district is formed. The only feature of the condition to which KREG objects is the portion which designates au “estimated” amount to be paid in cash by the applicant, at the time it pulls a building permit. Even then, the disagreement is not with the concept of payment, but with the amount stated as the estimate. The only estimate of ADT costs which has any official standing in the City, of which KREG is aware, is the amount of $73.00 per ADT. That amount resulted from a study done in 1995, which achieved at least a semi-official status as a result of ensuing actions by the Council. Other projects have been conditioned within recent months to a similar condition, in which the estimated amount to be paid at time of building permit is $73.00 per ADT. The Agenda Bill indicates that several other developments within the proposed fee district area have already “paid their estimated fees and have signed the required agreement.” What the Agenda Bill does not state is that those developments paid the fee at $73.00 (or in some cases even less). There has been a wide range of speculation by staff in recent weeks about studies of projected actual costs of facilities which may be constructed within the district, when and if it is formed. KREG has heard a wide range of dollar figure speculations as to the fee which will be stablished when and as the district is formed. As of today, those are all informal, and none of those has any official status. KREG is prepared to accept the condition if it is modified so that the dollar figure of $210.00 is changed to $73 .OO. The terms of the agreement referred to in the condition would also be modified to reflect that the payment at the time of the building permit should be in the amount of $73.00. PLEASE NOTE that the balance of the agreement, which KREG would sign, will make the KREG project subject to whatever the ultimate fee becomes, when determined at the time of the formation of the district. As is the case with other property owners who have already signed such 04/03/98 12~47 e _ . SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP Claude E. Lewis, Mayor April 2, 1998 Page 3 agreements, KREG could become subject to paying additional funds through the mechanism of the district. That would place KREG on the same position as the other developers who have already signed such agreements. sD1:DM1tmwR8w070783.1 cc: City Clerk City Manager City Engineer David Hauser City Attorney for SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON up @I 004/004 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LOP WRITER’S DIRECT LINE A LlHlTCD LI*eILIT” PARTNLRSHIP lNCL”DlNO PT(O~Es*toN*L CORPORITION5 ATTORNEYS AT LAW NINETEENTH FLOOR 501 WEST BROADWAY SAN 01~00, CALIFORNIA 92lok3596 TELEPHONE (6191 336-6500 OUR FILE NUMBER FACSIMILE (6le) 234-3615 (619) 3386530 WR8-30773 April 2, 1998 AGENDA ITEM /I ____ # VIA HAND DELIVERY AND FAX c: Mayor City Council City Manager Claude E. Lewis, Mayor Members of the City Council City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 City Attorney City Clerk Re: Anneal of Planning Commission Annroval. SDP 97- 14 , Carlsbad Ranch. Lots 9 and 10 Dear Mayor and Councihnembers: We represent Koll Real Estate Group and its affiliates (“KREG”), the applicant in connection with SDP 97-14, the subject of the appeal mentioned above. This letter is written to address the appeal, and we wish to clarify a significant matter which is central to the appeal. We hope that this letter will simplify and clarify the issue. The draft Agenda Bill which we reviewed characterizes the appeal as an “all or nothing” issue as regards condition no. 37. In other words, the staff report reads as if KREG’s objection is to the entire condition. In fact, that is not the case. The objection, and the reason for the appeal, is because of the dollar figure of “$210.00 per ADT” which is contained in the condition. It is the KREG position that such dollar amount is incorrect, and should be stated at “$73.00 per ADT.” KREG believes that the imposition of any front end payment requirement, within the context of condition 37, in excess of $73.00 is both (a) inconsistent with the treatment of other projects, and unfair, and (b) not legally justifiable at this time. KREG will accept virtually all of the condition, including the provisions which will require the applicant to sign an agreement with the City, consent to the LOS ANGELES 8 ORANGE COUNTY = SAN DIEGO 2 SAN FRANCISCO SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON Lag Claude E. Lewis, Mayor April 2, 1998 Page 2 formation of a fee district, and (within the agreement) acknowledge that the applicant will ultimately become obligated to pay a fee determined at the time that the district is formed. The only feature of the condition to which KREG objects is the portion which designates an “estimated” amount to be paid in cash by the applicant, at the time it pulls a building permit. Even then, the disagreement is not with the concept of payment, but with the amount stated as the estimate. The only estimate of ADT costs which has any official standing in the City, of which KREG is aware, is the amount of $73.00 per ADT. That amount resulted from a study done in 1995, which achieved at least a semi-official status as a result of ensuing actions by the Council. Other projects have been conditioned within recent months to a similar condition, in which the estimated amount to be paid at time of building permit is $73.00 per ADT. The Agenda Bill indicates that several other developments within the proposed fee district area have already “paid their estimated fees and have signed the required agreement.” What the Agenda Bill does not state is that those developments paid the fee at $73.00 (or in some cases even less). There has been a wide range of speculation by staff in recent weeks about studies of projected actual costs of facilities which may be constructed within the district, when and if it is formed. KREG has heard a wide range of dollar figure speculations as to the fee which will be stablished when and as the district is formed. As of today, those are all informal, and none of those has any official status. KREG is prepared to accept the condition if it is modified so that the dollar figure of $210.00 is changed to $73.00. The terms of the agreement referred to in the condition would also be modified to reflect that the payment at the time of the building permit should be in the amount of $73.00. PLEASE NOTE that the balance of the agreement, which KREG would sign, will make the KREG project subject to whatever the ultimate fee becomes, when determined at the time of the formation of the district. As is the case with other property owners who have already signed such /” m A SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLp Claude E. Lewis, Mayor April 2, 1998 Page 3 agreements, KREG could become subject to paying additional funds through the mechanism of the district. That would place KREG on the same position as the other developers who have already signed such agreements. SDl:DMlLE~WR8\51070783.1 cc: City Clerk City Manager City Engineer David Hauser City Attorney for SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP 04/03/98 12:45 6 I p001/004 , SBRPPARD, XULLIU, RICEITIGR c muem UP A Partnership Including Professional Corporations Attorneys at Law 501 West Broadway, Nineteenth floor San Diego, California 92101 Telephone (619) 338-6500 Facsimile (619) 234-3815 San Dicao Office TELECOPY NUMBER TGLICOPY COVRR LETTBR WRB-30773 TARGETED'TIME JiTTORNEY/SECRETARY EXT. (619) 234-3815 ASAP CBN\530 WE ARE TRANSMITTING FROM A “SERIES 3" MACHINE l ' THIS TZmCOpI ~~SSSm WILL NOT BIL =ILXD +* DATE : April 3, 1998 FROM: Christ-her 8. Neils, Esquire TO: Claude E. Lewis, Mayor and Members of the City Council City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-434-8367 Confirmation t: 760-434-2891 r Lee Rautenkranz City Clerk, City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-434-1987 Raymonci R. Patchett CiZy Manager, City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-720-9461 Confirmation #: 760-434-2820 Ronald R. Ball, Esquire City Attorney, City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-434-8367 Confirmation #: 760-434-2891 Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer AND David City of Carlsbad Fax #: 760-438-1094 Confirmation #: 760-438-1161 Ex &I - - - . DATE 413 CllY MhbER 1 AGENDA m w 11 :t. 4391 TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES (INCLUDING COVER LETTER): IF ALL PAGES NOT RECEIVED, PLEASE CALL (619) 338-6500 MAME OF SENDeR Pamela TIME COMPLETED ~SSAGB : THIS NESSAGE IS 1mEmED OYLY m TL USE OF THE lyDIVIDlML OR ENTITY TO UllCH IT IS UDRESSED, All0 HA1 eolTAlW IS-TIDT THAT IS PRlVILEbB), QYFIDEMTIAL ABID EXBPT FRU0 Dl#mstlRE IJmER APPL1cMI.E w. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, aR TWE EMPLOYEE DR AGENT RESPONSLELE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TO THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YIW ARE HEREBY NGTIFIED THAT ANY DISSENINATION, DISTRIRUTION OR COPYING OF THIS -ICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YCU HAVE RECEIVED TNIS CCMMJWICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPWORE, AMD RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE AROVE ADDRESS VM THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU. NOE HAVE A HEARING INPAIRED EMPLOYEE WRKING IN OUR FAX RCOM AFTER 5:45 P.M. OR UEEKDAYS. IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOUR FAX DURING THESE TIRES, PLEASE CALL (619) 33&k6600.** 04/03/68 12146 6 c @002/004 WRITER’S q IRCCT LINE SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON UP . “L(I~ UUKrn WI*- wN)**o l moves*IMY CD”COUIM*S ATTORNEYS AT LAW NINCTE~NTH FLOOR SO1 WEST 6ROLLDWAY SAN Olc60, CALlrnRNlA 921ol-3s9e TELEPHONE (6198 336-6600 (619) 338-6530 rAC6IMtLC (619l 2343616 OUR m(Lc NUM6ER WRS-3 0773 April 2, 1998 ND DELIVERY AND FAX Claude E. Lewis, Mayor Members of the City Council City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Cd&ad, Ctiornia 92008 Re: eal of Planning Commission Approval. SDP 97-14 Ranch, Lots 9 and 10 Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: We represent Roll Real Estate Group and its afUiates (“KREG”), the applicant in connection with SDP 97-14, the subject of the appeal mentioned above. This letter is written to address the appeal, and we wish to clar@ a significant matter which is central to the appeal. We hope that this letter will simplify and clarify the issue. The draft Agenda Bill which we reviewed characterizes the appeal as an “all or nothing” issue as regards condition no. 37. In other words, the staff report reads as if KREG’s objection is to the entire condition. In fact, that is not the case. The objection, and the reason for the appeal, is because of the dollar figure of “$210.00 per ADT” which is contained in the condition. It is the KREG position that such dollar amount is incomct, and should be stated at “$73.00 per ADT.” KREG believes that the imposition of any front end payment requirement, within the context of condition 37, in excess of $73.00 is both (a) inconsistent with the treatment of other projects, and unfair, and (b) not legally justifiable at this time. KREG will accept virtually all of the condition, including the provisions which will require the applicant to sign an agreement with the City, consent to the LOS ~NGCLCS H ORANGE COUNTY m SAN DIEGO m SAN FRANCISCO 04/03/98 12~46 6 c @I 003/004 SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP Claude E. Lewis, Mayor April 2, 1998 Page 2 formation of a fee district, and (within the agreement) acknowledge that the applicant will ultimately become obligated to pay a fee determined at the time that the district is formed. The only feature of the condition to which KREG objects is the portion which designates an “estimated” amount to be paid in cash by the applicant, at the time it pulls a building permit. Even then, the disagreement is not with the concept of payment, but with the amount stated as the estimate. The only estimate of ADT costs which has any official standing in the City, of which KREG is aware, is the amount of $73.00 per ADT. *t amount resulted from a study done in 1995, which achieved at least a semi-official status as a result of ensuing actions by the Council. Other projects have been conditioned within recent months to a similar condition, in which the estimated amount to be paid at time of building pexmit is $73.00 per ADT. The Agenda Bill indicates that several other developments within the proposed fee district area have already “paid their estimated fees and have signed the required agreement.” What the Agenda Bill does not state is that those developments paid the fee at $73 .OO (or in some cases even less). There has been a wide range of speculation by staff in recent weeks about studies of projected actual costs of facilities which may be constructed within the district, when and if it is formed. KREG has heard a wide range of dollar figure speculations as to the fee which will be stablished when and as the district is formed. As of today, those are all informal, and none of those has any official status. KREG is prepared to accept the condition if it is modified so that the dollar figure of $210.00 is changed to $73 .OO. The terms of the agreement referred to in the condition would also be modified to reflect that the payment at the time of the building permit should be in the amount of $73.00. PLEASE NOTE that the balance of the agreement, which KREG would sign, will make the KREG project subject to whatever the ultimate fee becomes, when determined at the time of the fomtion of the district. As is the case with other property owners who have already signed such 04/03/98 12~47 e d @I 004/004 , SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER 6 HAMPTON LLp Claude E. Lewis, Mayor April 2, 1998 Page 3 agreements, KREG could become subject to paying additional funds through the mechanism of the district. That would place KREG on the same position as the other developers who have already signed such agreements. sD1DMmEn~~1070783.1 cc: City Clerk City Manager City Engineer David Hauser City Attorney for SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP PROOF OF P”BLIC~?ON (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above- entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, under the dates of June 30, 1989 (Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times- Advocate) case number 171349 (Blade-Citizen) and case number 172171 (The Times-Advocate) for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad, Solana Beach and the North County Judicial District; that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: March 27, 1998 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. San mcos Dated at California, this 27+hdw Mafirch, 1998 of -----fl$kcc&---- NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising This space is Icr the County Clerk?/ Filing Stamp Proof of Publication of Public Hearing I L ---------____-----_ ______ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPFAI - CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 9 AND 1Q SQP 97-141CDP 97-31 Conl~ ode: Nwmter 22.1997 DEscRIPnON. TO wmlda a” apqa, dthe Pla”“lng colbm1611m appmd da mqum t B sne ckxewm uan and c&l Dev~opmentPermn,orfourtwwt~~build,q~mn,ahlingatdald186.000squarefwtd~ee. ressarch. and devdopmenl and Ywehwse "X wnh &grade pa*ng cm two Ids bmmg 11 65 .Yaes APPEALS If you *allange me se Dwdopmsrn Plan nntiw coastal csmlopment Pm” I” cmrt. ycu may be hmed to mlsln9 only ih3e ,hslJs yar or solm-arm eke dead a1 me PUMlC headng deralbd h this “o”c=% OT in urinen mrespondence d&emd to dm C@ d Cadsbad. CW CMKS cmce a or pkf to. he FuMlC hearing , ~ppea,n to me City Cmndl Where the dezisbn is appealable t0 d-6 cny council, apwk must be filed In rmtmg v&i,, $n (10) calendar days a+ter a k&ion bY he Planmn~ comrmsslG+l 2. c&l cmmhohll A$PQeal*le pfc+aci: rms site is lxakd Mhin the coastal Zone Appealable Ama. X Th!a Sib is not lxakd wimin me ccestd mle WealaNn Araa. Where Ihe de&ion Is appeslable (0 the CoaSti ca”miFsiar. appedo musl be mud with me coas!A Camnriniml wnbhl ten (1O)mnklW day% snsr me Cosstatti~ksbri has rsceived a Nodes dl FM ,w,c,, ho,,, @ ci d Cartsbad. Applirants till be notified by ,he coastal Canmbbn d ths date that tieit aWSl p+kdwIIomcMs TheSatiD!egoolAaedhe~l Commission Is located al 311f Camino De! Rio No*, Suite 2w. San DIego. oarma 921oa1725. rfut~8me: ?m,uf No. kqa&oss cnlsw hr&Loh9~,0 9DI91-wcmp7-II Y3xf$Bml March 27.1898 - ,.- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING APPEAL - CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 9 AND 10 SDP 97-14/GDP 97-31 DESCRIPTION: COMPLETE DATE: November 22,1997 To consider an appeal of the Planning Commission approval of a request for a Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit for four two-story buildings containing a total of 184,000 square feet of office, research, and development, and warehouse use with at-grade parking on two lots totaling 11.55 acres. LOCATION: This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone at the east side of Fleet Street between Armada Drive and LEG0 Drive within Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan in the Coastal Zone and Local Facilities Management Zone 13. ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER: 211-lOO-Ol & 02 APPLICANT: Koll Real Estate Group, 4275 Executive Square, Suite 240, San Diego CA 92037 APPELLANT: Anthony Badeaux, KREG Operating Company, 4275 Executive Square, Suite 240, San Diego CA 92037 A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the City Council at the CONFERENCE CENTER, CARLSBAD SAFETY CENTER 2560 ORION WAY. CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, on April 7,1998, at 6:OO p.m. Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described and a staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. Copies of the staff report will be available on or after April 3, 1998. If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Bob Wojcik at the City of Carlsbad Engineering Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Friday 800 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009, (619) 438-l 161, extension 4333. APPEALS If you challenge the Site Development Plan and/or Coastal Development Permit 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, City Clerk’s Office at, or prior to, the public hearing. 1. ADDealS to the Citv Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council, appeals must be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the Planning Commission. 2. Coastal Commission Appealable Project: 0 This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area. lxl This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area. Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the Coastal Commission is located at 3 111 Camino De1 Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego, California 92108-1725. PUBLISH: FRIDAY, MARCH 27,1998 DATE: January 30,1998 TO: Bobbie Hoder - Planner FROM: Sherrie Worrell - Clerk’s Office RE: Carlsbad Ranch - SDP 97-14/GDP 97-3 1 THE ABOVE ITEM FIAS BEEN APPEALED TO THE CITY COUNCIL According to the Municipal Code, appeals must be heard by the City Council within 30 days of the date that the appeal was filed. (REMINDER: The item will not be noticed in the newspaper until the agenda bill is signed off by &l parties.) Please process this item in accordance with the procedures contained in the Agenda Bill Preparation Manual. If you have any questions, please call. The appeal of the above matter should be scheduled for the City Council meeting of: . Signature Date 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad, California 92008- 1989 l (760) 434-2808 JAN-30-98 14.11 FROM-KOLL REAL ESTATE GROUP ID:619 642 0908 foaI6cartsbpdcilyGaJncll. . . w Dat6dDecisi#lyw~~ q@ygy _ PAGE 2/3 . . . /+77iiW~ (4% ka--3rM sw=w= l?lcBJENo- tzia3o~v!ie~ * -.t=ehmiu92ooEc1969 - (6nQ)4z484am a9 JAN-30-99 14111 FROMzKOLL REAL ESTATE GROUP ID=619 642 0906 - , ’ . /. KEG-OC, L-P., a Califomia Iii partnership By: KREG Opemling Co., a Delaware anpomtbn, its General Partner ‘Syz (5ihfhch Anthony c. &ideaux Its: viPmsident PAGE 3/3 . ’ CITY OF CARLSBAD - . . , 1. 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 434-2867 ) ; . . ..’ 2 d REC’D FROM ,.’ ., _’ -f !/ ;-e (< i- I i ( , ,I ,4,’ ’ ,j ._ ~.-.* <,’ , , > DATE ,/ 1: (,: ““’ . ! ’ ACCOUNT NO. DESCRIPTION I AMOUNT : : : : : : : : I I I RECEIPT ‘NO. !8 NOT VALID UNLESS VALIDATED BY TOTAL I “’ ;. e: ’ @ Printed on recycled paper. CASH REGISTER _______- .__.- -.. ._ ._ . ..__... ., -._.- .-.___ -_____ -._-_-_-- ___- ---. -..--___ 075 Las Palmas Drive Bad, California 92009-l 576 ANTHONY C BADEAUX KREG OPERATING COMPANY #240 4275 EXECUTIVE SQUARE LA JOLIA CA 92037 SPIEKER PROPERTIES L 9255 TOWNE CENTRE DR 100 SAN DIEGO CA 92121-3034 CARLSBAD RANCH COMPA 5600 AVENIDA ENCtiAS 100 CARLSBAD CA 92008-4452 GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUT 1660 STEWART ST SANTA MONICA CA 90404-4020 ECKE RANCH PAUL PO BOX 230488 ENCINITAS CA 92023-0488 C B RANCH ENTERPRISE 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS 106 CARLSBAD CA 92008-4452 LP KREG-CO 4275 EXECUTIVE SQ 240 LA JOLLA CA 92037-1476 NATIONAL ASSN OF MUS PO BOX 2329 RANCH0 SANTA FE CA 92067-2329 h c . . . 3075 Las Palmas Drive ibad, California 92009-l 576 CARLSBAD ESTATE HOLD 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS 130 CARLSBAD CA 920084455 (Form A) TO: CITY CLERK’S OFFICE FROM: && LZ/aJt/kf RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice Z4?2? A&?&l&L @r/ XZ’p 9794 for a public hearing before the City Council. Please notice the item for the Council meeting of /!%!p Thank you. 6 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive l Carlsbad. California 92008-l 989 l (619) 434-2808 @