Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-04-14; City Council; 14638; CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 SDP 97-12|CDP 97-26? '4 7 %TY QF CARLSBAD - AGE & BILL I IT; 4 CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 c SDP 97-12/CDP 97-26 That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. yf * j/y , APPROVING SDP 97 ITEM EXPLANATION: On March 4, 1998, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and unan recommended approval of the Carlsbad Ranch Lots 11 and 14 project, which is pr for property located on the east side of Fleet Street north of Palomar Airport Roa project site is located within Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plar within the Coastal Zone as well as Local Facilities Management Zone 13. The applications propose development of two three-story multi-tenant office b containing 62,000 square feet each for a total of 124,000 square feet with at-grade on two lots totaling 7.38 acres. The two existing lots will be combined into one lot, presently owned by a single company, Spieker Properties. The two buildings are i in size and architectural design. The Site Development Plan and Coastal DeveI Permit applications are required for the City to determine that the design of the complies with all City standards including the requirements of the Carlsbad Ranch : Plan, and the Local Coastal Program. The project is in compliance with The permits require City Council approval as the buildings are proposed at a heigl feet with architectural features up to a height of 45 feet. The Carlsbad Ranch Speci, allows for building height up to 45 feet with architectural features to 55 feet. To at1 increased building height additional standards must be met including increasi landscaped building setbacks at a ratio of one horizontal foot for every one foot of construction beyond 35 feet. The project complies with this and all other prc required to exceed a building height of 35 feet. Facilities Zone Local Facilities Management Plan Growth Control Point Net Density Special Facility Fee 13 13 N/A N/A Park Fee 40 cents/sq.ft. r # . 1 2 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 98-114 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. SDP 97-12 AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 97-26 FOR TWO THREE-STORY MULTI-TENANT OFFICE BUILDINGS CONTAINING 62,000 SQUARE FEET EACH FOR A TOTAL OF 124,000 SQUARE FEET ON 7.38 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF FLEET STREET NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD 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 11 & 14 CASE NO.: SDP 97-12/CDP 97-26 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby . as follows: WHEREAS, on March 4, 1998 the Carlsbad Planning Commission duly noticed public hearing to consider a proposed Site Development Plan and C Development Permit for a 124,000 square foot office project on 7.38 acres of lar adopted Resolutions 4243 and 4244 recommending to the City Council that ti Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit be approved; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on 14 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 April , 1998 held a public hearing to consider the recommendation and he persons interested in or opposed to SDP 97-12 and CDP 97-26; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared for the project and determined that the project was in Prior Compliance with the Program Environr Impact Report (EIR 94-01) certified, for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amen and related applications, on January 9, 1996 by the City Council, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the ( Carlsbad, California, as follows: r r 1 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 0 1. 2. That the above recitations are true and correct. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Plan 97-12 and Coastal Development Permit 9 approved and that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission conk Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4243 and 4244 on file with the City Clt incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City COUI This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by t Council. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Timt for Judicial Review” shall apply: 3. “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 no 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 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 latter 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 -.. *-- ... ... ... ... ... **- -2- I r 1 I 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 l8 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 e 0 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.” PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Counci day of April 1998, by the following \ City of Carlsbad on the wit: l4 AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Hall & Finnila NOES: None ABSENT: Nygaard ATTEST: RANZ, City Clerk KAREN R. KUNDTZ, Assistant City Clerk (SEAL) -3- f r 0 0 E: 1 t / @ CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS I1 8't 14 SDP 97-12/CDP 97-26 < T 1 r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 38 EX! e a PI‘ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4243 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING FOR TWO THREE-STORY MULTI-TENANT OFFICE BUILDINGS CONTAINING 62,000 SQUARE FEET EACH FOR A TOTAL OF 124,000 SQUARE FEET ON 7.38 ACRES ‘GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF FLEET STREET NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD WITHIN PLANNING AREA 2 OF THE CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN IN THE COASTAL ZONE AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13 CASE NAME: APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. SDP 97-12 CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 CASE NO.: SDP 97-12 WHEREAS, Spieker Properties , “Developer”, has filed a verified a1 with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Spieker Properties, “Owner”, ( as Lots 11 and 14 of Carlsbad Tract No, 94-09, Carlsbad Ranch Units 2 and 3, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, April 1,1997 (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site Devc Plan as shown on Exhibit(s) “A” - “I” dated March 4, 1998, on file in the Planning Dei CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 SDP 97-12 as provided by SP 207(A) and Chap of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 4th day of March, 19 a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all tt and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered a relating to the Site Development Plan. 4 f 1 U 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 a NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the I i Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A) B) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing. the P Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH 11 & 14 SDP 97-12 based on the following findings and subject to the fol conditions: Findings: 1. That the requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and enviro settings, is consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General PI not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area i the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, SLUTO~I traffic circulation, in that the project design complies with the requirementL Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and all other requirements applicable to the si as all required building and landscape setbacks which have been incorporal the site design. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan was found to be in com with the General Plan and contains a detailed description of the plan’s com with the General Plan in Section I. H. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate thc that all applicable code requirements have been met. Required parking is pi onsite. Building coverage is proposed at 13.2 percent and the devell standards of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan allow for up to 50 percent b coverage if all parking is provided at-grade. Approximately 4.15 percent parking area will be landscaped while only 3 percent is required. That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences. landscaping, and other features necessary tc the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood provided and maintained, in that berming, landscaping, and a screen w proposed to screen the parking areas. Adequate vehicle circulation ha provided to accommodate vehicle, and truck turning movements on site. Ac the site will be provided from Fleet Street. Pedestrian connections to the pedestrian circulation system of the Carlsbad Ranch have been provided. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all generated by the proposed use, in that the proposed use is consistent with t analyzed in the circulation analysis prepared for Program EIR 94-01 f Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. With required street improvements the p specific impacts can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Ovei considerations were previously adopted for the cumulative impact to 1-5 and 2 The Planning Commission finds that the Planning Director has determined: 2. 3. 4. 5. PC RES0 NO. 4243 -2- f r 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 e e a. there was an EIR certified in connection with the prior Speci Amendment (SP 207(A)) and related actions; the project has no new significant environmental effect not analyzed as SI in the prior EIR ; and none of the circumstances requiring Subsequent or a Supplemental E CEQA Guidelines Sections 15 162 or 15 163 exist. b. c. 6. The Planning Commission finds that all feasible mitigation measures o alternatives identified in EIR 94-01 which are appropriate to this Subsequen have been incorporated into tlus Subsequent Project. 7. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements 1 applicable local facilities management plan and all City public facility poli ordinances since: a. The project has been conditioned to ensure the building permits will not 1 for the project unless the District Engineer determines that sewer s available, and building cannot occw within the project unless sewe: remains available, and the District Engineer is satisfied that the require the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan have been met insofa apply to sewer service for this project. Statutory School fees will be paid to ensure the availability of school fac the Carlsbad Unified School District. All necessary public improvements have been provided or are req conditions of approval. The Developer has agreed and is required by the inclusion of an apl condition to pay a public facilities fee. Performance of that contract and of the fee will enable this body to find that public facilities will be : concurrent with need as required by the General Plan. b. C. d. 8. The project has been conditioned to pay any increase in public facility fee, construction tax, or development fees, and has agreed to abide by any a requirements established by a Local Facilities Management Plan prepared pu Chapter 2 1.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure continued availe public facilities and will mitigate any cumulative impacts created by the project. This project has been conditioned to comply with any requirement approved as p: . 9. Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13. 10. The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP) McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April 1994, in that, as conditioned the a shall record a notice that the property is subject to overflight, sight and s aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport. The project is compati PC RES0 NO. 4243 -3 - f 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 0 0 the projected noise levels of the CLUP; and, based on the noise/land use con matrix of the CLUP, the proposed land use is compatible with the airport, ir project site falls partially inside the 60 CNEL noise contours and the propc use is a compatible use at these noise levels . A growth management park fee of 40 cents per square foot of non-rc development will be collected at the time of building permit issuance. Thi within Zone 13. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the I contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions arc to mitigate impacts cause by or reasonably related to the project, and the exter degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the prc That the project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual, adopted by Cit, Resolution No. 90-384. The project complies with the development standards and design guidelin Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207(A)). The following findings are made to permit the building height of the p 11. be used to construct recreational facilities to offset the demand created by el 12. 13. 14. 15. exceed a height of 35 feet as provided for in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Pla a. The buildings do not contain more than three levels as shown on thl exhibits. The required setbacks have been increased at a ratio of one horizo for every one foot of vertical construction beyond thirty-five additional setback area will be maintained as landscaped open space. c. The buildings conform to the requirements of Section 18.04.17( b. Carlsbad Municipal Code. The allowed height protrusions as described in Section 21.46.02r Carlsbad Municipal Code do not exceed 45 feet including arch features as demonstrated on the project exhibits. d. Conditions: 1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all cc and modifications to the Site Development Plan document(s), as necessary, to mi internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Devt shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed devt different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, i ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 2. PC RES0 NO. 4243 -4- i I 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 @ 3. The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, de hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers. employees, ag representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages. demand and costs, including court costs and attorney's fees incurred by the City arising, or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Site Developme (b) City's approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated hereir (c) Developer/Operator's installation and operation of the facility permitted including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. The Developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24" x 36". mylar cop Site Plan as approved by the final decision making body. The Site Plan shall re conditions of approval by the City. The Plan copy shall be submitted to 1 Engineer and approved prior to building, grading, final map, or improveme submittal, whichever occurs first. The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan c reduced legible version of the approving resolutions on a 24" x 36" blueline d Said blueline drawing(s) shall also include a copy of any applicable Coastal Devei Permit and signed approved site plan. Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property un District Engineer determines that sewer facilities are available at the time of app 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 J 1987, (amended July 2, 1991) and as amended from time to time, and any devell fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad ML Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth management system or Fi and Improvement Plan and to fulfill the subdivider's agreement to pay the facilities fee dated September 16, 1997, a copy of which is on file with the Cit: and is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not paid, this application will 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 n conditions of overcrowding as part of the building permit application. The am( these fees shall be determined by the fee schedule in effect at the time of building application. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are re as part of the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments n that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits, including, but not limited following: 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. --* PC RES0 NO. 4243 -5- I 1 \ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 l9 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 e e a) A growth management park fee of 40 cents per square foot of non-re! development will be collected at the time of building permit issuanc fee will be used to construct recreational facilities to offset the created by employees within Zone 13. 10. Approval of SDP 97-12 is granted subject to the approval of CDP 97-26. SDP subject to all conditions contained in the Planning Commission Resolu CDP 97-26. 1 1. Prior to the issuance of the Building Permit, Developer shall submit to the City of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the sat of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interesl by Resolution Nos. 4243 and 4244 on the real property owned by the Develop1 Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file cc complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any condi restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Planning Dirt the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which moc terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or sue( interest. Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a six-foot high masonry wall wi pursuant to City standards. Location of said receptacles shall be approved Planning Director prior to building permit issuance. The enclosure shall be sh the building plans to be of similar colors and/or materials to the projecl satisfaction of the Planning Director prior to building permit issuance. City of Carlsbad has issued a Site Development Plan and Coastal Developmen1 12. 13. An exterior lighting plan including parking areas shall be submitted for Planning approval prior to building permit issuance. All lighting shall be designed tc downward and avoid any impacts on adjacent homes or property. The maximun of all light fixtures shall not exceed 30 feet. No outdoor storage of materials shall occur onsite unless required by the Fire C such instance a storage plan will be submitted for approval by the Fire Chief Planning Director. The Developer shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in conforma the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City’s Landscape Manual. Tl shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the Planning Director prio approval of the final map, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occurs fii Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved pl, maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, tr; 14. 15. debris. 16. The first submittal of detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be accompanie project’s building, improvement, and grading plans. PC RES0 NO. 4243 -6- I r 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 e 0 17. Building identification and/or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing t: so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identificatio addresses shall contrast to their background color. Prior to the issuance of building permits the Developer shall prepare and record that this property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operati McClellan-Palomar Airport, in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Dire 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 im (linkage fee) consistent with Program 4.1 of the Housing Element. The app further aware that the City may determine that certain non-residential projects IT to pay a linkage fee, in order to be found consistent with the Housing Elenier General Plan. If a linkage fee is established by City Council ordinance and/or re and this project becomes subject to a linkage fee pursuant to said ordinanct resolution, then the Developer, or hishedtheir successor(s) in interest shall linkage fee. The linkage fee shall be paid at the time of issuance of building except for projects involving a request for a non-residential planned developmer existing development, in which case, the fee shall be paid on approval of the fir parcel map or certificate of compliance, required to process the non-residenti; whichever pertains. If linkage fees are required for this project, and they are not p project will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this proj become null and void. 18. 19. 20. Prior to building permit issuance the Developer shall submit a solid management plan for review and approval by the Planning Director. The pl: provide the following: a. The approximate location, type and number of containers to be I collect refuse and recyclables. Refuse and recyclable collection methods to be used. A description and site plan for any planned on-site processing facil equipment (balers, compactors). b. c. d. A description of the types of recycling services to be providt contractual relationships with vendors to provide these services. e. The estimated quantity of waste generated and estimated quanti recyclable materials. This plan shall also evaluate the feasibility of the following di programs/measures: .. .. PC RES0 NO. 4243 -7- ‘L v t 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 0 1. Source separated green waste collection. .. 11. Cardboard recycling. iii. Programs which provide for the separation of wet (disposab dry (recoverable) materials. Where feasible, providing compactors for non-recyclables to the number of trips to disposal facilities, iv. 21. Prior to occupancy the developer shall submit a final security plan for revic approval of the Carlsbad Police Department. The plan shall include infor about internal security programs, security systems and devices and an3 information required by the Police Department. Prior to building permit issuance the developer shall submit evidence that tb implement the following air quality mitigation measures: a. b. 22. Provide commuter information areas on site for employees. Implement flexible or staggered employee shift start and finish times ill to reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by the project duri morning and evening peak hour commute. c. Develop a trip reduction plan to achieve 1.5 AVR (Average vehicle ride The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a unifori 23. program for this development prior to occupancy of any building. Enpineering Conditions Note: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following conditions, up( approval of this Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit, must 1 prior to issuance of any building permit. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed constructic within this project, the developer shall submit to and receive approval from thr Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all the conc and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operatic The developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at all project drivew, accordance with Engineering Standards and the Engineering Site Develol Plan/Preliminary Grading Plan and shall record the following statement (I mylar Architectural Site Development Plan and Preliminary Landscape Plan: 24. 25. PC RES0 NO. 4243 -8- I t > 1 2 9 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 3 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 e “No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches al: street level or vegetation having a canopy of less than 8 feet high shall be pl permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance cor1 accordance with City Standards and the Engineering Site Devel PlanPreliminary Grading Plan of this plan set. The underlying proper0 shall maintain this condition.” FeedAgreements 26. Prior to issuance of a building permit for any buildable lot within the subdivis property owner shall pay a one-time special development tax in accordance w Council Resolution No. 9 1-3 9. The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required. 27. DedicationsAmprovements 28. The developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National PI Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provir management practices as referenced in the “California Storm Water Best Mana Practices Handbook” to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to di to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved to the satisfac and by the City Engineer, in accordance with the following: a. Fossil type filters shall be installed at storm drain inletshnverts, as shc the Engineering Site Development PlanPreliminary Grading Plan. 29. The structural section for the access aisles must be designed with a traffic index o accordance with City Standards due to truck access through the parking area and/o with an ADT greater than 500. The structural pavement design of the aisle ways 5 submitted together with required R-value soil test information and approved by tl as part of the building plan site review. Reciprocal access easements and maintenance agreements shall be executed w developer and adjacent property owners for the shared driveway access aloni Street (at Lot 10). Depending on property ownership, these easement agreements shall be executed in accordance with the following: a. If different property ownership - Reciprocal access easement! maintenance agreements shall be executed with the developer and ad property owner. If same property ownership - Covenants for reciprocal access easemen maintenance agreements shall be executed with the developer. 30. . b. PC RES0 NO. 4243 -9- 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 Fire Conditions 33. Prior to issuance of building permits, complete building plans shall be approve1 Fire Department. Additional on-site public water mains and fire hydrants are required. Applicant shall submit a site plan to the Fire Department for approval, which location of required, proposed and existing public water mains and fire hydran plan should include off-site fire hydrants within 200 feet of the project. Applicant shall submit a site plan depicting emergency access routes, drivew traffic circulation for Fire Department approval. An all-weather, unobstructed access road suitable for emergency service vehicles provided and maintained during construction. When in the opinion of the Fire C1 access road has become unserviceable due to inclement weather or other reasons. in the interest of public safety, require that construction operations cease u condition is corrected. All required water mains, fire hydrants, and appurtenances shall be operationa combustible building materials are located on the construction site. Prior to. final inspection, all security gate systems controlling vehicular access I equipped with a “Knox”, key-operated emergency entry device. Applicant shall the Fire Prevention Bureau for specifications and approvals prior to installation. Prior to building occupancy, private roads and driveways which serve as requirec for emergency service vehicles shall be posted as fire lanes in accordance v requirements of Section 17.04.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Plans and/or specifications for fire alarm systems, fire hydrants, automatic fire s systems and other fire protection systems shall be submitted to the Fire Departn approval prior to construction. An approved automatic fire sprinkler system shall be installed in buildings having 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. aggregate floor area exceeding 10,000 square feet. ... PC RES0 NO. 4243 -10- 1 ? 1 I 1 2 3 0 0 31. All monument signs shall be installed at locations as shown on the Engineer Development PlanRreliminary Grading Plan. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the owner shall have a Certij Compliance approved and recorded to merge the two lots as shown on the si( 32. 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 44. The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges whicl- collected before andor at the time of issuance of the building permit. The S; meter installation. Sequentially, the Developer's Engineer shall do the following: a. County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of applic 45. Meet with the City Fire Marshal and establish the fire protection requi Also obtain G.P.M. demand for domestic and irrigational needs from apl parties. Prepare a colored reclaimed water use area map and submit to the , Department for processing and approval. Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and reclaimed water improvement meeting must be scheduled with the District Engineer for review, comn approval of the preliminary system layouts and usages (Le., GPM - EDU). This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits wil issued for development of the subject property unless the water district ser development determines that adequate water service and sewer facilities are ava the time of application for such water service and sewer permits will contini available until time of occupancy. b. c. 46. General Conditions 47. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their term implemented and maintained over time; if any of such conditions fail to implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the revoke or modify all approvals herein granted: deny or further condition issuanc future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of OCI issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute lit& compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violati vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's appi this Site Development Plan. ... ... PC RES0 NO. 4243 -1 1- f 1 2 3 0 0 Water Conditions 43. The entire potable water system, reclaimed water system and sewer system evaluated in detail to ensure that adequate capacity, pressure and flow demanc met. t 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 0 Standard Code Reminders: 48. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by 20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued 49. project within two (2) years from the date of project approval. 50. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sectioii Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of L permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein. The project shall comply with the latest non-residential disabled access requi pursuant to Title 24 of the State Building Code. All roof appurtenances, including air conditions, shall be architecturally integra concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and strl substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfactior Directors of Community Development and Planning. All landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared to conform with the Lar Manual and submitted per the landscape plan check procedures on file in the P Department. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in confoi with the City’s Sign Ordinance, the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, and tE program required for the project and shall require review and approval of the PI Director prior to installation of such signs. The developer shall. exercise special care during the construction phase project to prevent off-site siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be prc in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. ... ... ... ... ... .-. ... PC RES0 NO. 4243 -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 0 0 -.- PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Commksion of the City of Carlsbad, Califorda, held on the 4th day of March 199s following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas, Heineman, hi Nielsen, Savary, and Welshons NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CARLSBAD COMMISSION ATTEST: Planning Director PC RES0 NO. 4243 -13- 7 1 c 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 e 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4244 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NO. OFFICE BUILDINGS CONTAINING 62,000 SQUARE FEET EACH FOR A TOTAL OF 124,000 SQUARE FEET ON 7.38 ACRES OF PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE EAST SIDE OF FLEET STREET NORTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD WITHIN PLANNING AREA 2 OF THE CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13. CASE NAME: CDP 97-26 FOR TWO THREE-STORY MULTI-TENANT CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 CASE NO.: CDP 97-26 WHEREAS, Spieker Properties, “Developer”, has filed a verified app with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Spieker Properties, “Owner”, dc as Lots 11 and 14 of Carlsbad Tract No. 94-09, Carlsbad Ranch Units 2 and 3, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, April 1, 1997. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request far a ( Development Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “A” - “I” dated March 4, 1998, on file Planning Department, CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 CDP 97-26 as provic Chapter 21.201.040 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 4th day of March 1998, duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and ... 1 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 lo 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 a WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all te and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered a1 relating to CDP 97-26. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the I Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A) B) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Com RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 CDP 97-26, based on the following findings and subject to the fo conditions: Findings: 1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Certified Local Program and all applicable policies in that the project is in compliance w relevant policies of the Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Prograr Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan which serves as partial implementation for thc II Segment for the project site, and the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay i 2, The project complies with the requirements of the Coastal Resource Pra Overlay Zone as the project site has been previously graded pursuant to the Tentative Map (CT 94-09) for the Carlsbad Ranch. No sensitive vegetation e:. the project site. Drainage facilities to remove pollutants from site runoff a provided. The time limitations on grading in the Coastal Zone have been apF a condition of this permit. Conditions: 1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all con and modifications to the Coastal Development Permit document(s), as necess make them internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the I Development shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any pr development substantially different from this approval, shall require an amen& this approval. Building permits shall be issued for'this project within two (2) years of apprc this coastal development permit will expire unless extended per Section 21.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Approval of CDP 97-26 is granted subject to the approval of SDP 97-12. CDP 9' granted subject to all conditions contained in the Planning Commission Resoluti 2- 3. SDP 97-12. PC RES0 NO. 4244 -2- f 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 a 4. AllGa-ading activity shall be prohibited between October 1 st and April 1 st of any as otherwise allowed by the Mello I1 Local Coastal Plan. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Agricultural Conversion Mi Fee shall be paid by the developer for approximately 7.38 acres as require1 Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program and California Coastal Corn Permit Number 6-96-9. 5. .PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the 1 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 4th day of March 1998 following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas, Heineman, M Nielsen, Savary, and Welshons NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: MICHAEL J. HOL~MILL~R Planning Director <:. PC RES0 NO. 4244 -3- At EX) %e City of CARLSBAD Planning Dep 'A REPORT IT- TO THE PLANNING GOMMISSIOE Item~o. @ Application complete date: October 16. 1997 Project Planner: Don Neu P.C. AGENDA OF: March 4, 1998 k Project Engineer: Mike Shirey SUBJECT: SDP 97-12ICDP 97-26 CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 - Request for recommendation of approval for a Site Development Plan and Coast; Development Permit for two three-story multi-tenant office buildings containin 62,000 square feet each for a total of 124,000 square feet with at grade parking o two lots totaling 7.38 acres on the east side of Fleet Street north of Palom2 Airport Road within Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan in thi Coastal Zone and Local Facilities Management Zone 13. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4243 and 4244 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of SDP 97-12 and CDP 97-26, based on the findings anc subject to the conditions contained therein. 11. INTRODUCTION These applications propose developing Lots 11 and 14 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan wit1 two three-story buildings containing a total of 124,000 square of office space. The two existing lots will be combined into one lot with shared parking and access. The proposed land use is permitted by the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207(A)). The Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit applications are required for the City to determine that the design 01 the project complies with all City Standards including the requirements of the Carlsbad Ran& Specific Plan, and the Local Coastal Program. The project is in compliance with all Cit] requirements. The buildings are proposed at a height of 41 feet with architectural features up to 45 feet which requires approval by the City Council. The project was analyzed in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 94-01) and no new environmental impacts or changed circumstances have been identified for this project. 111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission recommend approval of a site development plan and coastal development permit for the Carlsbad Ranch Lots 11 and 14 project proposed for two lots totaling 7.38 acres on the east side of Fleet Street within Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Planning Area 2 is located in the central portion of the Carisbad Ranch Specific Plan. The two lots will be merged into a single parcel containing all required improvements for the project. The project consists of a total of 124,000 square feet of multi-tenant ofice space to be contained in two three-story buildings. The two proposed @ Site North South East West EXISTING GENERAL PLAN ZONING LAND USE O/PI 0-QP-M-Q Vacant development pads ’ O/PI 0-Q/P-M-Q Future site of the approved Ocean Terraces Development O/PI 0-Q/P-M-Q Vacant development pad TR C-T-Q LEGOLAND om 0-QR-M-Q NAMM and Denso Facilities 1 a SDP 97-12/CDP 97-26 C@LSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 0 .March 4, 1998 Page 3 Site Description The project site consists of vacant, graded development pads. No sensitive vegetation exists c the property. The site has street frontage on future Fleet Street on the west. Prior Actions On January 9, 1996, the City Council approved the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendmer (SP 207(A)) and related applications. The project site consists of 2 of the 9 lots within Plannin Area 2, the Research and Development/Office area. The specific plan permits office. researc and development, related manufacturing, processing, and storage uses. Applicable Regulations The proposed project is subject to the following plans, ordinances and standards as analyze( within the following section of this staff report: A. B. C. D. OfficePlanned Industrial (OM) General Plan Land Use Designation; Office/Planned Industrial, Qualified Development Overlay Zone (0-QP-M-Q); Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207(A)); Site Development Plan findings required by the Qualified Development Overlay Zone ’ Carlsbad Municipal Code, Chapter 2 1.06, Section 2 1.06.020; Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport; Mello 11 Segment of the Local Coastal Program and the Coastal Resource protection Overlay Zone - Carlsbad Municipal Code, Chapter 2 1.203; and Growth Management Ordinance (Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 13). E. F. G. IV. ANALYSIS The recommendation of 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. & B. The proposed office project is consistent with the office industrial land use designation (OPI) permitted for this site by the General Plan, the zoning map, and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. In addition, the specific plan implements objectives of the General Plan by including required circulation improvements and provisions for alternative modes of transportation such as GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING STANDARD Building Height Building Coverage Parking Standards Employee Eating Areas Trash Enclosures Building And Landscape Setbacks Parking Areas REQUIRED PROPOSED 35 ft.; allowed height protrusions 41 feet and less; height to 45 ft.; or 45 ft.; allowed height protrusions to 45 ft. protrusions to 55 ft. with increased landscape setbacks l3,2% 496 spaces 496 spaces 7,436 sq. ft. required 7,760 sq. ft. provided Minimum 6 ft. high masonry 6 ft. - 6 in. high split face wall with gates. Color and/or masonry wall with gates. Color materials similar to the project to complement the builidngs. Interior side yards - 16 fi. Interior side yards - 16 ft. Fleet Street - 26 ft. Fleet Street - 26 ft. LEGO Drive - 41 ft. LEGO Drive - 41 ft. Screen with berms and Berms are proposed where there landscaping where sight distance is no conflict with sight distance standards permit. standards. Landscape screening is also proposed as well as a 36 in. concrete wall adjacent to the parking west of the buildings. 50 % if all surface parking STANDARD Building Orientation Building Form & Massing Architectural Character Building Materials REQUIRED PROPOSED Office buildings shall maintain a Buildings are located toward Fler strong relationshp to the road. Street at an angle with pedestria connections. Buildings shall be articulated by The building height is varied t changes in height and vertical planes reduce the appearance of bulk an to reduce the appearance of bulk. vertical planes are broken by sever: The use of features such as balconies, changes in the footprint- of th arcades, window & entry recesses are structures resulting in separatioi encouraged to provide visual interest between building planes. & detail. The project design include balconies, as well as window an( entry recesses. Building design shall incorporate or The proposed building design i be generally compatible with a compatible with a Mediterranea Mediterranean vocabulary. vocabulary. Exterior surfaces wi, contain limestone tile and contrastin, limestone accent tile. Proposed building materials are compatible with a Mediterranean Building materials shall incorporate or be generally compatible with a Mediterranean architectural architectural vocabulary. vocabulary. Stucco with accent materials such as The building surface will be coverec tile, natural stone, or other compatible with limestone tile. natural building materials shall be preferred. Substantial use of mirrored, reflective Windows are proposed to be or darkly tinted glass should be evergreen tinted vision glass to mee avoided to prevent the appearance of energy conservation requirements anc glass curtain walls. are separated by the main building surfaces in addition to being limitec in area to prevent the appearance 0' glass curtain walls. q STANDARD Roofs REQUIRED PROPOSED For large buildings, flat roofs with Parapet treatment is proposed and tl appropriate parapet treatment to roof plane is broken in height or for provide relief may be acceptable. every 75 to 100 feet. Roof planes should be broken in height or form every 75 to 100 feet. I FACILITY IMPACTS COMPLIANCE WITH STANDARDS City Administration NJA Yes Library NIA Yes Wastewater Treatment 69 EDU Yes Capacity Parks $.40/sq. ft. Yes Drainage Basin B Yes Circulation 2,480 ADT Yes Fire Station 4 Yes Open Space NIA . Yes S choo 1s Payment of non-residential Yes school fee at bldg. permit issuance Sewer Collection System 69 EDU Yes Water Distribution System 69 EDU Yes ’ SDP 97-121CDP 97-26 C dh. SBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 0 March 4, 1998 _- Paee 8 landscape watering, and preparation of a solid waste management plan for City review an approval and implementation of that plan. As a result, the environmental analysis for the si1 development plan included an Initial Study (Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part I‘ focusing on any changes from approved plans and the project contemplated in the EIR to what 1 proposed with this site development plan. No additional significant adverse impacts wer identified in the initial study for the project, therefore, no further environmental review i required. A Notice of Prior Compliance was prepared. for the project and published in the Nort County Times Newspaper. A Notice of Determination will be filed upon the final action bein taken on the project. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4243 2. 3. Location Map 4. Background Data Sheet 5. 6. Disclosure Form 7. Prior Environmental Compliance 8. 9. Reduced Exhibits 10. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4244 Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part I1 Exhibits “A” - “I”, dated March 4, 1998. DN nm BACKGROUND DATA SHEE 9 CASE NO: SDP 97-12/CDP 97-26 CASE NAME: Carlsbad Ranch Lots 11 & 14 APPLICANT: Spieker Properties REQUEST AND LOCATION: Two three-story multi-tenant office buildings containir 62.000 square feet each for a total of 124.000 square feet on 7.38 acres on the east side of Fie Street north of Palomar Airport Road. LEGAL DESCRIPTION! LOtS-11 ~d 14 of Carlsbad Tract No. 94-09. Carlsbad Ran Units 2 and 3. in the City of Carlsbad. Countv of San Dieno, State of California. accordine Map thereof No.13408. filed in the Office of the Countv Recorder of San Diego County. April 1997. APN: 21 1-100-03 & 05 Acres: 7.38 Proposed No. of LotskJnits: N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation: OPT (OfficePlanned Industrial) Density Allowed: N/A Existing Zone: 0-O/P-M-O Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zonin Requirements) Density Proposed: N/A Proposed Zone: N/A Zoning Land Use Site 0-Q/P-M-Q Vacant North 0-Q/P-M-Q Site of Approved Ocean South 0-Q/P-M-Q Vacant East C-T-Q LEGOLAND West 0-Q/P-M-Q NAMM & Denso Terraces Development PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 69 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: September 16,1997 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 0 Negative Declaration, issued 0 Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated Other, Prior Compliance with EIR 94-01 certified Januarv 9. 1996 CITY OF CARLSBAD a GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: Carlsbad Ranch Lots 11 & 14 - SDP 97-13YICDP 97-26 LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 13 GENERAL PLAN: OPI ZONING: 0-OP-M-O DEVELOPER’S NAME: Suieker ProDerties ADDRESS: 5900 La Place Court. Suite 100. Carlsbad, CA 92008 PHONE NO.: (‘760) 931-6800 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 21 1-100-03 & 05 QUANTITY OF LAND USEDEVELOPMENT (AC.. SQ. FT.. DU): 7.38 AC: 124.000 So. F1 ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = N/A .. B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = NIA C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 69 D. Park: Demand in Acreage = $.40/sq. ft. E. Drainage: Demand in CFS = Identify Drainage Basin = B (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) F. Circulation: Demand in ADT = 2,480 (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = 4 H. Open Space: Acreage Provided = N/A 1, Schools: Won-res. school fee (Demands to be determined by staff) J. Sewer: Demands in EDU 69 Identify Sub Basin = (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) K. Water: Demand in GPD = 15,180 L. The project is not proposing any dwelling units thereby not impacting the GrowtE Management Dwelling unit allowance. DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information must be disclosed: 1. APPLICANT List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in t application. 5p ie K&lr ppp-h'k, d.?, [,gvkbd. i 66 CIZZB 54DG La a31 !LC2 &rf-%D 74474: hi?& {K I -fsdd Sp;&W@Of&h&,L*P 5YaG hi // uce/m/+- -A('(dZ, /s&C/, & 9 20023 &f& ,Ye-k&4 2. OWNER List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in tt property involved. v 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above IS a corporation or partnershir list the names and addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the share in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 5D;c/+7f fL+d7k &. &/v &a!!/ &vPLwL, dn* /2/ e4 @ /DM &CL ZLr-Te +taPw ns &WfSdoQJlf ;sp-&-p/D 4 tes / L ./d d' 4. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or I2 above IS a non- ofit organization or i trust, list the names and addresses of any person serving as officer or director o the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the trust. 2075 Las Palmas Dr * Carlsbad. CA 92009-1 576 - (61 9) 438-11 61 - FAX (61 9) 438-0894 - 5. Have you had t@e than $250 worth of business tr fib acted wlth any member City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twe (1 2) months? 0 Yes wo If yes, please indicate person(s): Person is defined as -Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, assoclatlon, social C~I ffateffld OfgankatiOn, COfpOlation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, ( and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group combination acting as a unit." NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. 927- MAP qfi. /Ud Disclosure Statement 10/96 Page 2 of 2 ’ PUBLIC NOTICE OF PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE Please Take Notice: The Planning Department has determined that the environmental effects of th project described below have already been considered in conjunction wit previously certified environmental documents and, therefore, no addition, environmental review will be required and a notice of determination will be filed. Project Title: Project Location: Carlsbad Ranch Lots 11 & 14 East side of Fleet Street north of Palomar Airport withi Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan A Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permi for two three-story multi-tenant office buildings containin; 61,964 square feet each for a total building area of 123,92€ square feet with at grade parking spaces on 7.38 acres. Project Description: Justification for this determination is on file in the Planning Department, 2075 La: Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 20 days 01 date of publication. DATED: OCTOBER 11 , 1997 CASE NO: SDP 97-12/CDP 97-26 CASE NAME: CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 & 14 PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 11, 1997 MICHAEL J. TOLZMLLER Planning Director 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-1161 FAX (760) 438-0894 0 0 ENVIRONMENTAL fMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: SDP 97-12/CDP 97-2 BACKGROUND 1. 2. APPLICANT: Spieker Properties. L.P. 3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5900 La Place Court. Suite IO( CASE NAME: Carlsbad Ranch Lots 1 1 & 14 .. Carlsbad. CA 92008: (760) 93 1-6800 DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: July 1 1,1997 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Site Develmment Plan and Coastal Development Permit for twl three-stow multi-tenant office buildings containing 61 -964 square feet each for a total buildin area of 123,928 sQuare feet with at grade parking spaces on 7.38 acres on the east side of Flee Street north of Palomar Airport Road within Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specifi Plan. 4. 5. 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 Impac Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning E TransportatiodCirculation Ix] Public Services 5 Population and Housing Geological Problems Energy & Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics Ix] Water 0 Hazards 0 Cultural Resources Ix] Air Quality Noise 0 Recreation Biological Resources Utilities & Service Systems 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 Rev. 03/28/96 e 0 DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on t environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on t environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigati measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIk DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and ; ENVIRoNME"UL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment. but least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlil document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigatic measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An Negatii 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 th environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentiall significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier environmental impac report (EIR) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been voided or mitigate pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are impose, upon the proposed project. Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared. [XI 10-7-77 Planner La Signature Date 10 /?r/53- Planning Director? SignatHe Date 2 Rev. 03/28/96 @ 0 ENVIRONMENTAL I ACTS STATE CEQA ISUIIXLINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Seetian 15063 requires that the c conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a signific effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the followi pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and hurr factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Negat Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. a A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that i adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following ea question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced informati sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one invoived. “No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to. it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that t1 potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopt1 general standards and policies. “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporatic of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to “Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and tl City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce tl effect to a less than significant level. “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that a effect is significant. 0 r. 0 8 0 Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significar effect on the environment, but & Potentially significant effects (a) have been analyze1 adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicabl standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigatel Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed up0 the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to o supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prio environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additiona environmental document is required (Prior Compliance). When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily require( 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 ol Overriding Considerations’’ has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence thai the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment. 8 0 3 Rev 03/28/96 , a 0 If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, a those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In t case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporate may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked. and includi but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect h not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards. a the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less th; significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant impact h not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR (3) proposed mitigation measures do not redu the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part I1 analysis it is n possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect. determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significa effect to below a level of significance. e A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of tl form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attentic should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determint significant. 4 Rev. 03/28/96 e 0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Less Than so Significant Significant Significan Impac Impact Unless t Impact Mitigation Incorporated I LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:. a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (Source #(s): (1; pg. 5.7-1 through 5.7-18) b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? (1; pg.5.4-5 through 5.4-13, 5.7-1 through 5.7- 18, and 5.12-1 through 5.12-7) c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? (1; pg. 5.7-8 and 5.7-9) d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses? (1; pg. 5.1-1 through 5.1-16) e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? (1; 5.7-1 through 5.7-18) 11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? (1; pg. 7-1 through 7-4) b) 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) c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? (1 ; pg. 7-8 and 7-9) 0 [x] 0 0 0 Ixi 0 0 Ixl 0 0 [XI 0 0 0 e4 0 0 0 e4 0 0 [x1 0 [XI III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal resuit 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) 0 0 0 e4 0 0 0 1xI 0 0 0 Ix) 0 0 0 Ix1 0 0 IXI 0 0 0 Ix1 0 0 0 w o 0 0 w 0 0 0 Ix) 0 0 0 Ixi 0 0 0 El 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) 5 Rev. 03/28/96 e Potentially Potentlall? Less Than ho Significant Significant Significan lmpac Issues (and Supporting Information e Sources). Impact Unless t Impact Incorporated x. c Mitigation 0 0 Ixi 0 0 0 !XI 0 0 Dlsi 0 DM c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (1; pg. 5.12-1 through 5.12-7) d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water f) 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 through 5.12-7) g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? (1; pg. 5.12-1 through 5.12-7) h) Impacts to groundwater quality? (1; pg. 5.12-1 through i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (1; pg. 5.9-1 3 through 5.9-22) body? (1; pg. 5.12-1 through 5.12-7) movements? (1; pg. 5.12-1 through 5.12-7) 1, 0 0 [xi IXI 0 El 0 €8 5.12-7) V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (1; pg. 5.2-1 through 5.2-8) b) 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) Kl 0 nu 0 IXI 0 0 0 w 0 0 0 !XI VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (1; pg. 5.5-1 through 5.5-29) b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? (1; pg. 5.5-1 through 5.5-29) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? (1; pg. 5.5-1 through 5.5-29 and 5.9-1 through 5.9-4) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? (1; pg. 5.5-25 and 5.5-26) e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? (1; Appendix A) f, Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (1 ; pg. g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (1; pg. 5.7-1 through 5.7-18) proposal result in: El 0 0 0 0 0 0 E3 0 0 0 El 0 0 0 €4 0 0 0 El 17 0 0 El 0 0 0 ixI c) d) 5.7- 1 6) 6 Rev. 03128196 0 Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significan hpac Impact Unless t lmpacr Mitigation Incorporated Issues (and Supporting lnforma q ion Sources). VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? (1; pg. 5.4-1 through 5.4-13) 0 0 0 [x) 0 0 urn .n 0 0 €3 0 0 0 IXI 0 0 [x] b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? (1; pg. 5.4- I through 5.4- 13) c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (1; pg. 5.4-1 through 5.4: 13) d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? (1; pg. 5.4-1 through 5.4-13) e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (1; pg. 5.4-1 through 5.4-1 3) ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? (1; Appendix A) b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? (1 ; Appendix A) c) 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) VIII. proposal? 0 cl 0 191 0 El 124 0 0 0 IXI IX HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve: a) 0 0 0 ixl 0 €3 0 0 0 €3 0 0 pa 0 0 (xi A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? (1; pg. 5.6-1 through 5.6-7) b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (1; 5.9-1 through 5.9-4) c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? (1; pg. 5.6-1 through 5.6-7) d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? (1, pg. 5.6- 1 through 5.6-7) e) Increase fire 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. 5.8-1 through b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (1; pg. 5.8-1 through 5.8-7) 0 El 0 El 5.8-7) XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? (1; pg. 5.9-1 and 5.9-2) b) Police protection? (1; pg. 5.9-2 through 5.9-4) 0 IXI 0 €3 0 0 0 0 [XI c) Schools? (1; pg. 5.9-7 through 5.9-13) 7 Rev. 03128/96 e Potentially Potentially Less Than ht) Significant Significant Sipifican Impac 0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Impact Unless t Impact Mitigation Incorporated 0 0 (x1 D!X d) Maintenance of public facilitizs, including roads? (1 ; pg. 5.7-2,5.7-3, and 5.7-16) e) Other governmental services? (1; pg. 5.7-2 and 5.7-16) 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. 5.12-1 through 5.12-7) f) Solid waste disposal? (1; pg. 5.10-1 through 5.10-5) g) Local or regional water supplies? (I; pg. 5.9-13 and cl 0 €3 0 n OBI 0 13 IXI 0 0 0 €3 0 0 0 IXI 0 w 0 0 0 [x1 cl 0 5.9-22) XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: 0 0 0 Ix) 0 0 124 0 0 0 Ixi 0 0 w 0 0 Ix) 0 o 0 Ixl 0 0 0 [XI 0 0 0 Ix1 a) Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (1; pg. 5.11-1 through 5.11-7) b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (1; pg. 5.1 1-1 through 5.1 1-7) c) Create light or glare? (1; Appendix A) XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? (1; pg. 5.3-1 through 5.3-8) b) Disturb archaeological resources? (1 ; pg. 5.3- 1 through c) Affect historical resources? (1; pg. 5.3-1 through 5.3-8) d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (1; pg. 5.3- 1 through 5.3-8) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? (1; pg. 5.3-1 through 5.3-8) 5.3-8) e) XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal: 0 0 IXI 0 0 0 ixI 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) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (I ; pg. 5.7-2 through 5.7-3 and 5.7-16) b) 8 Rev. 03/28/96 0 Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Sipnifican lmpac Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Impact Unless t Impact Mitigation Incorporated XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. El On a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the 0 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 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? (“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)? Does the project have environmental effects which will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES. €3 0 0 0 El .. 0 0 0 c) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQL process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negativl declaration. In this case a discussion should identify tlil following on attached sheets: a) Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are availablc for review. Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklis were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuan to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed bj mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. 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. b) c) 9 Rev. 03/28/96 !B e DISCUSSION OF ENVI NMENTAL EVALUATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Carlsbad Ranch Lots 11 and 14 Project is proposed for two lots having a combined site art of 7.38 acres located on the east side of Fleet Street north of Palomar Airport Road with Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The project consists of two three-stoi multi-tenant office buildings containing 61,964 square feet each for a total buildin, 0 area ( 123,928 square feet. All parlung for the project will be constructed at grade. Planning Area 2 located in the central portion of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The project site fronts on Fle Street and is adjacent to the LEGOLAND site on the east. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS The proposed project was evaluated in the “Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Fini Program Environmental Impact Report, dated November 1995 (EIR 94-01),’‘ EIR 94-0 evaluates the environmental effects of the development and operation of: The Carlsbad Ranc’ Specific Plan; improvements to the I-YCannon Road Interchange; and the development of a 24.. acre parcel immediately adjacent to the northern boundary of the specific plan site. The Carlsbal Ranch Specific Plan is a planning document which will guide the development of a 447.40 acr area through the provision of a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations, and implementatioi programs. include office. research an1 development, related light manufacturing, commercial, hotel, destination resort. golf course agriculture, a vocational school campus, and LEGOLAND Carlsbad. The 24.2 acre parce adjacent to the northern boundary is proposed as a continuation of the Specific Plan golf course. EIR 94-0 1 analyzed the following environmental issue areas: Agricultural Resources, Ai Quality, Archaeological and Paleontological Resources, Biological Resources TrafficlCirculation, Hazardous Waste/Pesticide Residue, Land Use Compatibility; Noise, Public Services and Utilities, Solid Waste, Visual AestheticsiGrading, and Water Quality. The Initial analyzed additional issues which were determined not to have a significant environmenta; 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 anc Monitoring Program were approved. All mitigation measures applicable to the Carlsbad Ranch Lots 1 1 and 14 project proposed for two existing graded lot in Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan 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”: The proposed land uses for the Specific Plan Study prepared for the Specific Plan Amendment is contained in Appendix A of EIR 94-01 ana * 10 Rev. 03128196 0 a , V. AIR QUALITY 4 a) Air Quality NO SigflifiCiUlt Impacts as a result of construction activity are anticipated. Implernentati of the air quality mitigation measures will lessen long-term operation air quality impac to a level less than significant. It was concluded in the analysis for EIR 94-01 that t development anticipated under the proposed specific plan amendment together with t development of other related projects will have a significant and unavoidable cumulati impact on the region’s air quality. A statement of overriding considerations was adopt for this cumulative impact. VI. TRANSPORT ATION/CIRCUL AT1 ON a) Increased Vehicle Trips A series of circulation system improvements are required as part of the development ( the Carlsbad Ranch property. With the implementation of the improvements identified EIR 94-01 all of the analyzed intersections and street segments are projected to operate acceptable levels of service. It was determined that the Carlsbad Ranch project conjunction with cumulative build-out forecasts, will result in a significant curnulati? impact to the 1-5 freeway and SR-78. A statement of overriding considerations wi adopted for this cumulative impact. XI. PUBLIC SERVICES b) Police protection The EIR analysis concluded that the conversion of an agricultural area to an urban are which will attract visitors will require additional law enforcement and crime preventio services. The potential increase in demand on police services is a significant impac This demand for police protection will be reduced through implementation of mitigation measure requiring security measures to be incorporated into the propose developments. XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS f) Solid waste disposal The generation of additional solid waste is a potentially significant impact. Thc mitigation measure identified in EIR 94-01 which has been applied to the project wil reduce this impact to a level of less than significant. The mitigation measure requires thc submittal of a solid waste management plan to address the project’s needs for recyclinE facilities and diversion programs/measures which can be implemented. g) The project will require the construction of onsite water lines. The impacts of buildout 01 the Carlsbad Ranch project to water supplies are potentially significant. Implementation Local or regional water supplies ‘ 11 Rev. 03/28/96 e 0 of the mitigation measures contained in EIR 94-01 will reduce impacts to a level of lr than significant. The mitigation includes utilizing reclaimed water for landscaping on t project sits. SOURCE DOCUMENTS - (NOTE: Department located at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92009, Phone (6 19) 43 8- 1 1 6 1 ) 1. All source documents are on file in the Plas.mil “Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program Environmental Impact Rep0 City of Carlsbad, November 1995 .” 12 Rev. 03/28/96 s 0 n. #. 0 LI n B r 0 a . a I 4 9 n b E m m -I n r m c P m -I m r m c b 4 - -I 0 L 0 2 m 111 n B r I .. a . I .I 9 0 0 DE 6. SDP 97-12lCDP 97-26 - CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 'I1 & 14 - Request for a recommendation o approval for a Site Development Plan and Coastal Development Permit for two three-story multi tenant office buildings containing 62,000 square feet each for a total of 124,000 square feet witt at-grade parking on two lots totaling 7.38 acres on the east side of Fleet Street north of Paloma Airport Road within Planning Area 2 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan in the Coastal Zone an( es Management Zone 13. Assistant Planning Director, Gary Wayne, introduced this item and stated that Senior Planner, Don Neu. would make the presentation. Project Planner, Don Neu, while employing the use of the exhibits, summarized this project as follows: The proposed project is located on Lots 11 and 14 in the Carlsbad Ranch. This project ( the Spieker project] proposed is for two lots to be merged to accommodate two 62,000 square foot buildings. The buildings would be identical in architectural style, size, and materials. The purpose for the two permits, as on the other projects in the area, is to determine that the project meets the requirements of the Specific Plan anc the Local Coastal Program. Staffs analysis determined that the project does meet those requirements. In addition, what makes these buildings unique is that the building heights on this particular project is proposed at forty-one feet. The Specific Plan does allow a building height to go up to forty-five feet provided it meets all of the applicable findings. The more significant design requirement is that the perimeter setbacks for the entire site, would increase by the amount of the increased building height. In this case, with the forty-one foot height, the perimeter setbacks will increase by six feet. The architectural firm for this project is the same firm that designed the National Association of Music Merchants project. Very high quality materials are being proposed for this building in that it will have a limestone exterior with green glass windows. Mr. Neu concluded his presentation by stating that staff is recommending approval of this item. Commissioner Welshons asked if the increased perimeter setbacks will add to the parking 101 Or to the landscaping and what percent of the building will be at forty-five feet. Mr. Neu replied that the increase will be in the landscaping and the forty-five foot height will be in the central tower of each building and according to staffs calculation, it will be within a total of 3% of the roof area. Commissioner Compas asked how much of this building will be visible from the 1-5 freeway. Mr. Neu stated that part of the upper floors may be visible, depending on how fast one is traveling on the freeway. Chairperson Noble opened Public Testimony and offered the invitation to speak. Mitch Ritschel, representing Spieker Properties, 5900 La Place Court, #I 00, Carlsbad, stated that Spieker Properties is looking forward to this project as their flagship office buildings. Commissioner Savary asked Mr. Ritschel to describe the materials in the metal decorative band that will be applied around the top of the building and voiced her concern that most metals cctrrode and rust in this . part of the country and asked if this will do the same. MINUTES . Page 0 PLANNING COMMISSION 0 March 4, 1998 L Mr. Ritschel responded by stating that the metal band has a factory metallic finish and that their architect and the factory have assured them that this metal band will have from ten to twenty years before an' noticeable deterioration will occur. Seeing no one else wishing to testify, Chairperson Noble closed Public Testimony. ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Heineman, and duly seconded, to adopt Plannin- Commission Resolution No. 4243 and 4244, recommending approval of SDP 97 12 and CDP 97-26, based upon the findings and subject to the condition! contained therein. Noble, Heineman, Savary, Monroy, Welshons, Compas, and Nielsen VOTE: 7-0 AYES: NOES: None ABSTAIN: None , PROOF OF PUBLIC@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 Cahfornia, under the dates of June 30, 1989 Advocate) case number 171 349 (Blade-Citizen) and case number 1721 71 (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 entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: (Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times- nonpareil), has been published in each regular and April 3, 1998 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at California, this 3rd of sal marcos day ______-- NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising This space is@ th Proof of Publication of Notice of Publiw makg _________---------- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SDP 97-121CDP 97-26-CARLSBAD RANCH LOTS 11 8 I COMPLETE DI DESCRIPTION This project IS within the CiV of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone on the east slde of Fleet Streti nom of Palorn Planning Area 2 ofthe Carkbad Ranch Speafic Plan m the coartal Zone and Local Failibes Managem Lots 11 and 14 of Qllsbad Tract NO 94-09, Carlsbad Ranch Units 2 and 3, In the City of Cadsbd, Cor state of California amrding to Map thereof NO ~08 614 in w office ofthe b~ny ~~~a~~ of Q Swker Pmpertler, L P, 5900 La Place Court Suiie loo, Carisbad CA 92008 LEW& DESCRlPTlON 2 Caasla Commission Appealable Project Thls ate IS Cornmiss on wthin ten (IO) wMng days afler the Coastal CARLSBAD RAN imted a13111 Camino Del Rio Nom Sults 200 San Dlego California 92!oB1725 LOTS 11 8 14 Legallt58114 PuMish Fnday bnl3 1998 SDP 97-12fCDP 97- 3e-T 4kQd I3 \ (Form A) e e - TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FROM: RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice SDP 97-12/CDP 97-26 - Carlsbad Ranch Lots 11 and 14 for a public hearing before the City Council. Please notice the item for the council meeting of .///.//sf Thank you. March 18, 1998 - Assistant City Man-- Date - 0 LP KEG-CO LP 4/ KREG-OC CARLSBAD CA 92008-4452 LA JOLLA CA 92037-1476 LA JO CA 92037-1476 0 CA~LSBAD RANCH co 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS 100 4275 EXECUTIVE SQ 240 CARLSBAD RANCH 5600 AVENID CINAS CAFUS / CA 92008-445 F CARLSBAD 5fjfj; RANCH CO NATIONAL ASSN OF MUS POBOX2329 * 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS 106 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067-2329 C B RANCH ENTERPRISE CARLSBAD CA 92008-4452 2 CARLSBAD RANCH C CARLSBAD RANCH CO CARLSBAD RANCH CO CARLSBAD ESTATE HOL 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS 111/_1/^___ CARLSB 92008-4452 5/ CARLSBA 92008-4452 CARLSBAD CA 92008-44s CARLSBAD ESTATE HO CARLSBAD RANCH CO F-- SPIEKER PROPERTIES L CARLSB 5600 u AVENIDA A 92008-4455 // CARLSB 5600 AVENIDA A 92008-4452 STE 5900 100 LA PLACE CT CARLSBAD CA 92008 i \ !, \ u( 5 b CA DEPT OF FISH & GAL * SD COUNTY PLANNING 0 CA COASTAL COMMISSION STE 200 STE B STE 50 31 11 CAMINO DEL RIO NO 5201 RUFFIN RD 330 GOLDENSHORE DR SAN DIEGO CA 92108-1725 ~ SAN DIEGO CA 92123 LONG BEACH CA 9080. REGIONAL WATER QUALITY BRD SANDAG LAFCO STE B STE 800 1600 PACIFIC HWY 9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD 401 BST SAN DIEGO CA 92101 SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DlST 91 50 CHESAPEAKE DR 801 PINE ST - WATER DISTRICT SAN DIEGO CA 92123 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DlST CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC WORKS - OAK ST PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPT PROJECT PLANNER DON NEU Y * April 24,1998 Spieker Properties, LP Suite 100 5900 La Place Court Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: CARLSBAD RANCH - SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT SDP 97-1 ZLICDP 97-26 Enclosed for your reference is a copy of the face sheet of Agenda Bill No. 14,638 and a complete copy of Council Resolution No. 98-1 14 which were adopted by Council on April 14,1998. These documents approved SDP 97-12 & CDP 97-26 for Carlsbad Ranch, Lots 11 and 14. Please call your project planner If you have specific questions about Council’s action or about your project. The City’s Planning Department may be reached by calling: (760) 438-1 161. &ZLy- KATHLEEN D. SHOUP Sr. Office Specialist 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, California 92008-1 989 - (760) 434-2808