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