HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-09-22; City Council; 14856; LINCOLN NORTH POINTE - SP 109(B)5
Z fa,, 3
z5
.. z 0 + 2
J G z
$ 0
I
0 1 I3 ‘CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGEhuA BILL
AB# TITLE:
CITY ATTY. 1 MTG. 9/22/98 LINCOLN NORTH POINTE - SP 109(B)
1 DEPT. PLN %“2( CITY MGR
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. ffl*3&, APPROVING the Mitigated
Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Specific Plan Amendment 1
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On August 19, 1998, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and approved
non-legislative discretionary development permits (CT 98-07, PUD 98-01, HDP 98-05, S
and CUP 98-08) for the Lincoln North Pointe project These permits will allow Lincoln Prc
develop a 50.23 acre property (including the former Hughes Aircraft industrial site) which
adjacent to and south of the Olympic Resort Hotel along El Camino Real. The specific dei
actions include: (1) subdividing the 50.23 acre parcel into 12 non-residential lots ranging
acres to 6.28 acres in area, (2) balanced grading of the entire property, (3) consi
office/research and development/warehouse buildings totaling 385,085 square feet in are
of the proposed non-residential lots, and (4) constructing satellite antennas upon the rooftl
of the buildings and a satellite dish antennae farm along the northern boundary of the pro
ViaSat Inc. is the proposed tenant for 3 of the 6 Phase I buildings and 2 proposed future t
The project as proposed was approved by the Planning Commission without major revision
The recently demolished Hughes Aircraft industrial buildings and associated developn
approved in 1972 through Specific Plan 109. The site was processed under specific plai
due to its location within the Palomar Airport Influence Area. However, the City’s Updatec
Plan no longer mandates that projects located within the Palomar Airport Influence Area be
to process a specific plan. Accordingly, the project applicant is requesting, and the
Commission and staff are recommending that Specific Plan 109 be rescinded and that th
be processed through other discretionary permits (CT, PIP, PUD, HDP, CUP and
proposed. With the repeal of Specific Plan 109, all future development upon the subject
would still require the approval of a Planned Industrial Permit (PIP) by the Planning Director
FISCAL IMPACT:
All future development upon the subject property will require the processing and apprl
Planned Industrial Permit. The Planned Industrial Permit application fee will adequately
staffladministrative costs for processing such permits. No other fiscal impacts will result
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The Planning Commission has determined that this project will result in direct signifi
adverse impacts to biological resources. Specifically, the project will impact 15.32 acres of
Maritime Chaparral (SMC) and .41 acres of other sensitive habitat which is located v
western third of the property. The developer has agreed to mitigate at a 21 ratio the
impacts to 15.32 acres of SMC and .41 acres of other sensitive habitat, thereby redl
significant adverse biological impacts to below a level of significance in accordance
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The specific mitiga
approval of this project.
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
I
I
I RESOLUTION NO. 98-314
I
A RESOLUTldN OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, (CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING 1 PROGRAM, AND A SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT NO. 109(B) TO REPEAL THE SPECIFIC PLAN
ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE WEST
AIRPORT RO ID IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
5.
CASE NO.:
The City Coun il of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby rc
SIDE OF EL d AMINO REAL TO THE SOUTH OF PALOMAR 1 SP 109(B)
WHEREAS, ve ified applications for a Specific Plan Amendment fo 1 follows:
property to wit:
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 11 10, in the City of Carlsbad, County
of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel map thereof
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, on
November 10, 11972 as File No. 3021 14 of official records.
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS] the Carlsbad Planning Commission did on August 19, 199
duly noticed public hearing as1 prescribed by law to consider a Mitigated Negative De(
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Specific Plan Amendment (SP I(
repeal Specific Plan 109; and ~
I
I
I
I
WHEREAS] thel Planning Commission did on August 19, 1998, after he;
I
considering all the evidence and testimony of all people desiring to be heard, adopt
Commission Resolutions No. 4354 and 4355 recommending approval of the Mitigated ,
Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Specific Plan Amendme
WHEREAS, thelCity Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the
September , 1998, held a quly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to con:
Commission's recommendations and all evidence, testimony, and argument of those
I
I
22nd
I
I
I I
I
1
2
3
4
.5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I e l
l
present and desiring to be hdard and approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration, I
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Specific Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was issued on June 25,
submitted to the State Clearinghouse for a 30 day review period. All comments recei
that review period are fully ir/corporated into the conditions of approval for the Spel
Amendment and other project approvals and these conditions will be reviewed tl
monitoring program set up for jhe project: and I
WHEREAS, thd findings and conditions of the Planning Commission R
Nos. 4354 and 4355 approving the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitc
Reporting Program, and the Specific Plan Amendment constitute the findings and conc
the City Council; and
I
I
I
~ WHEREAS, the City Council on the 22nd , day of September
I
approved a Mitigated Negative! Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Pr
compliance with the City of Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance and the (
Environmental Quality Act.
I
I
NOW THEREFbRE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
I
Carlsbad, California as follows/
I
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitor
Reporting Program are appdoved and that the findings and conditions of the
Commission contained in Resolution No. 4354, on file with the City Clerk and inco
herein by reference, are the finldings and conditions of the City Council.
~
I
3. That the Specific Plan Amendment is approved and that the findil
conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Resolution No. 4355, on file with
Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City C
4. That the dity Council adopts and incorporates Planning Con
Resolution Nos. 4354 and 4355 approving the Lincoln North Pointe Specific Plan Amen(
I I
I
I -2- ~
1
2
3
5
4
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I
I 0 0 ~
I
I
5. The City Council finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Monitoring and Reporting Probrarn, Lincoln North Pointe, reflects the independent juc
the City Council of the City of barisbad,
EFFECTIVE D TE: This resolution shall be effective upon its adoption
1998, by the following vote, to wit
PASSED AND DOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of t
Carlsbad on the 22nd day of A September
A
AYES: Coun il Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin and Hall
NOES: none^
ABSENT: Council Member Nygaard
I
~
I
I
I
ATTEST:
I
ZLETHA L. WUTENKRANZ, kity Clerk 1
(SEAL) I
I
I
I
I
I
I I I
I
I
I
~
~
I
I I
~
I -3-
I
e 0 PAGE 2 OF AGENDH BILL NO. /'$$<L
include the acquisition of 31.46 acres of comparable quality habitat either from within tt-
Carlsbad or outside the City of Carlsbad and/or the payment of an in-lieu fee to the City of
for future acquisition of comparable acreage and quality habitat. In consideration of the f
the Planning Director issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project on June 25, I!
EXH I BITS :
I. City Council Resolution No. 54J-3/9
2. Location Map
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4354, 4355, 4356, 4357, 4358, 4359 and 4360
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated August 19, 1998
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated August 19, 1998.
I e I 0
l
I EXHINT
PALOMAR AIRPORT
- I @
LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
S~P 109(B)
I
I I
I
I
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e e EX1
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4354
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM TO CREATE A 12 LOT INDUSTRIAL
SUBDIVISION AND DEVELOP 6 OF THE LOTS WITH 6
OFFICEiRESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT/WAREHOUSE
BUILDINGS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL TO THE
SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD IN L0CA.L
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
CASE NO.: SP 109(B)/CT 98-07PUD 98-01/
HDP 98-05/SUP 98-03/CUP 98-08/PIP 98-07
WHEREAS, Lincoln Property Company, Developer”, has filed I
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by W9kNP Re
Limited Partnership, “Owner”, described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 1110, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel
map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
official records.
Diego County, on November 10, 1972 as Pile No. 302114 of
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of August, ;
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered i
relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
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
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing. the
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Mitigated
Declaration according to Exhibit “ND” dated June 25, 1998. and “I
findings:
June 16, 1998. attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, anal
considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the environmental impac
identified for this project and said comments thereon, and the Mitigation Moni
Reporting Program, on file in the Planning Department, prior to RECOMM
APPROVAL of the project. Based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thc
Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence the project v
significant effect on the environment and hereby RECOMMENDS APPROV
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
The Planning Commission does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Decla
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared in accord
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelint
Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad.
The Planning Commission finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration rc
independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad.
2.
3.
Conditions:
1. The Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the L1
NORTH POINTE Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, date
19,1998.
...
...
-
...
...
,..
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 4354 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of August 19'
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas, Heineman.
Nielsen, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOMMILYER
Planning Director
-
PC RES0 NO. 4354 -3-
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project AddresdLocation: South of Palomar Airport Road along the west side of El Cami
Real.
Subdivision of a 50.23 acre Planned Industrially (PM) zon
property into 12 office/warehouse lots (ranging from 2.47 to 6.
acres in area), balanced grading (350,000 cubic yards) of the s
and the construction of 6 offce/warehouse buildings (ranging fro
60,000 square feet to 72,425 square feet in area and totalii
385,085 square feet) and a satellite antennae dish farm.
Project Description:
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described proje
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act a~
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review,
Mitigated Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact (
the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file
the Planning Department.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in t
Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from t,
public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within :
days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Chris DeCerbo in the Plannii
Department at (760) 43 8- 1 16 1, extension 4445.
DATED: JUNE 25,1998
CASE NO: SP 109(B)/CT 98-07PUD 98-01/PIP 98-07/HDP 98-05/CUP 98-08/
SUP 98-03
/ A&’
CASE NAME: - LINCOLN NORTH POINTE i
PUBLISH DATE: JUNE 25,1998 (/&z& 5 kfi2
76
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1 576 - (760) 438-11 61 - FAX (760) 438-08s
0 0
ENVlRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT POW - PART H
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: SP 109(B)\ CT 98-07\PUD 98-0I\PIP 98-07\HDP 98-O5\CUP 98-O8\SUP 98-
DATE: 6/ I6/
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
2, APPLICANT: Thomas Lamore. Smith Consulting Architects
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 5355 Mira Sorrento Place. Suite 6C
San Diego CA. 92121.619-452-3188
DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: 3/4/98
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The prouosed proiect entails the development of a 50.23 ac
Planned Industrial (PM) zoned property which is located south of Palomar Airport Road a101
the west side of El Camino Real. The specific development actions include: (1) subdivision
the property into 12 non-residential lots ranging from 2.47 acres to 6.28 acres in area. (2) nradii
of the entire property (350.000 cubic yards balanced on-site), and (3) the construction of
office/warehouse buildings (ranging between 60,000 sf and 72.425 sf in area and totalii
385,085 square feet) on proposed lots 1-3 and 6-8 and a satellite antennae dish farm.
4.
5.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this projec
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impa
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
17] Land Use and Planning W Transportation/Circulation Public Services
0 Population and Housing
Geological Problems Energy & Mineral Resources Aesthetics
[7 Water -. 0 Hazards 0 Cultural Resources
W Air Quality 0 Noise 0 Recreation
B Biological Resources 0 Utilities & Service Systems
Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0 DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
0 I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on t
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
E 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 mitigatit
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIT
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and
ENVIRONMENTAL 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 earli
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 Mitigatc
Negative Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to 1
addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on tl
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potential
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Master Environmenl
Impact Review (MEIR 93-01) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been void1
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Master Environmental Review (MEIR 93-01
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed projec
Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
I r-
-\ 1 i , c. r i L:\ -7 y, f '/" f b/,),[; 1 [/ rv'ic i, ' c/-- L - L t /p
Pranner Signatire Date
p &id/ /5kJh$?? Date
&/ &- 'i' Jy
2 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the C
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significi
effect on the environment, The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the folowi
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and hum
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): Negatj
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
0 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 e2
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 involved.
“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 t
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopt
general standards and policies.
“Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporati
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” tc
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and t
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce t
effect to a less than significant level.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that
effect is significant.
Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significi
effect on the environment, but &l potentially significant effects (a) have been analyn
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applical
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigai
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upc
the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the pri
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additior
environmeiital document is required (Prior Compliance).
When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily requir
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier E
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement
Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence tl
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
0
0
0
0
0
0
3 Rev. 03/28/96
e 0
0 If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing i
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, ar
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In th
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 includir
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. a1
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 reduc
the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part 11 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.
0
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
0 0
hues (and Supporting lnformation Sources). Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant lmpa
Impact Unless lmpact
Mitigation
lncorporated
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
0 0 0 Ix o 0 0 Ix
0 1K
0 0 [x
0 0 o E
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity? [7 (#l:PgS 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? (#l:Pgs 5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
11. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? (X1:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 -
5.5-6)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-1 - 5.5-6)
0 0 o E
0 0 o E
0 0 nix
111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
b) Seismic ground shaking? ((#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
c) Seismic ground failure. including liquefaction?
((ff1:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1.15)
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 -
5.1-15)
e) Landslides or mudflows? (# 1 :Pgs 5.1 - 1 - 5.1 - 15)
f) Erosion. changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading. or fill? (#I :Pgs
5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
g) Subsidence ofthe land? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
11) Expansive soils? (!#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15)
i) Unique geologic or physical features? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 -
5.1 - 1 5)
0 El 0 E I7 0 0 Ix 17 0 0 E
0 0 o E
0 0 0 E o 0 0 Ix
0 0 0 E 0 OB 0 0 0 E
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
0 0 o E
o 0 0 lz
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff! (#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-
11)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-I 1)
5 Rev. 03/28/96
0 Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impac
e Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
0 0 0 [XI
CI 0 0 IXI
0 0 0 €3
0 0 0 [xi
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
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? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? ((# 1 :Pgs
body? ((#l:Pgs 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
0 cl cl [XI
0 0 0 [XI
0 0 cl [xi
((#l:PgS 5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
11)
5.2-1 - 5..2-11)
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) IXI 0 0 0
0 0 0 [XI o 0 o [xi
cl 0 0 [xi
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3-
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-1
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? ((#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12)
d) Create objectionable odors? ((#l:Pgs 5.3-1 - 5.3-12)
1 - 5.3-12)
- 5.3-12)
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#I :Pgs
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)? (iY1:Pgs 5.7-1 - 5.7.22)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#I:Pgs 5.7-1 -
5.7.22)
[XI 0 0
O El cl IXI
0 0 0 Do
17 0 0 [XI
0 0 0 €K
cl 0 o Ix
0 0 0 [x
5.7-1 - 5.7.22)
(#l:Pg~ 5.7-1 - 5.7.22)
(#I :Pgs 5.7-1--5.7.22)
(#l:Pg~ 5.7-1 - 5.7.22)
(#l:Pg~ 5.7-1 - 5.7.22)
g)
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
in impacts to:
6 Rev. 0312 8/96
0
Potentially Potentially Less Than KO Significant Significant Significant Impac
0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
lncorporated
0 [x1 ci 0
o 0 cl [xi
0 w ci 0
0 IXI 0
0 0 0 Lzl
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants. fish, insects,
animals. and birds)? (#2)
bj Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#2)
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
(#2)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (#1 :Pgs 5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
(#l:PgS 5.4-1 - 5.4-24)
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.1-5 €2 5.13-
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? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5
cl 01xI
0 0 w
0 0 0 w
(#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-1 - 5.13-9)
1 - 5.13-9)
& 5.13-1 - 5.13-9)
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
0 o 0 [x]
0 0 0 w
0 0 om
0 cl 0
grass, or trees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5) 0 0 €3
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5)
Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? (# 1 :Pgs 5.10.1 - 1 -
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-1 - 5.10.1-5)
e) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
bj
5. I 0.1-5)
I
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in .existing noise levels? (X1:Pgs 5.9-1 - 5.9-
15)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#1 :Pgs 5.9-
1 - 5.9-15)
0 0 w
0 0 0 [x1
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:
Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6) 0 0 0 [x1 0 El 0 0 [x]
a>
b) Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12,6-1 - 5,12.6-4)
c) Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5)
7 Rev. 03128f96
0 Potentially Potentially Less Than No
Significant Significant Significant Impa
0 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
Incorporated
0 0 0 w
0 0 G [XI
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (1,
pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7)
e) Other governmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -
5.12.8-7)
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? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 &
b) Communications systems? (#l; pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7)
0 0 [x
0 0 OB 0 E
0 0 0 E 0 0 0 w 0 cl 0 w 0 0 w
5,13-1 - 5,13-9)
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (#l:Pgs 5.12.3-1 - 5.12.3-7)
e) Storm water drainage? (#l:Pg 5.2-8)
f) Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3)
g) Local or regional water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 -
5.12.3-7)
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
0 0 0 IXI o 0 0 [XI
0 0 0 [XI
0 0 I7 Ix o 0 0 Ix o 17 cl E 0 0 cl [XI
0 0 w
a)
b)
c)
Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l:Pgs
Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (#1 :Pgs
Create light or glare? (#l:Pgs 5.1 1-1 - 5.1 1-5)
5.11-1 -5.11-5)
5.1 1-1 - 5.1 1-5)
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-
b) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-
c) Affect historical resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#1 :Pgs
Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
10)
10)
5.8-1 - 5.8-10)
e)
-.
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
0 17 El [XI
0 CI MI
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 -
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (# 1 :Pgs
5.1 2.8-7)
5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7)
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Rev. 03/28/96 8
0 Potentially Potentially Less Than KO
Significant Significant Significant lmpa
e Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation
lncorporated
0 0 0 w a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
0 0 0 [XI b) Does the pro-iect 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?
0 0 IXI c)
-.
9 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0
XVII . EARLIER ANALYSES .
With the exception of biological resources, earlier analysis of this proposed office/warehou
project has been completed through the General Plan Update (GPA 94-01) and related Mast
Environmental Impact Report (MEIR 93-01) . The MEIR is cited as source #1 in the precedii
checklist. This proposal is consistent with the applicable portions of the General Plan and
considered a Subsequent Project that was described in MEIR 93-01 as within its scope. P
feasible mitigation measures identified in MEIR 93-0 1 which are appropriate to this Subseque
Project have been incorporated into this project. The development of this project will howev
result in significant biological impacts that were not analyzed in the MEIR for which mitigatic
measures are required. Accordingly, these biological impacts and required mitigation measur
are described below.
-.
10 Rev. 03/28/96
e 0
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL, EVALUATION
I. PROJECT DESCFUPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This project is located south of Palomar Airport Road and along the west side of El Camino Re
and entails the subdivision of a 50.23 acre property into 12 offce/warehouse lots which range
area from 2.47 acres to 6.28 acres and the construction of 6 office/warehouse buildings (385.01
square feet) on lots 1-3 and 6-8. The project’s grading would be balanced on-site and wou consist of 350,000 cubic yards of cut and fill, Elevations on the project site range from 220 €t
at the western end of the property to 325 feet at the eastern end. The south-eastern 21.4 acres
the subject property is developed with the vacated Hughes Aircraft industrial building(s) a
associated utilities and parking lot. The northeastern corner of the site (1 0.42 acres) is compris
of ruderal habitat (non-native weeds). Dense native habitadvegetation exists within the west€
18.42 acres of the property. The project site is designated for Planned Industrial developme
The property is surrounded by light industrial development to the south and west, and a hotel
the north. El Camino Real borders the eastern property boundary.
--
11 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0
11. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
B. Environmental Impact Discussion
Biological Resources
Implementation of the proposed project would result in significant direct and indirect biologic
impacts to the following sensitive upland habitat and sensitive plant species: Coyote Brush Scr
(.35 acres), Southern Maritime Chaparral (15.32 acres), Mule Fat Scrub (.06 acre)? Del M
Manzanita (72 individuals), Del Mar Mesa sand aster (80 individuals) and Nuttall‘s scrub OE
The project is conditioned to mitigate at a ratio of 2: 1 (3 1.46 acres) the project’s impacts to 15.
acres of Southern Maritime Chaparral and -41 acres of other sensitive habitat and sensitive plz
species. The specific mitigation site(s) (either within the City of Carlsbad or outside of the Cil
or mitigation method (in-lieu fee) shall be subject to the approval of the City of Carlsbad, U.
Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Game. The mitigation shall
required to be approved by such agencies and implemented by the developer prior to the issuan
of grading permits for any phase of the project.
The western edge of the project site includes .7 acres of wetlands (Southern Willow Scrub)
which will not be directly impacted by development. In order to mitigate potential indire
impacts to this wetland, the project has been designed to include a minimum 10 foot wide buff
along the eastern wetland edge, and is conditioned 1. that the wetland be enhanced by tl
removal of non-native pampas grass, and 2. that the proposed manufactured slope locatl
and which are compatible with the function of the wetland.
adjacent to the wetland be planted with a mix of species which are primarily native to the arl
Air Quality
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updatc
1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle milt
traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reacti7
organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur, and suspended particulates. These aerosols are tl
major contributors to air pollution in the City as well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since tl
San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin”, any additional air emissions are considere
cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in tl
updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region.
-.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a varie
of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisioi
for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2) measure
to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation Deman
Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including ma:
transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and f
participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable an
appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into tl
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
12 Rev. 03128196
0 0
Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project
located within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is markr
“Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, t!
preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by Ci
Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for i
quality impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subseque
projects covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, 1
Planning Department.
further environmental review of air quality impacts is required, This document is available at t‘
TransportatiodCirculation
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updat
1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequ:
to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severe
impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. The
generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsb
Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersectio
are projected to fail the City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numero
mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include measu
to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to devel
alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestri
linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies wh
adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highw
onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. T
applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either be
incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of t
failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefo
the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project
consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because t
recent certification of Final Master EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, includ
Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Ph
Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulati
impacts is required. -
a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This “Statement
Rev. 03/28/96 13
0 0 111. EARLIER ANALYSES USED
The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on &le in the City 1
Carlsbad Planning Department located at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California, 9200
(760) 438-1 161, extension 4471.
1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Upda
(MEIR 93-01), dated March 1994, City of Carlsbad Planning Department.
Biological Resources Report and Imuact Assessment - Hughes Propem, dated February, 19s 2.
Dudek and Associates.
-.
14 Rev. 03/28/96
0 e LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
1. Prior to the issuance of grading permits for any phase of this project, the proje
developer shall be required to mitigate at a ratio of 2: 1 (total of 3 1.46 acres) the project
impacts to 15.32 acres of Southern Maritime Chaparral and .41 acres of other sensiti7
habitat. The specific mitigation may include the acquisition of 3 1.46 acres of comparab
quality habitat either from wihn the City of Carlsbad or outside the City of Carl&
and/or the payment of an in-lieu fee to the City of Carlsbad for future acquisition
comparable acreage and quality habitat. The specific habitat mitigation sites and/or i
lieu fees shall be subject to the approval of the City of Carlsbad, U.S. Fish and Wildli
Service and the California Department of Fish and Game.
2. Prior to the issuance of building permits for any phase of this project, non-native pap
grass shall be removed from the on-site wetlands and the proposed manufactured slo
adjacent to and east of the wetlands shall be planted with a mix of species which a
primarily native to the area and are compatible with the function of the wetlands.
3.
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
-.
15 Rev. 03/28/96
0 0 APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AN
CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
E 11 Signature
-
16 Rev. 03/28/96
ob m
I : z
4
n 3
r- 4r-
T
00 m
k
:g
5%
I-= on
g4
\-
r- m
&$ (jj y ..
z$j> mr-Q E; ; €2 ;;; 8 .o Q
& .E * c 2eg [
.E i ; .i
g €5 C .g 5 '5
s E E
LEE i
42 5 '5 I -mu C 9Q,e PLm
=+ 5 a g .= 5
.-
uo 7
* C
O3Q -
+ c
I
(i C Q.E s I mc ? .E CJ) a, L C
c
I: * t QP .E c
I
\c,% 5 < I
(
am; zz
Z$g 52
zm
-lnQ LO
Coz E * c
5 5; i
gov, * c i 0 srn-~
cj 0'"s
-I zF2 +mE . ( 222 0 cc
n a, .' -
7
*
/ z
c, Q) S
O a z e
2 c
.-
- g c .-
-I
I- .-a73 0 uE-6 z $€
-
2 0 0
EQ ;
o,€ .E 0 2
!?!a€ a, 2 .- 3-EzA v,.Fcncq F :cy
:% sz
8 o"$
0
SQ
3 .- c 03
Q,-u(v
,-2 Qg E $s K
0 Eo a =moa,
(3) moo0 0 .P- c a)--
T- 'cna,m
Ooi €%a0
~ -cno0
c. SQ(fJv, 0 s.gma 3 Q,-ZF
w .sEma,
<
€223 < i irii
!=K30 3 gQ,v,m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4355
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 109(B)
TO REPEAL THE SPECIFIC PLAN ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF EL
CAMINO REAL TO THE SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT
ROAD IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5.
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
CASE NO.: SP 109(B)
WHEREAS, Lincoln Property Company, “Developer”, has filed ,
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by W9LNP Re
Limited Partnership, “Owner”, described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 1110, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel
map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, on November 10, 1972 as File No. 302114 of
official records.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Spe
Amendment, on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department, LINCOLN NORTH PO
109(B) as provided by SP 109 and Government Code Section 65.453 and Title
Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS. the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of Aug
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
--
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered
relating to the Specific Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS. on March 20,1973, the City Council approved SP109, a:
and conditioned in Planning Commission Resolution No. 836 and City Council Resc
3087.
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
NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
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 Co
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, SI
to repeal SP 109 based on the following findings and subject to the
conditions :
Findinm :
1. The subject property was originally processed under Specific Plan 109 in
to its location within the Palomar Airport Influence Area. However, ti
Updated General Plan no longer mandates that projects located within the
Airport Influence Area be required to process a specific plan. Instead, I
Element Airport Planning policy C.l requires that all projects that arl
within the Airport Influence Area be required to process other disc
permits for approval. The proposal to process this project throul
discretionary permits (CT, PIP, PUD, HDP, CUP and SUP) is therefore c
with the General Plan. Any future development of the subject prope
require the approval of a Planned Industrial Permit.
2. The existing SP 109 is obsolete and does not include all the necessary Spei
provisions, pursuant to Article 8, Sections 65451 of the California Plan
Zoning Law.
All necessary public facilities can be provided concurrent with need and
provisions have been provided to implement those portions of the capital imy
program applicable to the subject property.
The proposed industrial uses will be appropriate in area, location and overall de:
purpose intended.
environment of sustained desirability and stability. Such development 7
performance standards established by this title.
In the case of other similar non-residential uses. such development will be pro1
surrounding areas are protected from any adverse effects from such developmen
The streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and adequate to carry the a
traffic thereon.
The area surrounding the development is or can be planned and zoned in coordii
substantial compatibility with the development.
3
4.
The design and development standards are such as to
-
5.
6.
7.
PC RES0 NO. 4355 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
8. Appropriate measures are proposed to mitigate any adverse environmental i
noted in the mitigated negative declaration for the project.
Conditions:
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all c(
and modifications to the Specific Plan Amendment document(s) necessary to m
internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Dev
shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed dev
different from this approval: shall require an amendment to this approval.
Approval of SP 109(B) is granted subject to the approval of HDP 98-05KT 91
98-03PUD 98-O1/CUP 98-08 and PIP 98-07.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their teri
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have thl
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issua
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of o
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute lit
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their viola
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's ay
this Specific Plan Amendment.
2.
3.
...
...
...
...
."
*.-
...
-. ...
...
... '
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 4355 -j -
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
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of August 195
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas. Heineman. 1
Nielsen, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary
AB STAIN:
ATTEST:
Planning Director
--
PC RES0 NO. 4355 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
2 1
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4356
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
50.23 ACRES INTO 12 LOTS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL
TO THE SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5
CARLSBAD TRACT NUMBER CT 98-07 TO SUBDIVIDE
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
CASE NO.: CT 98-07
WHEREAS, Lincoln Property Company, “Developer”, has filed a
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by W9/LNP Re:
Limited Partnership, “Owner”, described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 1110, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel
map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, on November 10, 1972 as File No. 302114 of
official records.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentai
Map as shown on Exhibit(s) “A” - “I” dated August 19, 1998, on file in the
Department, LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, CT 98-07 as provided by Chapter 20.
Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of August 1
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and -
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered i
relating to the Tentative Tract Map.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 8
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Con
findings and subject to the following conditions:
APPROVES LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, CT 98-07, based on the fi
Findings:
1. That the proposed map and the proposed design and improvement of the subdi
conditioned, is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General E
applicable specific plans, Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and
Subdivision Map Act, and will not cause serious public health problems, in
design and improvements for the map are in compliance with all applica
policies and standards, and necessary public facilities and services needed
the development will be in place prior to occupancy of any buildings r
within the project.
That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land u!
Commercial development on the General Plan, in that the site is design
Planned Industrial land uses and the proposed officehesearc
development/warehouse uses are consistent with this designation.
That the site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the development
site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate non-residential developme
intensity proposed, in that the project meets all of the requirements of the P
without the need for a variance from development standards and all require
facilities and services will be provided.
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conl
easements of record or easements established by court judgment, or acquire
public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdii
that all existing easements of record within the project are consistent >
proposal or shall be relocated as necensary concurrent with the recordatic
final map.
That- the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to I
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act).
That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future p
natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that the area is dc
by westerly wind patterns which allows the use of natural heating and
opportunities and the large building separation and north to south
alignment enhances these opportunities.
2.
surrounding properties are designated for Planned Industrial or TraveVReci
3.
4.
5.
6.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
7. That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause su
environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife
habitat, in that the project will not encroach into on-site wetlands and h
conditioned to mitigate, at a 2:l ratio, impacts to 15.32 acres of Southern N
Chaparral and .41 acres of other sensitive habitat.
That the discharge of waste horn the subdivision will not result in violation of
California Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, in that the pra
been designed in accordance with the Best Management Practices for watei
protection in accordance with the City’s sewer and drainage standards. In a
the project is conditioned to comply with the National Pollution D
Elimination System (NPDES) standard to prevent any discharge violations.
The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein for CT
in conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the follow
A. Land Use - The site is designated for Planned Industrial land use
proposed office/research and development/warehouse uses are c(
with the Planned Industrial General Plan designation.
Circulation - The project will provide roadway improvements to El
Real including median, signalization, additional turn lanes and dect
lanes.
Noise - Temporary construction activities would be required to com
the City’s Construction Noise Ordinance and the project would com
the noise guidelines.
Houskg - The project is conditioned to pay a non-residential af
housing impact linkage fee if adopted by City Council.
Open Space and Conservation - The project has been designed to not e
into and provide a buffer around the on-site wetlands, and condit
mitigate project impacts to 15.32 acres of Southern Maritime Chapa
.41 acres of other sensitive habitat.
F. Public Safety - All buildings would comply with UBC and state seismi
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements I
applicable local facilities management plan, and all City public facility poli
ordinances since:
A.
8.
9.
B.
C.
D.
E.
-.
10.
The project has been conditioned to ensure that the final map will not be :
unless the City Council finds that sewer service is available to serve tht
map that building permits may not be issued for the project unless thc
Engineer determines that sewer service is available, and building canr
within the project unless sewer service remains available, and the
In addition, the project is conditioned such that a note shall be placed on
9 PC RES0 NO. 4356 -3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
Engineer is satisfied that the requirements of the Public Facilities Eleme
General Plan have been met insofar as they apply to sewer service for this
Statutory School fees will be paid to ensure the availability of school fac
the Carlsbad School District.
Park-in-lieu fees are required as a condition of approval.
B.
C.
D. 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 ap
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.
E.
11. 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 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This will ensure continued avail
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 12. Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 5,
13. That all necessary public facilities required by the Growth Management Ordin
be constructed or are guaranteed to be constructed concurrently with the need
created by this project and in compliance with adopted City standards.
The project is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan (CLUP)
McClellan-Palomar Airport, dated April 1994, in that, as conditioned the applic
record a notice concerning aircraft noise. The project is compatible with the
noise levels of the CLUP; and, based on the noise/land use compatibility mat1
CLUP, the proposed land use is compatible with the airport, in that officehese:
development/warehouse uses are compatible with noise environments of i
dBA CNEL. The maximum airport noise level (65 dBA CNEL) will occur 01
Thatthe project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual, adopted by Citj
Resolution No. 90-384.
14.
15.
Conditions:
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all cc
and modifications to the Tentative Tract Map document(s) necessary to mi
internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Dev
shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed dev
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
f5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
2. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, i
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
The Developer shall provide the City with a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar co
Tentative Map as approved by the final decision making body. The Tental
shall reflect the conditions of approval by the City. The Map copy shall be sub
the City Engineer and approved prior to building, grading, final map, or imp
plan submittal, whichever occurs first.
The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan
reduced legible version of the approving resolutions on a 24” x 36” blueline
Said blueline drawing(s) shall also include a copy of any applicable Coastal Dev
Permit and signed approved site plan.
The final map shall not be approved unless the City Council finds as of the timi
3.
4.
5.
approval that sewer service is available to serve the subdivision.
6. The Developer shall pay the public facilities fee adopted by the City Council on
1987, (amended July 2, 1991) and as amended from time to time, and any devl
fees established by the City Council pursuant to Chapter 2 1.90 of the Carlsbad h
Code or other ordinance adopted to implement a growth management system or
and Improvement Plan and to hlfill the subdivider’s agreement to pay th
facilities fee dated February 25,1998, a copy of which is on file with the City (
is incorporated by this reference. If the fees are not paid, this application wi
consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will be void.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are
as part of the Zone 5 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits, including, but not limitc
7.
following:
8. The Developer shall provide proof of payment of statutory school fees to
conditions of overcrowding as part of the building permit application. The a~
these fees shall be determined by the fee schedule in effect at the time of buildir
application.
If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this rc
housing project are challenged this approval shall be suspended as pro
Government Code Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be in.
approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project wi
condition complies with all requirements of law.
Approval of CT 98-07 is granted subject to the approval of SP 109(B)/PUD 98.
98-051SUP 98-031CUP 98-08 and PIP 98-07. This project shall comply
conditions and mitigation measures which are required as part of the approvec
9.
10.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -5-
I
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
North Pointe Mitigated Negative Declaration, PUD 98-01, HDP 98-05, SUP 92
CUP 98-08, as contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4355, 43,
4359,4360.
The Developer shall establish an owner's association and corresponding c
conditions and restrictions. Said CC&Rs shall be submitted to and approve
Planning Director prior to final map approval. The CC&Rs shall adequatelj
maintenance of all common landscaped areas (including landscaping within
areas) and paved parking areas. Prior to issuance of a building permit the I
shall provide the Planning Department with a recorded copy of the official CC
have been approved by the Department of Real Estate and the Planning Direc
minimum, the CC&Rs shall contain the following provisions:
A.
11.
General Enforcement bv the Citv. The City shall have the right, bu
obligation, to enforce those Protective Covenants set forth in this Dedi
favor of, or in which the City has an interest.
12. Prior to the issuance of the final map, Developer shall submit to the City a.
Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satis
the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interes
City of Carlsbad has issued a CT 98-07, SP 109(B), PUD 98-01, HDP 98-05,
03, and CUP 98-08, by Resolutions No. 4354, 4355, 4356, 4357, 4358, 4359,
the real property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall
property description, location of the file containing complete project detail,
conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for in(
the Notice of Restriction. The Planning Director has the authority to execute a
an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a sf
good cause by the Developer or successor in interest.
Trash receptacle areas shall be enclosed by a six-foot high masonry wall v
pursuant to City standards. Location of said receptacles shall be approve
Planning Director. Enclosure shall be of similar colors and/or materials to the
the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
An exterior lighting plan including parking areas shall be submitted for Planning
approval. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and avoid any ir
adjazent homes or property.
No outdoor storage of materials shall occur onsite unless required by the Fire (
such instance a storage plan will be submitted for approval by the Fire Chie
Planning Director.
The Developer shall prepare a detailed landscape and irrigation plan in conform
the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City's Landscape Manual. '
shall be submitted to and approval obtained from the Planning Director prj
approval of the final map, grading permit, or building permit, whichever occws
13.
14.
15.
16.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -6-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1 *
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved p
maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, ti
debris.
The first submittal of detailed landscape and irrigation plans shall be accompanir
project’s building, improvement, and grading plans.
17.
18. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a mi€[
program for this development prior to occupancy of any building.
Building identification andor addresses shall be placed on all new and existing 1
so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identificatic
addresses shall contrast to their background color.
The Developer is aware that the City is preparing a non-residential housing in
(linkage fee) consistent with Program 4.1 of the Housing Element. The apI
Mher aware that the City may determine that certain non-residential projects r
to pay a linkage fee, in order to be found consistent with the Housing Eleme
General Plan. If a linkage fee is established by City Council ordinance and/or r
and this project becomes subject to a linkage fee pursuant to said ordinanc
resolution, then the Developer, or his/her/their 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 developme
existing development, in which case, the fee shall be paid on approval of the fi
parcel map or certificate of compliance, required to process the non-resident
whichever pertains. If linkage fees are required for this project, and they are not
project will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this prc
become null and void.
19.
20.
21. Prior to the recordation of the first final tract map or the issuance of building
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this
is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan
Airport, in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the City
(see Noise Form #2 on file in the Planning Department).
Eack-lot of this development has been designed with adequate parking
proposed uses. As no joint use of parking agreement has been provided fa
development, each lot must stand on its own for parking purposes.
improvements for this development are only permitted if the parking 1
complies with City Ordinance parking requirements for the mix of uses I
(office/research and development/warehouse). This condition shall be inc
the Notice of Restriction required in Condition No. 12 of this resolution.
22.
...
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
’ 7
*
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e a
Engineering General Conditions
NOTE: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following engineering c(
upon the approval of this proposed major subdivision must be met prior to approval c
map.
23. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the developer shall comply 7
requirements of the City’s anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and whe
program is formerly established by the City.
There shall be one final subdivision map recorded for this project.
Approval of this tentative tract map shall expire thirty-six months from thc
Planning Commission approval unless a final map is recorded. An extens
be requested by the applicant. Said extension shall be approved or denie
discretion of the Planning Commission. In approving an extension, the 1
Commission may impose new conditions and may revise existing ca
pursuant to Section 20.12.110(a)(Z) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
The use of each of the proposed buildings shall be restricted so that any a(
traffic generated does not impact the existing traffic circulation, and the ac
Traffic Impact Fees are paid, but in no event shall the total project traffic g
exceed 5036 ADT without appropriate environmental review.
The developer shall provide an acceptable means for maintaining the private e
facilities and sewer facilities located therein and to distribute the costs
maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties w
subdivision. Adequate provision for such maintenance shall be included with the
subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
All concrete terrace drains shall be maintained by the owner’s associatio
commonly owned property) or the individual property owner (if on an ind
owned lot). An appropriately worded statement clearly identifying the respc
shallbe placed in the CC&Rs (if maintained by the Association) and on the Find
The developer shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents
and employees from any claim, action or proceeding against the City or it
officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or null an approval of the
Planning Commission or City Engineer which has been brought against the Ci
the time period provided for by Section 66499.37 of the Subdivision Map Act.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed constru
within this project, the developer shall submit to and receive approval from
Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all condi
24.
25.
26.
27.
within the subdivision and all the private: streets, sidewalks, street lights, sto
28.
29.
30.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -8-
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
requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operatio
The developer shall provide for sight distance corridors at the intersectio
driveways and El Camino Real in accordance with Engineering Standards
include the following statement in the CC&Rs and the Final Map non-map]
sheet:
3 1.
“No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object shall
within the area identified as the intersection sight distance in ac
with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.1 ant
underlying property owner shall maintain this condition.’’
FeedAgreements
32. The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required.
33. The owner of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the City
regarding drainage across the adjacent property.
The owner shall execute a hold harmless agreement for geologic failure.
Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, the owner
written consent to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaril
subdivision plan into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and La
District No. 1 on a form provided by the City.
34.
35.
36. Reciprocal access easementdcovenants for easements and/or maj
agreements acceptable to the City Engineer and City Attorney shall be exc
the owner and/or placed on the final map for the shared access c
connecting all the lots in the subdivision.
Grading
37. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shoi
tentative map, a grading permit for this project is required. The developer mi
and receive approval for grading plans in accordance with city codes and stand
to issuance of a building permit for the project.
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occur:
developer shall submit proof that a Notice of Intention has been submitted to
Water Resources Control Board.
Upon completion of grading, the developer shall ensure that an “as-graded” geo
is submitted to the City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology a
by the grading operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constr
38.
39.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -9-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
must be based on a contour map which represents both the pre and post site gradi
plan shall be signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist. '
shall be prepared on a 24" x 36" mylar or similar drafting film and shall b
permanent record.
No grading for private improvements shall occw outside the limits of the sul
unless a grading or slope easement or agreement is obtained from the owe:
affected properties and recorded. If the developer is unable to obtain the grading
easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case the develc
either amend the tentative map or modify the plans so grading will not occur ou
project site in a manner which substantially conforms to the approved tentativc
determined by the City Engineer and Planning Director.
40.
Dedications/Improvements
41. Additional drainage easements may be required. Drainage structures shall be prc
installed prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit as may be re(
the City Engineer.
The owner shall make an offer of dedication to the City for all public st1
easements required by these conditions or shown on the tentative map. The offei
made by a certificate on the final map for this project. All land so offered
granted to the City free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and without co
City. Streets that are already public are not required to be rededicated.
Direct access rights for all lots abutting El Camino Real shall be waived on the fi
except for the access driveways as shown on the tentative map.
Cross lot drainage is specifically not approved unless easementskoven:
easements are granted to the affected lots as required.
The developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National .
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall pro\
management practices as referenced in the "California Storm Water Best Mar
Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to c
Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tc
the following:
A.
42.
43.
44.
45.
to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City E
All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with esi
disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and hazardoi
products.
Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil, ar
solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such fluids
be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain or stoi
B.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -10-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
I9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides, hc
insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet Fedei
County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective containers.
Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface I
when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements.
C.
46. Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all public improvements
prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In accordance with City Stan(
developer shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as
by law, improvements shown on the tentative map and the following improvemei
A. El Camino Real to prime arterial standards, including fully improved
and deceleration lanes, as shown on the tentative map. The (
configurations, including the proposed use of non-standard curb r:
specifically not approved as shown. They are to be designed to en$
standards to the satisfaction of the city engineer.
B. Traffic signal at the intersection of the southerly driveway and El Cam1
The signal shall be interconnected with the existing traffic signal!
intersections of El Camino Real with Palomar Airport Road and Cam
Roble. These plans are to include traffic control, signing and striping pl:
A list of the above improvements shall be placed on an additional map sheet on
map per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act. Imprc
listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the
improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement.
The developer shall install sidewalks along all public streets abutting the p
conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards prior to occupancy of any building
At the signalized southerly driveway, remove the island shown in the tenta
and adjust the total width of the driveway to the satisfaction of the City Eng
Prior to occupancy of any buildings, the developer shall install wheelchair ran:
pub-lic street corners as shown in the tentative map in conformance with
Carlsbad Standards.
47.
48.
49.
50. The structural section for the access aisles must be designed with a traffic index
accordance with City Standards due to tmck access through the parking area and,
with an ADT greater than 500. The structural pavement design of the aisle way2
submitted together with required R-value soil test information and approved by
prior to the issuance of a building permit.
The design of all private drainage systems shall be approved by the City Engir 51.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -1 1-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
drainage systems shall be inspected by the City. The standard improvement pl
and inspection fees shall be paid prior to issuance of any building or grading p
this project.
Drainage outfall end treatments for any drainage outlets where a direct access
maintenance purposes is not provided, shall be designed and incorporated
gradinghmprovement plans for the project. These end treatments shall be desig
to prevent vegetation growth from obstructing the pipe outfall. Designs could co
modified outlet headwall consisting of an extended concrete spillway sect
longitudinal curbing and/or radially designed rip-rap, or other means deemed apI
satisfaction of the Community Services Director and the City Engineer.
52.
8s 8 method of preventing vegetation gtowth directly in front of the pipe out11
Final Map Notes
53. Note(s) to the following effect(s) shall be placed on the final map as non-mappin
A. Geotechnical Caution:
The owner of this property on behalf of itself and all of its SUCCI
interest has agreed to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Carlsl
any action that may arise through any geological failure, ground watei
this subdivision due to its construction, operation or maintenance.
B. No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 3
above the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within
identified as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standa
Street-Design Criteria, Section 8 .B.3. The underlying property ow
maintain this condition.
or land subsidence and subsequent damage that may occur on, or adj
C. No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object shall e
within the area identified as the intersection sight distance in acc
with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.1
The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition.
Satellite Antennas
54.
--
The satellite antenna or appurtenance shall not be constructed on any easement
the easement holder’s permission.
The satellite antenna or appurtenance shall not be constructed in any drainage
over any drainage structure.
55.
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -12-
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 0
Water Conditions
56. The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which
collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The Sz
County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of applic,
any meter installation.
The Developer shall provide detailed information to the District Engineer regardi
flow in million gallons per day.
The entire potable water system, recycled water system and sewer system
evaluated in detail by Developer and District Engineer to insure that adequate (
pressure and flow demands can be met.
All District pipelines, pump stations, pressure reducing stations and appur
required for this project by the District shall be within public right-of-way o
easements granted to the District or the City of Carlsbad.
Sequentially, the Developer’s Engineer shall do the following:
A. Meet with the City Fire Marshal and establish the fire protection requirements
B. Prepare and submit a colored recycled water use area map and submit this mi
Planning Department for processing and approval by the District Engineer.
C. Prior to the preparation of sewer, water and recycled water improvement pl
Developer shall submit preliminary system layouts to the District Engir
review, comment and approval.
57.
demand, irrigation demand, fire flow demand in gallons per minute, and project1
58.
59.
60.
61. Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency pi
water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the C
adequate water service and sewer facilities respectively are available to the projet
time of the application for building pennits and that water and sewer capac
continue to be available until the time of occupancy.
All potable water and recycled water meters shall be placed within public right of 7
The following item(s) shall apply if checked:
[XI A public fire flow system shall be required for this industrial or corn
development, and it shall be constructed as a looped pipeline system.
-.
62.
63.
64. All landscape improvement plans shall be submitted to the City P1 Department.
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -13-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
1 5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
North County Transit District Conditions
65. A new southbound bus turnout shall be constructed along El Camino Re
project frontage at the farside of the existing southerly driveway. The app
location of the bus turnout should be between Station 305+50 and Station
This 170 foot section would be improved as a 12 foot deep bus turnout wit
of ingress, a 50 foot pad and 60 feet of egress, per NCTD Design Outlinc
Facilities, Figure 3 NCTD Design Outline for Bus Facilities, Figure 3.
turnout improvements should also include a sidewalk, a bus shelter, beni
receptacle and ADA boarding pad (8’ perpendicular to back of curb by
All facilities should meet ADA regulations and NCTD standards. The shell
be designed to compliment the architectural style of the development.
recommends the use of perforated metal screening instead of glazing for i
durability. The maintenance of this facility shall be the responsibilit
applicant.
Pedestrian access to El Camino Real should also be designed into the
Sidewalks should be extended from within the project to and along El Cami
Additionally, signalized pedestrian crossings should be provided at the inti
of El Camino Real and the driveway to the project.
Developer shall install street lights within one-quarter mile of this future
location.
66.
67.
General Condition
68. If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terr
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail t
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuar
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of o(
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute liti
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their viola1
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s ap
this Tentative Map.
--
Code Reminders:
69. The Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of
map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required b;
20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
70.
...
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -14-
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
71. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sectio
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of
permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
72. The project shall comply with the latest non-residential disabled access reqi
pursuant to Title 24 of the State Building Code.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integr
concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and s’
substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfactic
Directors of Community Development and Planning.
73.
The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not 1
the following:
74. The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this I
prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in ac
with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer.
Some improvements shown on the tentative map andor required by these condi
located offsite on property which neither the City nor the owner has sufficien
interest to permit the improvements to be made without acquisition of title or
The developer shall conform to Section 20.16.095 of the Carlsbad Municipal Cod
Prior to the future development of lots 4, 5, 9, 10, 11 and 12, Planned In
Permits shall be required to be approved by the Planning Director.
75.
76.
NOTECE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees, ded
reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenh
Vees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from August 19, 1998 to protest imposition of these feeslexactions.
protest them; you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Man
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure tc
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside,
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/e:
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor p
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection v
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously bet
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -15-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
j5
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 e
a NOTICE s;m;lar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously 01
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the I
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of August 1998
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas, Heineman, M
Nielsen, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary
ABSTAIN:
BAILEY NOBLE, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
--
PC RES0 NO. 4356 -16-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4357
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
NONRESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
PUD 98-01 ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG
THE WEST SIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL TO THE SOUTH OF
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD IN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 5
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
CASE NO.: PUD 98-01
WEREAS, Lincoln Property Company, “Developer”, has filed a
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by W9LNP Re;
Limited Partnership, “Owner”, described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 1110, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel
map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, on November 10, 1972 as File No. 302114 of
official records.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Nonre
Planned Unit Development Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “A” -“AA” dated August 1
on file in the Planning Department, LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, PUD 98-01 as prc
Chapter 2 1.47 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of Augu
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
-.
WHEREAS, at said public hearing. upon hearing and considering all tt
and arguments, if any, of persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered a
relating to the Planned Unit Development Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
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
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Cor APPROVES LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, PUD 98-01, based
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings: -
1. That the granting of this permit will not adversely affect and will be consistent
City code, the General Plan, applicable specific plans, master plans, and all adop
of the City and other governmental agencies, in that the project complies
development standards of the P-M zone, Titles 19 and 20, and the Palomar
Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The proposed officehesearc
development/warehouse projects is consistent with the Planned Industrial
Plan designation, and no specific plan or master plan applies to the project.
That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary and desirable to 1
service or facility which will contribute to the general well-being of the neigl
and community, in that the proposed officeiresearch and development/warehc
will provide additional employment opportunities to City residents, are co
with surrounding planned industrial and hotel uses and the project will prc
adequate circulation, parking, access, loading, delivery, open space, an
collection to meet the operational needs of the businesses.
That such project will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general w
persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improve
the vicinity, in that the project meets all applicable City standards and ordin;
public facilities and services will be provided, adequate access to the sitc
provided from El Camino Real, and the site plan includes all the necessary
to adjust the development to the surrounding neighborhood including !
enhanced architecture, and landscaping.
That the proposed nonresidential planned development meets all of the I
development standards of the underlying P-M zone and all policies and stan
the City.
2.
3.
4.
ConditionS:.
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make- all cc
and modifications to the Planned Unit Development document(s), necessary
them internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the
Development shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any
development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this apF
PC RES0 NO. 4357 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
1 5
16
l7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
2. Approval of PUD 98-01 is granted subject to the approval of SP 109(B)/CT 98
98-0YSUP 98-03/CUP 98-08 and PIP 98-07, PUD 98-01 is subject to a\\ c
contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4356 and 4360 for the ’
Map and Conditional Use Permit and all conditions of approval for PIP 98- - This approval shall become null and void if a final map is not approved for th
within 24 months from the date of project approval.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are. by their ter
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have thc
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted: deny or further condition issuai
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of o
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute lit
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their viola
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s ap
this Planned Unit Development.
’.
4.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition”
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for conve
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from August 19, 1998 to protest imposition of these feedexaction:
protest them. you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Cod(
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Ma,
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3 32.030. Failure
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review. set aside
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feed
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor
zoning, gracfing or other similar application processing or service fees in connection
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously be
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously c
expired.
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 4357 -3 -
1
0 0
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Commission of the City of Cdsbad, California, held on the 19th day of August 199
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas, Heineman. I
Nielsen, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary
AB STAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
1 !I MICHAEL J. HOBMILER
Planning Director
-
PC RES0 NO. 4357 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17 ’ 8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4358
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CAIUSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF EL
CAMINO REAL TO THE SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT IN
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5.
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
CASE NO: HDP 98-05
WHEREAS, Lincoln Property Company, “Developer”, has filed a
application with the City of Carisbad regarding property owned by W9LNP Re:
Limited Partnership, “Owner”, described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 1110, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel
map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, on November 10, 1972 as File No. 302114 of
official records.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a
Development Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “LL‘ - “BBB” dated August 19, 1998, (
the Carlsbad Planning Department, LINCOLN WORTH POINTE, HDP 98-05, as prc
Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of Augu!
consider said request; and
- - WHEREAS. at said hearing, upon hearing and considering all testim
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered a
relating to the Hillside Development Permit: and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
1
2
3
4
5
t5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Cor
APPROVES, LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, HDP 98-05, based
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinw :
1. That undevelopable areas of the project, i.e. slopes over 40%. have been
identified on the constraints map Exhibit “LL”-“SS” dated August 19,1998:
That the development proposal is consistent with the Purpose and Intent prov
Section 21.95.010 of the Hillside Ordinance, Chapter 21.95, as follows:
A.
2.
Project hillside conditions have been properly identified on the constraj
Exhibit 44LL”-“SS” dated August 19, 1998, which shows existing and
conditions and slope percentages;
The project has been designed to relate to the slope of the land, to mini
amount of grading, and to incorporate contour grading into manufacturc
which are located in highly visible public locations in that the project 1
designed to terrace from east to west consistent with the exis
acceptable range, and due to the fact that the proposed manufacturc
are not visible from public locations, they do not require contour grac
The project has been designed in an environmentally sensitive manner
lagoons and riparian ecosystems are protected from increased erosior
substantial impacts to natural resource areas, wildlife habitats or native VI
will occur in that a temporary de-silting basin has been incorporated
project on lot 12 to mitigate erosion impacts to the on-site wetlands,
project applicant has been conditioned to mitigate at a 2:l ratio,
impacts to 15.32 acres of Southern Maritime Chaparral and .41
other sensitive habitat.
B.
topography, project grading volumes of 7,692 cu ydslacre art
C.
3. The project complies with the Hillside Development and Design Standards in(
Section 21.95.120 of the Hillside Ordinance in that the existing 50%
intervening manufactured slope is developable, the project grading volume (
yddacre) is acceptable, the maximum manufactured slope height is 35 feet, p
manufactured slopes of greater than 20’ in height and 200’ in length are no
from a Circulation Element Road, collector street or useable public ope
(park), buildings 7 and 8 are setback from the manufactured slope edge a m
of 74 feet, and the western facing manufactured slopes will be landscaped c(
with the City’s Landscape Manual.
PC RES0 NO. 4358 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e 0
4. That the project design substantially conforms to the Hillside Development C
Manual, in that the proposed grading design will modify the existin
manufactured slope, yet preserve its general character.
Conditions:
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make. all c
and modifications to the Hillside Development Permit document(s) necessary
them internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the
Development shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any
development different from this approval. shall require an amendment to this api
Approval of HDP 98-05 is granted subject to the approval of SP 109(B)/CT 91
98-03PUD 98-O1/CUP 98-08 and PIP 98-07. HDP 98-05 is subject to all c
contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 4356 for the Tentative Ma
conditions of approval for PIP 98-01.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their ten
2.
3.
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail t
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuai
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of o
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute lit1
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their viola1
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s ap
this Hillside Development Permit.
This approval shall become null and void if a final map is not approved
project within 24 months from the date of project approval.
4.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition”
dedications, reservations. or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convei
“fees/exaciions.”
You have 90 days from August 19, 1998 to protest imposition of these fees/exaction>
protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code
66020(a). and file the protest and any other required information with the City Mar
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure t
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside,
annul their imposition.
PC RES0 NO. 4338 -3 -
1
2
3
4
5
61
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
l8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection
pro-ject; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously bt
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously t
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of August 195
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas. Heineman, 1
Nielsen, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary
ABSTAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
1
MI!C!.
,
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 4358 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
lo
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Is
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4359
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA. APPROVING AN EL
CAMINO REAL SCENIC CORRTDOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT
LOT INDUSTRIAL PARK ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL
TO THE SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
SUP 98-03 FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 50.23 ACRE, 12
CASE NO: SUP 98-03
WHEREAS, Lincoln Property Company, “Developer”, has filed i
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by W9kNP Re
Limited Partnership,, “Owner”, described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 1110, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel
map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, on November 10, 1972 as File No. 302114 of
official records.
(‘the Property”); and
WHEREAS. said verified application constitutes a request for a SF
Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “A” - “KK” dated August 19, 1998, on file in the
Department. LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, SUP 98-03, as provided by Chapter 21
Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS. the Planning Commission did on the 19th day of August,
a duly notked public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS. at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all
and arguments, if any. of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered
relating to the Special Use Permit:
NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Coi
findings and subject to the following conditions:
APPROVES LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, SUP 98-03. based on the
Findings:
1. The project complies with the requirements of the El Camino Real (ECR)
Development Standards and will not adversely impact the scenic qualil
corridor in that the project: a) has a “planned campus” design themc
maximum building height is 35 feet on lots fronting and within 400 feet of
the maximum grading (cut/fill) upon these lots does not exceed 7 feet; d) 1
are setback a minimum of 160 feet and parking a minimum of 35 feet from E
e) rooftop equipment is adequately screened from adjacent properties.
Conditions:
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all CI
internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Del
shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed de\
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
Approval of SUP 98-03 is granted subject to the approval of SP 109(B)/CT 9t
98-05RUD 98-O1/CUP 98-08 and PIP 98-07. SUP 98-03 is subject to all (
contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4356 and 4360 for the ’
Map and Conditional Use Permit and all conditions of approval for PIP 98-
This approval shall become null and void if a final map is not approved for tl
within 24 months from the date of project approval.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their ter
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have tli
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issus
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of (
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute li
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their viol;
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s a
this Special Use Permit.
and modifications to the Special Use Permit document(s) necessary to m
2.
3.
4.
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 4359 -2-
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 0
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition”
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for conve
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from August 19, 1998, to protest imposition of these feedexaction:
protest them. you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Codc
66020(a). and file the protest and any other required information with the City Ma
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges. nor
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously t:
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously
expired.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
-- ...
...
...
...
...
-3- PC RES0 NO. 4359
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
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 19th day of August. 19'
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas. Heineman, 1
Nielsen, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary
AB STAIN:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
\
MICHAEL J. HW~MIL~~R -
Planning Director
-
PC RES0 NO. 4359 -4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4360
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO DEVELOP A SATELLITE
ANTENNAS UPON BUILDING 2 WITHIN THE LINCOLN
NORTH POINTE PROJECT THAT IS GENERALLY LOCATED
ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF EL CAMINO REAL TO THE
SOUTH OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
ANTENNA DISH FARM ON LOT 2 AND ROOF-MOUNTED
CASE NO.: CUP 98-08
WHEREAS, Lincoln Property Company, “Developer”, has filed a
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by WSLNP Rea
Limited Partnership, “Owner”, described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 1110, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel
map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, on November 10, 1972 as File No. 302114 of
official records.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS. said verified application constitutes a request for a Conditi
Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “HH” - “KK dated August 19, 1998, on file in the
Planning Department, LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, CUP 98-08, as provided by
21.42 and 21.53 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS. the Planning Commission did, on the 19th day of August l!
--
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS. at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all tc
and arguments. if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered a
relating to the CUP 98-08.
NOW, THEREFORE. BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
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)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Cor
following findings and subject to the following conditions:
APPROVES LINCOLN NORTH POINTE, CUP 98-08, based
Findings:
1. That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the comn
essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the General I
is not detrimental to existing uses specifically permitted in the zone in w
M Zone with the approval of a conditional use permit. The proposed ante]
directly associated with, and integral to the permitted ViaSat Inc. resea
development use. The proposed antennas would be adequately screened fra
from adjacent properties.
That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate tl
that the antennas will comply with all required development standards an
roof-mounted upon a proposed building or ground-mounted and located 01
required setbacks.
That all the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features nect
adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhooc
provided and maintained. in that the ground mounted antennas are lo
minimum of 750 feet west of El Camino Real and adequately buffered fro
from El Camino Real and the Olympic Resort Hotel to the north by an
eucalyptus grove and a proposed 6 foot tall chain link fence and evergreen t
shrubs and the proposed roof-mounted antennas will also be adequately s
from views from El Camino Real and the Olympic Resort Hotel by a 9-14
building parapet.
That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle a
generated by the proposed use, in that the antennas are associated with a p
research and development use (ViaSat Inc.) and will therefore not g
additional vehicle trips .
proposed use is located, in that more than one satellite antenna is permitted i
2.
3.
4.
--
5. The ground-mounted antennas comply with the required findings of
a) the Satellite antenna 21.53.130(e)(l) of the Municipal Code in that:
located in the rear northwest corner of lot 2, b) the antennas range from 1
feet in height, c) no signage is proposed on the antennas, d) the antennas
adequately screened from El Camino Real and the Olympic Resort Hote
existing eucalyptus grove, a six foot tall chain link fence and evergreen shri
trees, and e) the antenna farm will be located outside of the required parki
for building 2.
PC RES0 NO. 4360 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
6. The roof-mounted antennas comply with the required findings of
21.53.130(e)(2) of the Municipal Code in that: a) the antennas range fron
feet in height, b) the maximum permitted building height, including protri
45 feet and the antennas do not extend above 41.5 feet in height, and c)
mounted antennas will be adequately screened from ground level vie
building parapet which ranges from 9 to 14 feet in height.
Conditions:
1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all c(
and modifications to the Conditional Use Permit document(s) necessary to m
internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. De\
shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed de\
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
This Conditional Use Permit is granted. This Conditional Use Permit shall be
by the Planning Director on a yearly basis to determine if all conditions of th
have been met and that the use does not have a substantial negative effect on SUI
properties or the public health and welfare. If the Planning Director determine
use has such substantial negative effects, the Planning Director shall recommenl
Planning Commission, after providing the permittee the opportunity to be hi
additional conditions to reduce or eliminate the substantial negative effects. TI-
may be revoked at any time after a public hearing, if it is found that the L
welfare, or the conditions imposed herein have not been met.
The Developer shall report, in writing, to the Planning Director within 30 (
address change from that which is shown on the conditional use permit applicatic
Approval of CUP 98-08 is granted subject to the approval of SP 109(B)/CT 98
98-05/SUP 98-03PUD 98-01 and PIP 98-07. CUP 98-08 is subject to all c
contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 4356 for the Tentative Ma,
conditions of approval for PIP 98-07.
This approval shall become null and void if a final map is not approved for th
within 24 months from the date of project approval.
Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for ViaSat building #2 (PI
additional landscaping shall be planted along the east side of the ground-
satellite dish antenna farm to completely screen the antennas from views
Camino Real.
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terr
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail .
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have thc
2.
substantial detrimental effect on surrounding land uses and the public’s h(
3.
4.
5.
--
6.
7.
q PC RES0 NO. 4360 -3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2
13
14
15
l6
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
revoke or modi& all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuar
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of 01
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted: institute and prosecute litj
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their viola1
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City‘s ap
this Conditional Use Permit.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition”
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convei
“fees/exactions.’*
You have 90 days from August 19, 1998 to protest imposition of these fees/exactions
protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Ma1
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure 1
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside,
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feesic
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges. nor 1
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection 1
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously be
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously c
expired.
...
...
...
...
-- ...
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 4360 -4-
I
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
PASSED. APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meettng J {L
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California. held on the 19th day of August 199
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Compas. Heineman. rV
Nielsen, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary
ABSTAIN:
BAILEY NOBLE, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
-.
PC RESO NO. 4360 -5-
rdlkn, EXI- @!,e City of GARLSBAD Planning Depa
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSIOF
ItemNo. @
Application complete date: May 15, 1998
Project Planner: Chris DeCerbo < Project Engineer: Frank Jimeno
SUBJECT: SP 109(B)/CT 98-071PUD 98-01mDP 98-051SUP 98-O3/CUP 98-0
LINCOLN NORTH POINTE - Request for approval of a Mitigated Negatii
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific P1:
Amendment, Tentative Map, Non-Residential Planned Unit Developme1
Hillside Development Permit, Special Use Permit and Conditional Use Permit
subdivide a 50.23 acre Planned Industrial (P-M) zoned property into 12 no
residential lots, grade the entire site and construct 6 office/research at
development/warehouse buildings, a satellite antennae dish farm. and rooftc
satellite antennas on property generally located along the west side of El Camir
Real to the south of Palomar Airport Road in Local Facilities Management Zor
5.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4354 and 435
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and SP 109(B), and ADOPT Planning Commissic
Resolutions No. 4356, 4357, 4358, 4359, 4360 APPROVING CT 98-07, PUD 98-01, HDP 91
05, SUP 98-03 and CUP 98-08. based on the findings and subject to the conditions containe
therein.
11. INTRODUCTION
This proposal is for the development of a Planned Industrial project (12 lots and 6 officeiresearc
and development/warehouse buildings totaling 385,085 square feet in area) upon a 50.23 acr
property located adjacent to and south of the Olympic Resort Hotel along El Camino Real. Th
project site was formerly developed with the recently demolished Hughes Aircraft industri;
buildings and associated parking. ViaSat Inc. will be the tenant of three of the propose
buildings and two future buildings. The Hughes Aircraft project was originally develope
pursuant to Specific Plan 109. In that the General Plan no longer requires that the subjec
property be processed under the specific plan. the project includes a specific plan amendment t
repeal Specific Plan 109. The project complies with all applicable City standards. all projec
issues have been resolved and all necessary findings can be made for the requested approval5
Therefore, staff recommends approval of this project.
P.C. AGENDA OF: August 19,1998
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigatic
ew r,#
SP 109(B)/CT 98-07PU B &-Ol/HDP 98-05BUP 98-03/CUP 98- ds -
LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
August 19,1998
Page 2
111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Lincoln Properties, the applicant for this project, is requesting approval of one legislative actic
(Specific Plan Amendment) and five quasi-judicial permits (Tentative Map, Non-Residenti
Use Permit) to develop a 50.23 acre Planned Industrial (P-M) zoned property, which is locate
along the west side of El Camino Real to the south of Palomar Airport Road. The specifj
development actions include: (1) subdividing the 50.23 acre parcel into 12 non-residential lo1
ranging from 2.47 acres to 6.28 acres in area (see Exhibits “A”-“I”), (2) grading the entir
property (350,000 cubic yards balanced on-site), (3) constructing 6 office/research an
development/warehouse buildings which range from 60,000 to 72,425 square feet and tot;
385,085 square feet in area upon 6 of the proposed non-residential lots (see Exhibits “J”-“AA‘
and constructing satellite antennas upon the rooftop of one of the buildings and a satellite dis
antennae farm along the northern boundary of the project site (see Exhibits “HH’-“KK”).
The project site is designated for Planned Industrial development. The property is surrounded b
light industrial development to the south and west, and the Olympic Resort Hotel to the north. E
Camino Real borders the eastern property boundary. The southeastern 21.4 acres of the subjec
property was formerly developed with the recently demolished Hughes Aircraft industriz
to the Olympic Resort Hotel is comprised of ruderal habitat (non-native weeds). Dense nativ
habitathegetation (Southern Maritime Chaparral) and a drainage (wetlands) exists within th
western 18.42 acres of the property. Elevations on the project site range from 230 feet within th
drainage at the western end of the property to 3 10 feet at the eastern end along El Camino Real.
The project applicant proposes the development of the property in 4 phases. Phase I includes th
mass grading of the entire 50.23 acre property and the development of lots 1,2, 3,6,7 and 8 wit1
buildings, parking, open space and landscaping. Phases I1 and I11 will include the developmen
of lots 4 and 5 respectively and Phase IV includes the development of lots 9-12.
Consistent with the requirements of the P-M zone, a Planned Industrial Permit (PIP 98-07) fo
Phase I has been processed by the applicant and conditionally approved by the Planning Director
Prior to the future development of lots 4-5 and 9-12, Planned Industrial Permits shall also bl
required to be processed for approval through the Planning Director.
As noted above. Phase I is comprised of 6 officehesearch and development/warehouse building
ranging from 60,000 to 72,425 square feet in area and totaling 385,085 square feet upon lots 1-:
and 6-8. The Phase I project has been designed with a “campus” theme whereby buildings anc
open space areas are centralized with parking and circulation drives located around the perimete
of the buildings and open space. The required parking spaces, employee eating areas
loadingidelivery areas and refuse collection areas for each building are provided on eacl
corresponding lot. The only common areas on the project are access driveways and landscaping.
ViaSat Inc. is the proposed tenant for buildings 1, 2 and 3 (and proposed future buildings 4 an(
5). Building 1 will be developed as the ViaSat administration building and buildings 2 and 3 a
Planned Unit Development, Hillside Development Permit, Special Use Permit and Condition:
buildings and associated parking lots. The northeastern corner of the site (10.42 acres) adjacer
SP 109(B)/CT 98-07/PU i9 d-Ol/HDP 98-05/SUP 98-O3/CUP 98- @-
LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
August 19,1998
Page 3
ViaSat engineeringhesearch and development buildings. The ViaSat buildings 1-3 have beel
tables, chairs, benches, a basketball court and two sand volleyball courts. The ViaSat building.
are generously parked for research and development/office uses (4 spaced1 000 square feet).
On behalf of ViaSat Inc., Lincoln Properties is requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permi
to allow for the development of a number of satellite antennas upon lot 2. As shown on Exhibit!
“HH”-”KK”, a satellite antenna dish farm is proposed within the northwest comer of lot 2 an(
other antennas upon the rooftop of building 2.
The at-grade satellite dish farm will include 18 satellite dish antennas which range from 4 to 12.:
feet in diameter and fiom 10 to 18 feet in height and a 120 square foot (12 foot tall) termina
building. The antenna dish farm will be surrounded by a 6 foot tall chain link fence and will bt
screened from the adjacent property to the north by evergreen trees and shrubs.
The proposed building 2 rooftop antennas will include 14 satellite dish antennas (between 4 - f
feet in diameter and 6-9 feet tall), 8 helical coil linear pointing antennas (each measuring 15 fee
in height), 12 cellular antennas (8-10 feet in height) and 4 “batwing” antennas which measure f
feet tall. The antennas will be screened by a proposed building parapet which varies from 9 to 1 L
feet in height.
Speculative office/research and development/warehouse buildings are proposed on lots 6-8
Buildings 7 and 8 have been designed around a landscaped courtyard that includes a watei
feature (fountain), tables and chairs, and building 6 includes two landscaped courtyards witl-
tables and chairs. Buildings 6-8 are parked for a combination of office (66.6%) and warehouse
(33.3%) uses at a parking ratio which ranges between 3.4 - 3.6 spaces/l000 square feet.
All of the Phase I buildings are two-story. Buildings 1, 3, 6, 7 and 8 have a maximum height oi
35 feet (including architectural features and roof equipment) and building 2 is 4 1.6 feet in heigh
(including a maximum 14 foot tall parapet to screen proposed rooftop antennae).
The proposed buildings will utilize the same exterior building materials and colors. The
buildings will be tilt-up concrete, painted in a tan color with green and white color accents.
Green glass and stge tile accents are proposed to complement the selected building colors.
The project will include two accesses off of El Camino Real, including a signalized driveway
access along the southern property boundary and a right-idright-out driveway access located
between lots 3 and 4. A third driveway access to lots 9-12 will be provided off of Corte De La
Pina. The signalized primary project access drive will extend from El Camino Real westward
through the property to provide access to the lower level lots 9-12. Internal project circulation
will include minimum 30 foot wide truck driveways and minimum 24 foot wide parking drive
aisles.
designed around a rectangular shaped landscaped employee lunch courtyard which include
SP 109(B)/CT 98-07/PU bl 8-0 1/HDP 98-05/SUP 98-03/CUP 98- ds -
LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
August 19,1998
Page 4
The proposed project is subject to the following regulations:
A. Carlsbad General Plan;
B. Specific Plan 109;
C. Planned Industrial (P-M) Zone (Municipal Code Chapter 21.34); Nonresidenti;
Planned Development (Municipal Code Chapter 21 -47); Hillside Developme1
(Municipal Code Chapter 21.95); Conditional Uses (Municipal Code Chaptt
2 1.42); Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone (Municipal Code Chapter 2 1.40) and E
Camino Real Corridor Development Standards;
Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20); and
Growth Management Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 21.90) and Locz
Facilities Management Zone 5.
D.
E.
IV. ANALYSIS
The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project'
consistency with applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis sectio
discusses compliance with each of these regulations/policies using both text and tables.
A. General Plan
The project site has a Planned Industrial (PI) General Plan designation. The proposec
office/research and development/warehouse uses are consistent with the Planned Industria
General Plan designation. Consistent with General Plan Land Use Element policies, thl
proposed project has been designed to: (1) be compatible with surrounding industrial ani
travel/recreational commercial (hotel) uses and Palomar Airport, (2) provide adequat,
circulation, parkigg, loading, storage and recreational/open space areas to meet the operationa
needs of the development and (3) adequately screen from view proposed mechanical equipmeni
loading and storage areas and satellite antennas.
The pro-ject is also consistent with other General Plan Elements as summarized in Table 1.
ELEMENT
Public Safety
Open Space and
Conservation
-
Circulation
TABLE 1 - GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE
GOAL, OBJECTIVE PROPOSED USES & COMPLY?
Design all structures in All buildings will meet UBC and
accordance with seismic State seismic codes.
UBC and State building
requirements.
encroachment of
development into
wetland and riparian
areas.
Designate as buffers The project has been designed to Yes
portions of land next to
environmental areas.
OR PROGRAM IMPROVEMENTS
Yes
design standards of the
Minimize the The project has been designed to Yes
not encroach into the wetland (.7
acres) that is located along the
western edge of the project site.
include a minimum 10 foot wide
buffer between the edge of
development and the on-site
wetland.
Require private The project has been conditioned Yes
development which
impacts sensitive
resources to provide
appropriate mitigation
measures. sensitive habitat. The specific
to mitigate at a 2: 1 ratio (total of
3 1.46 acres) impacts to 15.32
acres of Southern Maritime
Chaparral and .41 acres of other
mitigation may include the
acquisition of 3 1.46 acres of
comparable quality habitat either
from within the City of Carlsbad
or outside the City of Carlsbad
and/or the payment of an in-lieu
fee to the City of Carlsbad for
acreage and quality habitat.
construction along El Camino
future acquisition of comparable
Require new Project will provide median Yes
development to
construct roadway and
intersection at northern and southern
improvements needed
to serve proposed
development. driveway.
Real frontage, deceleration lanes
driveways and a signalized
intersection at southern
P-M ZONERUD
DEVELOPMENT
STANDARD
required for a Nmresidential
PUD.
Lot Coverage: 50%
Max Building Height: 35’
Height Protrusions: 45’
Setbacks: (Minimum)
Front - 50 feet
Side - 10 feet
Rear - 20 feet
Lot Size: No minimum size
PROPOSED PLAN COMPLIES?
2.47 - 6.28 acres per lot Yes
15.5% - 30.4% Yes
Maximum is 35’ Yes
Bldg. 2 has a parapet up to
4 1 feet and 6 inches
160 feet
10 feet
20 feet
Yes
Employee Eating Area: 300
sq. ft./5,000 sq. ft. or a total of
23,105 sq. ft.
Parking:
Office/R&D - 1 :250
Warehouse - 1 : 1000
Total spaces required - 1,337
Compact Parking:
25% or 334 spaces
Yes
32,705 sq. ft.
Yes
Office/R&D - 1:250
Warehouse - 1 : 1000
Total spaces provided - 1,434
spaces
13% or 1 88 spaces
Yes
STANDARD “AREA 4” PROPOSED PLAN
Design Theme - Planned Campus theme - buildings and
“campus type‘‘ research, landscaped courtyards with
business. service center perimeter circulation drives
and parking.
Grading - No cut or fill 7 feet
exceeding 15 feet from
original grade.
Building Setback - 30 feet 160 feet
from ECR.
Parking Setback - 25 feet from 35 feet
ECR.
Roof Equipment - No roof Rooftop equipment is
equipment shall be visible adequately screened from
from adjacent developed areas. adjacent hotel and industrial
developments.
COMPLIES?
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
saA
'=A
iSZIITdMI03
IyzlaY ur $333 PI 01 6 UJ0-J-J
sa2uei L~I~M iadmed 8uypIynq pal punoiz
E Lq SM~IA pa1 punoiB uroi3 le aIqtsTA IOU air? s-euua~u~
pauaai:,~ Llalenbapr? aq 111~ aql ieqi os pauaaix aq
sauualue palunour-jooi ay~ pys seuuap,~e ~~~U~OUI-JOO~
m?q
UT 1333 S'Ip 3AOqE pUaIX3 IOU
op seuuaim ayi pue IaaJ sp sy palE301 3.N day1 y3yqM
'suorsniioid Zurpnpur 'iq8ray uodn Suutpiynq aq 30 p@ar
8urppq *. paw&d &w~xku paiiruriad ayl ahoqz la33 s my;
ay;l -1y5yiy U! la33 SI aloux pua1xa IOU 1q%g UT $393
01 9 woij a3uei ssuuaiue ay~ 51 paa~xa IOU pys sema~uv
mvaNv'LLS NVTd a5ISOdOlId
=A
saA
sal4
safi
I I
=A
iS3ITdMIO3 (r)(a)o~r*~s*rz NoI'LLmssins
z 8uyppnq 103 eaie 2urymd
paiynbai ayl 30 apysino paie:,o1 eaie Buqiad paiynbai Lur! UI
aq IIIM LLLIE~ suuaim ay~ pale301 aq IOU 1pys seuu~~uv
u~ ,os 01 dn puaixa I~IM
py~) saa.11 auyd pur? sqnlys
UIB~~ 11ei 1003 xys pasodoid
E pm (1pi '()E 01 dn saaq .1r?pq€?uI 8u~uaai3s '&io.@ snldd1ema 8uIlsIxa 3~1 JO dol ayi aAoqt? spuaixa
m Lq pio~ vosaa 3rdurd1O euualue yxa 30 %sz u~yl
ayl pue pax OU~ITQ 12 u~oy aiom ou ~r?q~ os M~!A qqnd
pauaams AIalmbapr? aq 11:~ pur? sarpadoid 1ua3e[pe uroij
seuua~m IF$ 1003 81-01 aq~, pauaams aq plnoys swmaiuv
seuualuE suqs sf?
uo pasodoid ST aBeuB~s ON pasn aq IOU ppoys seuua1uv
I@g uy IaaJ ly8y uy Kq 02 8 I 01 01 uoy aBmi seuuaiuv paa:,xa IOU pInoqs scuuaiuv z 101 30 iamo3
)SaMyuOU lB3.I 3yl Uy palE301 101 ay1.30 yoos leal ayl
sy m3 euua~m aiqaies uy pal~~ol aq ppoys seuuaiuv
(m!ay
Ua3J8laAa pur? 33U33 >lu!I
NVTd aZtSOdOl3d mvaNvLs - SVNNZ~LNV auNnom-aNnoa3 - P ~T~VLH.
sa&
sari
SaA
SaA
Sa&
safi
iS3[I?dM03
OZT’S6’TZ
it!nut!py adzxpuq s.Xiy3
ayj L~IM juuaysysuo:, pad-expuei put!pq adt!xpuq s,Li!3
aq I~M sadoIs painiqmxu ayi L~IM iuaisrsuo.3 sadols
8ug uraisaM ayL painj~t!~nut!ur adespuq
8 put! L s8ugqnq -103 $333 sz3c
ymqlas aSpa adois urnqup
e io 8ulppnq oi adois
30 a8pa uroi3 pamseaur auqc
iaaj p~ 30 wnurIuIur .. I! a8pa po8erp Aieuy8t!w! it!3!pa~
adop pamimjnueur aqi ~1013 iooj 1 01- i-auoz!~orl 1003 L’
yxqias ale 8 pue L s8wp1mH .. :yxq]as SurpIIng aSpg adois
amds uado 3gqnd qqt!asn io axds uado qqnd aIqt!asn io
)aai)s lopa1103 ‘PEOX ~Uama~g Jaaqs iol3aIlo3 ‘pe0.I luaurqa
uoyqnm3 e ~0.13 aiq!sp IOU uopeinxy3 e wog aIqtsrA
ale puc badoid ayi 30 ped an L~YM pue ylSua1 ur $333
U.IaJS3M 3l# UIyiTM pa$t!301 alt!
iySyy uy ‘02 J~AO ait! L~YM iaizai8 sadols paini3t!jnw~
sadois pampt!pwm pasodoid :Su!pt!if> moiuo3
la33 SE S’ 4@ay 1333 Ot. :IYSlaH adois
adois pami3t!3nm~ runurIxepq pain~~g-~~t!pq urnurrxt!K
am/spL n3 739‘~ 30 arunioA qqEidamV
i?r.rd
,002 Pur! lY8laY U! ‘02 mY
a.IX?/SpA n3 666‘L :8UIpt!if>
qqcdo pap
SF a103aiay1 pu-e 101 a18urs
I? uo spt!d 1aq igds uaaMlaq
pap301 adois pam~~ejnu~ru
8uyua~aiuur ue SI adois iua~pt!if> %op DAO 30 sadoIS
iuaypt!i3 %os 8ups~xa aqL pamn~3e~nuepq 30 IuauIdoiahaa
NV?d a3SOdOHd mvaNV.Ls
NOILL33S - 333VNIaMO 3CUS??IH - 9 3WWL
SP 109(B)/CT 98-07/PU bl d-Ol/HDP 98-05/SUP 98-03/CUP 98- db -
LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
August 19, 1998
Page 12
(CEQA). The balance of the project site has been previously disturbed, or graded and develop1
significant habitat, plant or animal species nor any historical, archaeological or paleontologic
resources. The development of the project site with up to 629,560 sq. fi. of non-residential us
was covered under Master EIR 93-01 for the City's Updated General Plan. This pro-ject (385.0
sq. ft. of non-residential uses) is therefore consistent with the projected development anticipat
under MEIR 93-01, and is accordingly regarded as a subsequent project for which t
environmental effects have already been considered. Furthermore, the project has either be
designed or conditioned to incorporate all feasible and pertinent mitigation measures identified
Master EIR 93-01 (i.e.; bus stop and traffic signal along El Camino Real, erosion conti
measures). In consideration of the foregoing, on June 25, 1998, the Planning Director issuec
Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project. No comments were received.
with the recently demolished Hughes Aircraft industrial buildings and therefore supports ;
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4354 (Mitigated Negative Declaration)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4355 (SP)
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4356 (CT)
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4357 (PUD)
5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4358 (HDP)
6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4359 (SUP)
7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4360 (CUP)
8. Location Map
9. Background Data Sheet
10. Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
1 1. Disclosure Statement
12. Exhibits "A" - "BBB", dated August 19. 1998
CII dch
-
BACKGROUND DATA SHEE P
CASE NO: SI’ 109(B)/CT 98-07/PUD 98-0 1HDP 98-05/PIP 98-O7/SUP 98-O3/CUP 98-08
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
APPLICANT: Thomas Lamore, Smith Consulting Architects
REQUEST AND LOCATION: The proposed pro-iect entails the development of a 50.23 acre P
Industrial (PM) zoned property which is located south of Palomar Airport Road along the west sidl
Camino Real. The specific development actions include: (1) subdivision of the property into 1
residential lots ranging from 2.47 acres to 6.28 acres in area, (2) grading of the entire property (3
cubic yards balanced on-site), and (3) the construction of 6 office/warehouse buildings (ranging bt
60,000 sf and 72,425 sf in area and totaling 385,085 square feet) on proposed lots 1-3 and 6-8
satellite antennae dish farm.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 11 10, in the City of Carlsbad, County
Dieno, State of California, according to parcel map thereof filed in the office of the County Recoi
San Diego County on November 10, 1972 as File No. 3021 14 of official records.
APN: 213-020-14 Acres: 50.23 Proposed No. of LotsRJnits: 12 Lots
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: Planned Industrial (PI)
Density Allowed: NA
Existing Zone: Planned Industrial PM
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoning Requiremer
Density Proposed: NA
Proposed Zone: Planned Industrial PM
Zoning Land Use
Site P-M Demolished Hughes Aircraft Buildings
North C-T-Q Olympic Resort Hotel
South P-M Watkins Manufacturing Corp.
East
West P-M Industrial/Warehouse
L-c Vacant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Unified Water District: Carlsbad Municipal Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 349.75
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: February 25, 1998
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
[XI
0 0 Other,
Negative Declaration, issued June 25. 1998
Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
r PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: Lincoln North Pointe SP P09(B)/CT 98-07RUD 98-01/I;[DP 9
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 5 05/SUP 98-O3/CUP 98-08
GENERAL PLAN: PI
ZONING: P-M
DEVELOPER'S NAME: Lincoln Property Company
ADDRESS: 30 Executive Park, Suite 100
PHONE NO.: (714) 261-2100 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 213-020-14
QUANTITY OF LAND USEKIEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 629,560 sf
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE:
LlkcaAl.d GTti KNT-
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OR CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLIC
WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL (
APPOINTED BOARD, COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE
(Please Print)
The following information must be disclosed:
1. Applicant ns having a financial interest in the applicatio
3v;k 650
av, DieoLo . CA 9 212 l u-
2. Owner
List the names and addressees of all person having any ownership interest in the property q dill;
cas 4aen-C ~bJ-'owLc~
U7/LW ReQi %$al-Ct L;m;Ad Pa& -A? L L;ficeln PropcA Hqyectad Ser Ji'CQS, IQC.
30 kecY4:M P*Pk ! s Ji4.e /OO
Irvl'ne, CA 92613-%73
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list t
and addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation (
any partnership interest in the partnership.
-.
4. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a tru
names and addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organ
as trustee or beneficiary of the trust.
DISCLOS.FRM 2/96 PAGE 1 c
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 - (619) 438-1 1
0 e
Disclosure Statement
5. Have you had more than $250.00 worth of business transacted with any member of (
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes No ,X If yes, please indicate person(s)
Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal orgi
corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, districl
political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit."
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary)
3-:
&uAM A - SC/US/d Lamor-e .
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
--
DISCLOS.FRM 2/96 PAGE 1 of
0 0 EXHIBI'
.-
5. SP 109(B)/CT 98-07/PUD 98-011HDP 98-O5/SUP 98-O3/CUP 98-08 - LINCOLN NORTH POINT€
- Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitorlng anc
Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Tentative Map, Non-Residential Planned Unii
Development, Hillside Development Permit, Special Use Permit and Conditional Use Permit tc
subdivide a 50.23 acre Planned Industrial (P-M) zoned property into 12 non-residential lots, grade
the entire site and construct 6 office/research and developmenVwarehouse buildings, a Satellit€
antennae dish farm, and rooftop satellite antennas on property generally located along the west
side of El Camino Real to the south of Palomar Airport Road in Local Facilities Management Zone
5.
Assistant Planning Director, Gary Wayne, introduced this item and stated that Principal Planner, Chris
DeCerbo will present the staff report.
Project Planner, Chris DeCerbo Presented the staff report and described the project as follows: This is ir
request for approval Of a SPeClfiC Plan Amendment, Tentative Map, Non-Residential Planned Unit
Development, Hillside Development Permit. Special Use Permit and Conditional Use Permit to develop a
50.23 acre Planned Industrial zoned property which is located along the west side of El Camino Real to
property into 12 non-residential lots which will range from 2.47 to 6.28 acres in area, balanced grading of
the entire property, the construction of six office/R&D/warehouse buildings, the construction of a satellite
antennae dish farm along the northwestern corner of Lot No. 2, and the construction of rooftop antennas
on top of building No. 2. The project applicant proposed development in several phases. The first phase
will include buildings No. 1. 2. 3,6, 7, and 8. The remaining pads (#4, #5, and the four lower level pads at
the southwest of the property) will be developed at a later date. The first phase will include buildings.
parking, open space. and landscaping. A Planned Industrial Permit for Phase I has already been
processed by the applicant and conditionally approved by the Planning Director, subject to approval of the
actions of this Commission.
The Phase I project has been designed with a campus theme, whereby buildings and open space areas
are centralized with parking and circulation drives located around the perimeter of the buildings and open
MINUTES
the south of Pabmar Airport Road. The specific development actions include subdividing the 50.23 acre
PLANNING COMMISSIO ri, August 19. 1998 0 Page
space. The required parking spaces, employee eating areas, loading and delivery areas. and refu
collection areas for each building are proposed on each corresponding lot. The only common areas in t
project are access drives and some common landscaping.
One of the reasons this project has been regarded as a City Council priority is that the City IS VE
interested in keeping the firm, ViaSat, Inc,, in Carlsbad. Viasat, Inc. Will be the tenant Of three Of t
proposed buildings (#l, #2, and #3) and two of the future buildings. The ViaSat buildings have be
designed around a rectangular shaped. open space courtyard which includes seating areas. lunch are:
volleyball courts. and a basketball court. On behalf of ViaSat, Inc., Lincoln Properties is reouestil
approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the development of a number of satellite antennas UP'
lot 2. The at-grade satellite dish farm will include 18 satellite dish antennas ranging from 10 feet to 18 fc
in height and a 120 square foot terminal building. The dish farm will be surrounded by a 6 foot tall ch:
link fence and screened with evergreen trees and shrubs. There is an existing eucalyptus grove (w
trees up to 30 feet in height) along the north side of the dish farm site between the proposed dish farm a
the Olympic Resort Hotel, and additionally shrubs and trees will be planted to add to the density of t
screening and thereby adequately obscure the dish farm from the view from the hotel building and t
driving range. Additionally, the dish farm is located about 750 feet from El Camino Real and will be abc
10 feet below grade, so it should not be very visible. Staff has included an additional condition requiri
additional landscaping as necessary to screen the antennas.
The roof-top antennas will include a total of 38 satellite dishes and antennas of varying sizes. shape
heights, and diameters and will be screened by a 9 foot to 14 foot high parapet. All of the Phase
buildings are two-story; five will be no greater than 35 feet in height, while the sixth (the antenna buildin
will reach a height of 41.6 feet. The buildings will utilize the same exterior building materials and color:
The buildings will be tilt-up concrete, painted in a tan color with green and white color accents. Grec
glass and stone tile accents are proposed to compliment the selected building colors.
The project will include two accesses off of El Camino Real, including a signalized access-way along tl
southern property boundary as well as a right-inlright-out driveway access located between lots 3 and 1.
Additionally, there will be a third driveway access to lots 9 to 12, off Corte De La Piha. Ultimately there w
be an opportunity for traffic to access and depart the site from one of three driveways which will result
better circulation.
Staff analysis of the project focussed on the project's compliance with the General Plan. the developme
standards of the Planned Industrial zone, El Camino Scenic Corridor Development standards, ar
antennas through Conditional Use Permits. The project, as proposed is In compliance with all Of tt
above development standards.
There is an existing Specific Plan No. 109, which covers the property. It is a Site Development Plan fc
the former Hughes Aircraft project. At the time the Hughes Aircraft site was developed, there was
specific requirement to do a Specific Plan because it was in the Airport tnfluence Area for Palornar Airpor
The City's updated General Plan no longer mandates that sites in the Airport lnfluence Area be undt
Specific Plan, but indicates that other permits are appropriate. Accordingly, the applicant is requestin
that the project be grocessed under the permits as proposed, in addition to a Planned industrial Perm
which has already been conditionally approved.
The project will impact 15.32 acres of southern maritime chaparral vegetation and .41 acres of othc
sensitive habitat. The developer has agreed to add mitigation measures to the project to reduce tt-
significant adverse biological impacts to a level below significant. The biological mitigation alternative
could include acquisition, at a 2 to 1 ratio (31.46 acres) of southern maritime chaparral, at a site within th
City of Carlsbad and put it into open space, acquisition of a site outside of the City in a jurisdiction th;
has mitigation banks for appropriate habitat. or payment of an in-lieu fee of a dollar value that the Cit
could (at some time in the future) acquire habitat either in or outside of the City. These mitigatlo
alternatives. In general. have been reviewed by the City Council and found to be appropriate atternativ
means of mitigation. Other environmental mitigation measures include the preservation of the on-sit
MINUTE
Municipal Code standards regarding the development of ground mounted and roof mounted satelli
PLANNING COMM I SSlO No August 19, 1998 0 Page '
wetlands (.7 acres) and enhancement by the removal of non-native pampas grass, and the incorDoratic
of a 10 foot wetlands buffer from the toe of development of this project.
The project has responded to all of the issues that have been identified through review and has complll
with the required mitigations mandated by the state and federal resource agencies. Based on t
compliance with all of the associated and applicable standards, staff recommends approval of this prole
The Specific Plan Amendment, will have to go on to the City Council for approval.
Commissioner Monroy asked if there is an implication that if there is a need for additional antennas, tt
applicant would have to come back to the City for further permits.
Mr. DeCerbo replied that the CUP (if approved) will be for a certain type and number of antennas and
they change types or numbers, the CUP will be subject to amendment.
Commissioner Monroy asked if there is any possible way that the installation of a signal light, L
proposed, could be held in abeyance until it is determined that it is absolutely necessary.
Principal Engineer, Bob Wojcik replied that he is not certain if he can say that it would not be safe to dek
the installation of that signal, once there is traffic making left turns into the project. Given the current lev
and speed of travel on El Camino Real, the concern would be whether or not a left turn could be safe
negotiated without a controlled intersection. Mr. Wojcik stated that as far as the impact that the propose
signal would have on the Palomar Airport Road/El Camino Real signalized intersection. the spacing
2205 feet and the standards are 2600 feet. The distance between the proposed signal and the existir
signal is 400 feet shorter than the standard. However, there is another large area to the east, that
currently being planned, that has frontage on only El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road. Becaus
the City does not want all of that development's traffic using Palomar Airport Road exclusively, the Cit
has agreed with them that they can use the same point of access to El Camino Real as the propose
intersection for this project.
Commissioner Cornpas asked what the sequence and timing of the construction of these buildings will be
Mr. DeCerbo replied that buildings No. 1, 2, & 3 will be built first. The balance of the first Phase would b
buildings No. 6, 7, & 8. Regarding the timing, Mr. DeCerbo stated that the applicant is better able 1
provide that information.
Commissioner Heineman asked Mr. Wojcik if he can project the number of daily trips (ADT) for thi
development, how they will compare with the ADT of the former Hughes Aircraft project, and are thi
projects ADT likely to impact Palomar Airport Road.
Mr. Wojcik replied that there is more square footage in this project but the R&D and Office uses will bi
very similar to that of Hughes. However. without knowing the actual number of occupants of the building:
he estimated that there will be a significant increase in traffic, after all of the buildings have bee1
completed and occupied.
Commissioner Heinman asked Mr. DeCerbo if the antennas will only be used by ViaSat or can they bf
subleased.
Mr. DeCerbo replied that they would not be allowed to sublease, under the CUP that will be issued (i
approved).
Assistant Planning Director, Gary Wayne. stated that the CUP runs with the land and if they choose not tc
use them. they can lease them since that is their business. Mr. Wayne reminded the Commission tha only 18 of the eventual 38 antennas are before the Commission for approval at this time. and when the
time comes to increase the number from 18, an amendment to the CUP would be required.
Cornmissioner Welshons. stated that the drawings for the proposed signalized intersection indicate tha
MINUTE:
PLANNING COMMISSIO A August 19, 1998 0 Page
there are provisions for a left turn and a right turn but there is no provision for a straight through movemi
into the Bressi Ranch project. With that in mind. Cornmissioner Welshons asked how the addition o
new condition (as stated in item No. 7 of the errata sheet) will satisfy the increase of an additional throl;
lane of traffic.
Mr. Wojcik replied that the additional lane will be achieved with the removal of the island that IS currer
shown on the tentative map. He went on to state that the primary reason for the removal of the islanc
the impact on a truck's turning radius. In a meeting with the applicant, Mr. Wojcik continued. he told h
that they would probably need a third lane (through lane) at that intersection and with that island out. le
simply put wording in that says that the width of that entrance and exit will be to the satisfaction of the C
Engineer. Mr. Wojcik further stated that that also goes along with one of the other conditions that requir
the signing and striping plans for the signal, and when the City gets the signing and striping plans. they I
have all the lane widths and they will make sure that the proper lane width will be there.
COmmiSS~Onef W&hOns asked if there is any type of condition that can be added that would prevc
everyone from arriving and leaving the facility at the same time during peak hours, thereby lessening 1
impacts on the intersections in the immediate area.
Mr. Wojcik replied that there is no condition in this project that would specify any type of congesti'
management plan because the project does not meet the requirements for having a congesti
management plan. However, he stated, staff recognizes the concern and has asked the applicant's tral
engineer to be ready to address that issue.
Commissioner Welshons asked if a condition for congestion management, requiring staggered hours
operation, could be added if the response of the applicant's traffic engineer is not to the Commissior
satisfaction.
Mr. Wojcik replied that a condition with some type of wording that would require a congesti
management acceptable to the City Traffic Engineer could be added.
Commissioner Welshons asked how many employees will be working at this facility at buildout.
Mr. Wojcik replied that he does not know how many employees there will be.
Referring to the staff report and the statement that Phase I (buildings No. 1, 2 .3. 6, 7, & 8), has alreac
received conditional approval by the Planning Director, Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. DeCerbo
explain what that conditional approval means.
Mr. DeCerbo explained that it means that the Planned Industrial Permit is approved, subject to approval
all of the other permits before this Commission.
Commissioner Welshons asked if that was intended to expedite the approvals for them because it'al:
includes the regrading of the property.
Mr. DeCerbo replied that the conditional approval was not necessarily to expedite. The applicant COLI
have processed the map and subsequently processed the Planned Industrial Permits, but the Plannir
Director does have the authority to approve Planned Industrial Permits. Also, the demolition of the o
Hughes buildings was done on a demolition permit.
Rich Simons. Development Manager. representing Lincoln Property Company, 10 Double Coves, Newpc
Beach. CA, stated that he had nothing to add except to say that the proposed traffic signal IS an importai
element to the development. He went on to say that with the employees that ViaSat will have, the traff
signal is a necessity as well as an enhancement for the Bressi Ranch site. Additionally, the three R&
buildings will be developed in conjunction with the ViaSat buildings. Mr. Simons further stated that the
are holding two of the pads for buildings No. 4 & 5, and will be for the future expansion of ViaSat.
MINUTE
PLAN N I NG COMM l SSl 0 m August 19. 1998 0 Page
Commissioner Compas asked if buildings No. 4 & 5 will be built whether or not ViaSat is ready to I
them.
Mr. Simons replied that buildings 4 & 5 will not be built until ViaSat is ready for them. However. they
constructing buildings 6, 7, & 8, on a speculative basis.
Commissioner Compas asked what will happen to future buildings 4 & 5 if ViaSat is no in a positior
occupy them.
Mr. Simons replied that if ViaSat does not exercise their option, then Lincoln Property Co.. would have
right to build for another tenant.
Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Simons if he has read the errata sheet and does he agree v
everything in it.
Mr. Simons replied that he has read the document and agrees with everything in it, including
modification discussed with Mr. Wojcik.
Assistant City Attorney, Rich Rudolf, asked if Mr. Simons is referring to Condition No. 25 and Mr. Simc
replied affirmatively .
Mr. Rudolf then proposed a change to Errata Sheet Item No. 2, Condition No. 25, as follows: “The use
each of the proposed buildings shall be restricted so that any additional traffic generated does not imp,
the existing traffic circulation and the additional traffic impact fees are paid, but in no event shall the tc
project traffic generated exceed 5,036 ADT without appropriate environmental review. A note to this elT
shall be placed on the Final Map non-mapping data sheet.”
Mr. Simons stated that Mr. Rudolfs proposed change to Condition No. 25 is acceptable.
Commissioner Compas asked if the purpose of the change is so that the project will not be restricted tc
single tenant.
Mr. Rudolf replied that that is correct.
Gerard Tanksley, Facilities Manager for ViaSat, 214 Glenn Arbor Drive, Encinitas, stated that he
available to answer questions.
Commissioner Compas asked if ViaSat is publicly traded on the Stock Market and how old is 1
company.
Mr. Tanksley replied that ViaSat went public in February, 1997, and is 12 years old.
Commissioner Compas asked how many people ViaSat employs.
Mr. Tanksley replied that there are currently 360 employees.
Commissioner Compas asked how many employees they except to have in five years.
Mr. Tanksley replied that if they ultimately occupy buildings No. 4 & 5, the number of employees could 1
the 500 range.
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Tanksley to describe ViaSat’s product and also asked who thc
customers are.
Mr. Tanksley replied that the bulk of the business is very high quality, secured defense tyy
MINUTE
as high as 700 or 800. On the other hand, if they do not occupy buildings No. 4 & 5, the number will be
PLANNING COMMlSSlO 4 August 19. 1998 0 Page
communications. For example. he stated. they make the telephone for Air Force One as well as nea
every radio used in all of the armed services. He explained that they appear to have a nlche In what
called THEMA communications which makes very efficient use of the satellite band widths and allo\
more signals to be multiplexed over them. he added that the projections are very good for that type
communication to become a requirement QYer the lQng term8
Commissioner Compas asked if their business will be predominantly for the government.
Mr. Tanksley replied that they are trying to parlay that business into commerciallrural telephony.
Regarding the possible staggering of working hours, Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Tanksley to gi‘
the Commission a general idea of how their operations work, such as hours of operation and whether
not everyone enters and leaves at the same time.
Mr. Tanksley replied that they have a very flexible approach to the hours and that some of the enginef
come in late and leave late. He added that they have a very small footprint, in terms of production, a1
the hours for the production department are 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. The company is more than 60% engine€
and work hours are somewhat unintentionally staggered. Mr. Tanksley further stated that their Hum,
Resources Department is very open to whatever is culturally suitable and helps the community.
Commissioner Welshons asked if ViaSat would accept a very general condition to that effect. in cas
traffic becomes a problem.
Mr. Tanksley replied that he cannot speak for the founders of the company but is sure that agreement CE
be reached.
Commissioner Welshons asked why they need antennas on top of the building as well as the ones on tt
ground.
Mr. Tanksley replied that their primary objective is to get the larger dishes out on the dish farm and th
smaller pole, whip, and dish antennas on the roofs which is an answer to not having a giant dish farm
Also, the objective of the antenna will dictate where it is placed since all antennas do not have all of th
same capabilities.
Commissioner Welshons asked if ViaSat operations could put Carlsbad at risk by enemy factlons.
Mr. Tanksley replied that they do not know of any risk of that nature since they are basically a “think tan1
entities.
Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Rudolf if he could craft some wording for a very generalized conditio
as suggested earlier to Mr. Tanksley.
Mr. Wojcik interjected and replied that an additional condition is not necessary because it is already in th
Growth ManagemeDt-Plan. He went on to explain that the proposed signal will be a City signal and a
such, if the level of service fails below the City standards. the applicant will be required to come up with
traffic control plan to achieve compliance with the standards,
Commissioner Monroy asked if other developments would be held to the same standards and he wa
answered affirmatively.
Mr. Wayne stated that part of the action being taken by this Commission relies on the MEIR, as such, thc
applicant must comply with mitigation measures that are in the MEIR. otherwise the City would be dealin!
with projects that would a significant, non-mitigable, impact on the environment and the Commissioi
would not be able to approve the project. He added that those types of conditions that require compliancc
with the MER are in the PIP and are woven into all of the individual projects.
and a research and development facility for equipment used by b.oth government and private commerci:
MINUTE!
PLAN N I NG CO MM lSSl0 e August 19. 1998 e Page
Mr. Ruddf stated that the bus stop and the traffic signal. that are included as requirements on this projl
come from the MEiR which is why the City has the power to exact them.
Sam Kabb, Traffic Engineer with Urban Systems Associates. 4540 Kearney Villa Road. San Die
responding to some of the traffic issues that have been raised, stated that the Phase I development ’
generate enough traffic to trigger Caltrans warrants for the installation of a traffic signal and to delay t
installation is not recommended, especially from a liability and safety standpoint. Also, Mr. Kabb sta’
that he is also the traffic engineer for the Bressi Ranch project and that their concept plan is relying on t
location for access. With respect to this project generating more traffic than Hughes Aircraft did, Mr. K;
stated that there is more square footage in this project and it is covered under the MElR SO that impacts from the additional traffic have already been accounted for in that document. He added that th
is no.new traffic expected, that hasn’t already been planned in the City’s General Plan for this parcel .
Kabb pointed out that their calculations at buildout show that the facility’s driveway, where the signal 1
be, will be acceptable according to the Growth Management Plan and will be at LOS “A’ in the morn’
and LOS “B” in the afternoon. Also, there is enough flexibility for three lanes coming out of that drivewE With regard to stacking, Mr. Kabb stated that calculations indicate that there is ample stacking room at 1 intersection.
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Kabb to state the percentage of cars that will using the northt entrance and what percentage will use the southern entrance.
Mr. Kabb replied that the number of cars using the northern entrance ( right-iniright-out) will be about ’Z
the total load into the two driveways. In addition. the overall distribution to the driveways will deper
primarily, on where the individuals live. As for percentages, Mr. Kabb estimated that about 33.3% of t
traffic will enter and exit the northernmost driveway and about 66.6% will enter and exit the southernmc
driveway.
Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Kabb if his calculations for this intersection alSO included tho
persons that are not part of this project. namely those that are part of the adjacent project.
Mr. Kabb answered affirmatively.
Commissioner Welshons asked how many cars will be able to stack while waiting to proceed northboui
on El Camino Real.
Mr. Kabb replied that nine or ten cars will be able to stack at that intersection.
Cornmissioner Welshons stated that it appears that Mr. Kabb is in favor of only two lanes at tt
intersection which would make the right hand lane both a through lane as well as a right turn lane, whic
would block or restrict right turns.
Mr. Kabb responded by stating that the plan is being prepared to eventually provide an extra right tu
lane when the Bressi Ranch project is built and they take access at that intersection.
Chairperson Noble opened Public Testimony and offered the invitation to speak. Seeing no one wishir
Mr. Wayne stated that after conferring with the applicant and receiving the applicant‘s approval, he wish€
to proposed an amendment to Item No. 4 on the Errata Sheet as follows: . . . for easements andh
maintenance agreements acceptable to the City Engineer and the City Attorney shall be executed t
the owner andlor shall be placed on the Final Map for shared driveways . . .” Mr. Wayne continued t
stating that this condition strictly relates to the connecting of all of the lots in this 12 lot subdivision.
interconnects all 12 lots so that they all have reciprocal access easements over each other.
--
to testify. Chairperson Noble closed Public Testimony.
MINUTE:
August 19,1998 0 Pagc PLANNING COMMlSSlo e ,
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Welshons and duly seconded to adopt Plant
Cornmisston Resolutions No 4354 and 4355, recommending approval o Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Proqr;
4358, 4359, 4360 approving CT 98-07, PUD 98-01, HDP 98-05 SUP 98-03 L
CUP 98-08, based upon the findings and subject to the conditions contair
therein, including the errata sheet, dated 811 9/98. with the corrected language
Item #2 as read into the record by Mr Rudolf and corrected language to Item ;
as read into the record by Mr Wayne
and SP 109(Ei), and adopt Planning Cornmisston Resolutions NO 4356 k
In Commissioner Savary’s absence, Chairperson Nobie stated that she asked him to state for the recc
that she is concerned about the increased traffic and the proposed traffic signal
VOTE: 6-0
AYES :
NOES: None
ABSENT: Savary
Noble, Heineman, Monroy, Welshons, Compas, and Nielsen
ABSTAIN: None
-
PROOF OF PUBLI~ION
(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
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the
Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of
California, under the dates of June 30, 1989 (Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times-
Advocate) case number 171 349 (Blade-Citizen)
for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad,
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
and case number 1721 71 (The Times-Advocate)
Sdana Beach and the North County Judicial
District; that the notice of which the annexed is a
printed copy (set in type not smaller than
nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wlt:
Sept. 12, 1998
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Mar Dated at &%fornia,”tR?s 14th day
of Sept. 1998
fi -7 idfir- y&+ ----------------~-------____ / Signature /
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
This space i a the County Clerks Filing
Proof of Publication of
Publk Hearing -------------__________
.......................
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING LINCOLN NORTH POINTE - SP-IOS(B)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a pul
city Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Dnve, Carlsbad, California, at 6 00 P m September 22, 1998, to consider a request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declar;
residential lots ranging from 2 47 to 6 28 acres in size, balanced grading to the entire p consIwction of 6 office-research and developmenthvarehouse buildings tolalling 385.08
area On 6 of the proposed lots, and construction of Satellite antennas On the rOOfiOP Of (
buildings and a satellite dish antennae farm, on property generally located along the wf
Camin0 Real, 10 the south of Palomar Airport Road, in Local Facilnies Management 201
particularly described as
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No 1110, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State0
according to parcel map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of $an Diegr
November 10, 1972, as File No 302114 01 Official records
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the pub
Copies of the staff report will be available on and after September 18 1998 If YOU hav
regarding this matter, please call Chris
(760) 438-1161 extension 4445
DeCerbo, in the Planning Department at v \
If you challenge the Specific Plan
Amendment, Mitigated Negative Declaration, andlor Mitigation Monitoring and Repofing
Program in court you may be limrled to raislng only those issues raised by you or
else at the public heanng described in this
notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of Carlsbad at, or prior
to, the public hearing
APPLICANT Lincoln Propelty Company
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
LINCOLN NORTH
SP 109(B) Legal 59510 September 12,1998
0 0
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
LINCOLN NORTH POINTE - SP-I 09(B)
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a
public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:OO p.m. on Tuesday, September 22, 1998, to consider a request for
approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, and a Specific Plan Amendment to repeal the specific plan which was
originally approved in 1972, and to allow the subdivision of a 50.23 acre parcel into 12
non-residential lots ranging from 2.47 to 6.28 acres in size, balanced grading of the
entire property, construction of 6 office-research and developmentlwarehouse buildings
totaling 385,085 square feet in area on 6 of the proposed lots, and construction of
satellite antennas on the rooftop of one of the buildings and a satellite dish antennae
farm, on property generally located along the west side of El Camino Real, to the south of Palomar Airport Road, in Local Facilities Management Zone 5, and more particularly
described as:
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 11 IO, in the City of Carlsbad,
parcel map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder
of San Diego County, on November IO, 1972, as File No.
3021 14 of official records.
County of Sari Diego, State of California, according to
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the
public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after September 18,
1998. If you have any questions regarding this matUer, please call Chris DeCerbo, in
the Planning Department, at (760) 438-1 161, extension 4445.
If you challenge the Specific Plan Amendment, Mitigated Negative Declaration, andlor
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at, or prior to, the
public hearing.
APPLICANT: Lincoln Property Company
PUBLISH: September 12, 1998
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
0 0
PALOMAR AIRPORT
- @
LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
SP 109(B)
REAL ESTATE COLLATERAL
30 BOX 9000-685 23333 AVENIDA LA CAZA 6300 YARROW DR
CARLSBAD CA 92018 COT0 DE CAZA CA 92679 CARLSBAD CA 92oc
BRESSI LENNAR RANCH VEN. GLENN F HARE
WATKINS J REAL ESTATE S VECTOR ASSOCIATES JEAN K RINDT
1280 PARK CENTER DR 1810 S BAYFRONT
VISTA CA 92083 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92662 ESCONDIDO CA 92c
17535 BEAR VALLEl
VISTA INDUSTRIAL V LLC DORAN GERRY
NEW YORK NY 10019 CARLSBAD CA 92008 NEWPORT BEACH CA 1285 AVENUE OF THE AMER 3288 GARFIELD ST 2033 SHIPWAY LN
FUJITA INVESTORS OF CAL AXIOM AIRPORT PARTNERS SWIFTOAK INVESTOR
PO BOX 1860 3039 CRESTA WAY 12520 HIGH BLUFF
SANTA MONICA CA 90406 LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SAN DIEGO CA 921
AT P KPLR MORRIS I STEIMAN MYRON L CO
6150 YARROW DR 6243 ROCKHURST DR 6115 CORTE DEL CE SAN DIEGO CA 92120 CARLSBAD CA 9200 CARLSBAD CA 92009
VANGUARD INDUSTRIES WES MERCOTAC INC NEBLETT 6155 CORTE DEL CEDRO
CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92009
6195 CORTE DEL CEDRO 10 6190 CORTE DEL CE CARLSBAD CA 9200
MARINE CORPS W
DAUM 1661 WILLOWHAVEN RD MCX / COMP
ENCIMITAS CA 92024 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CA 9205
CEDRO 6110 CORTE EL DEL CEDRO
MCROSKZY FAMILY ROCKWELL FARMS INC ARO PARTNERS
PO BOX 1243 PO BOX 132 1015 CHESTNUT AVE
RAPJCHO SAIJTA FE C 92067 ORANGE CA 92856 CARLSBAD CA 92001
EILL J & JANET READ ARO PARTNERS UKE M T TR
860 W GLENWOOD CIR
FULLERTON CA 92832 CARLSBAD CA 92008 MINDEN NV 89423
1015 CHESTNUT AVE A03 1750 LUPINE CIR
K I( JERRY BETTI FAMILY JOSEPH STEWART 1000 QUAIL ST 190 6074 CORTE DEL CEDRO 6070 CORTE DEL CEI
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92005
.6070 c JOSEPH COR F STEWA .; . ;:"E: LHARO
AD CA 92009 AD CA 92009 CARDIFF BY THE SE
AMERICAN LOAD CELLS COR CHARLES A & GAIL ROSS ARO PARTNERS 7720 EL CAMINO RD 4962 CONCANNON CT 1015 CHESTNUT AVE CARLSBAE CA 92009 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 CARLSBAD CA 920c
KENNETH X BACA GARY W MOSELLE BANOWEN REAL EST$ 502 CAMINO DE ORCHIDIA 6058 CORTE DEL CEDRO 2566 OVERLAND AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024 CARLSBAD CA 92009 LOS ANGELES CA s
PALOMAR LOT 10 BUSINESS
2152 DUPONT DR 203 IRVINE CA 92612
*** 40 Printed ***
A "otiq has Reen mailed to
al' T
is:,
-347f Dat& d
- - ~~c>rc/-*~-~ 4, + u""uDants
. 4-7- si?iiLiI, d w
I
a GUY MOORE JR CLERK NO COUNTY SUPERIOR
COURT, CASE NO N69883
325 SOUTH MELROE DRiK
VISTA CA 92083
e 0
6503 EL CAMINO REA
CARLSBAD CA 92009
T W SMITH ESQ
SUITE 200
2170 EL CAMINO REAL
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
r 5
L&
t
)SI'] l?pu38
i 0 e
RICHARD SIMONS
LINCOLN PROPERTY CO
P 0 BOX 19693
IRVINE CA 92713-9693
THOMAS LAMORE
SMITH CONSULTING ARCH
5355 MlRA SORENTO PLACE
SAN DIEGO CA 92121
IS!? EpT.Imj I
m e f-
-
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice
SP 109(B) - Lincoln North Pointe
for a public hearing before the City Council,
Please notice the item for the
e
Thank you.
September 3, 1998 Assistant City Man-- - Date *
-
e 0
- City of Carlsba(
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that
Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m.
Wednesday, August 19, 1998, to consider a request for approval of a Mitigz
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific F
Amendment, h ?!?
50.23 acre Planned Industrial (P-M) zoned property into 12 non-residential lots, gr:
the entire site and construct 6 office/research and development/warehouse building:
satellite antennae dish farm, and rooftop satellite antennas on property gener
Local Facilities Management Zone 5 and more particularly described as:
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Cou
.. fi--m
located along the west side of El Camino Real to the south of Palomar Airport Roac
Parcel 1 of Parcel Map No. 1110, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to parcel
map thereof filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, on November IO, 1972 as File No. 302114 of
official records.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend 1
public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after August 13, 19!
If you have any questions, please call Chris DeCerbo in the Planning Department
(760) 438-1 161, extension 4445.
The time within which you may judicially challenge this Specific Plan Amendme
7, if approved, is established
state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the Specific P
Amendment, Tentative Map, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development, Hills
Development Permit, Special Use Permit and Conditional Use Permit in court, you r-r
be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hear
described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbac
or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: SP 109(B)--
CASE NAME: LINCOLN NORTH POINTE
PUBLISH: AUGUST 6, 1998
..
mtative M;lni Pi-!, .. -
>.I
I'
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2075 La Palrnas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 Q (760) 438-1 161 - FAX (760) 438-0
* 0 a
MITIGATION AGREEMENT
EMENT (the "Agreement") is made as of this day of
1998, by an between W9/LNP Real Estate Limited Partnership, a Delaware
"Lincoln"), and the CITY OF CaSBAJ3, a municipal corporation of the
State of California ("City"), with reference to the following facts:
A. Lincoln has applied for certain permits and approvals ("Approvals") known as SI
109 (B)\CT 98-07PUD 98-01PIP 98-07WP 98-05\CuP 98-08\SuP 98-03, for the
construction of the development project (the "Project") commonly known as Lincoln North
Pointe. In connection with the processing of such Approvals, the City provided a notice of inten
to adopt a mitigated Negative Declaration (the "MND"), and also mailed and published such
notice, in accordance with Section 15072 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Public review of the
proposed MND was also provided in accordance with Section 15073 of the State CEQA
Guidelines. The proposed MND identified the impacts of the Project on Southern Maritime
Chaparral, Coyote Brush Scrub and Mule Fat Scrub (the "Species") habitat and species as a
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated.
B. The City has determined that the Project's impacts on the Species would be
mitigated to a less than significant impact by the obtainment of mitigation sites of other
mitigation methods, e.g., in-lieu fees or their equivalent such as the obtainment of mitigation
credits, subject to the approval of the City, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California
Department of Fish and Game (collectively, the "Agencies").
C. This Agreement is entered into pursuant to Carlsbad City Council Resolution #98
274, dated 8-4-98 which established a deferred mitigation program.
D. By Resolution #98-274, the City determined that its first preference is for the
Project to provide its full mitigation amount (3 1.46 acres) of southern maritime chaparral (whicl
provides habitat for Del Mar manzanita, Del Mar sandaster and Nuttall's scruboak) in Carlsbad
concurrent with impacts. The City acknowledges, however, that Lincoln wishes to begin gradin
as soon as possible, and it may not be feasible for Lincoln to acquire appropriate mitigation lanc
in Carlsbad concurrent with the impacts without additional time. If the entire amount of
mitigation cannot be obtained in Carlsbad, then the City's next preference is to see at least
twenty-three (23) acres of the total mitigation obligation obtained in Carlsbad.
E. The City has developed and approved "procedures for deferred mitigation" whicl
allows for additional time to provide mitigation within the City upon obtaining appropriate
security and this Agreement is consistent with those procedures.
F. The City and Lincoln now wish to provide for such mitigation as set forth below
Performance by Lincoln of the matters set forth below will reduce the impacts of the Project on
the Species to a less than significant impact.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City and Lincoln agree as follows:
-1-
39728 V03
e e 0
1. Lincoln shall purchase or reserve southern maritime chaparral credits equal to
twenty-three (23) acres of land and coastal sage scrub credits equal to eight (8) acres of land fi-on
the Manchester Avenue Land Conservation bank. The credits, or a portion of them, may be
applied toward mitigating the impacts of habitat and species loss as a result of the Project as
further described below. These two types of credits are recognized as having the following
monetary values:
a)
b)
Lincoln shall continue to diligently pursue purchase of 3 1 acres of mitigation
Southern maritime chaparral credits are valued at $45,000 per credit.
Coastal sage scrub credits are valued at $20,000 per credit.
2.
lands located in the City. Such mitigation lands must contain southern maritime chaparral
(minimum of 75%), with remainder made up of coastal sage scrub or other vegetation
communities acceptable to the City and the Agencies. In any case, the amount of southern
maritime chaparral land and or equivalent credits to be applied toward mitigation of the loss of
the Species as a result of the Project shall not be less than an amount equal to 23 acres.
3. Lincoln shall document its efforts to obtain mitigation land located in the City by
providing monthly written reports to the City, which shall include documentation of its offers or
solicitations for such property, information concerning its retention of knowledgeable persons to
assist in the obtainment of such property, and such other matters that evidence Lincoln's efforts
to obtain such property. Lincoln shall be deemed to have acted diligently to obtain such propert:
if it has in good faith, and in a commercially reasonable manner, sought to obtain such property
by normal and customary means employed in the real estate industry.
unknown costs, whereas purchase of credits in a mitigation bank allows costs to be reasonably
accurately predicted. Lincoln desires to place a cap on its ultimate mitigation costs and to make
that cap reasonably close to the cost of purchasing credits as described in Paragraph 1 above.
Therefore, Lincoln shall not be required to expend more than $30,000 per acre for properties
located in the City. In no event shall Lincoln be obligated to expend more than $1,035,000 for
credits (for a total of $1,275,000.00 ), and the transfer thereof to the City.
4. Lincoln and the City acknowledge that purchase of land in Carlsbad entails
the obtainment of southern maritime chaparral land or credits and $240,000 for other land or
5. Lincoln shall provide the final mitigation package to the City the earlier of (i)he
one (1) year anniversary of the date of this Agreement or (ii) the issuance by the City of
certificate(s) of occupancy for the Project. The City may extend this agreement with concurrenc
from the agencies for up to one year in the event that a new mitigation bank is established in or
adjacent to Carlsbad. The final mitigation package shall be substantially in the form of either of
the following:
a) In the event Lincoln obtains at least twenty-three (23) acres of southern
maritime chaparral mitigation land located in the City that is reasonably acceptable to the City
and the Agencies, Lincoln shall dedicate to the City (or the City's designee) such land. Such
land shall be substituted for the equivalent amount of credits purchased (if any). If mitigation
land purchased in the City contains any other native or naturalized vegetation community, it
may be substituted for an equivalent amount of coastal sage scrub credits purchased or reserved
-2-
39728 V03
.LI e 0
upon concurrence by the Agencies. Subject to Paragraph 4, Lincoln shall ensure that the total
mitigation package is the equivalent of 3 1 acres by purchasing, if not already purchased, an
equivalent amount of remaining credits, as set forth in Paragraph 1. Such dedication of
mitigation land and purchase of equivalent credits shall constitute full and complete mitigation
for the Project.
b) In the event Lincoln is unable to acquire at least twenty-three (23) acres of
acceptable mitigation land located in the City, Lincoln shall, if not already purchased, purchase
the credits set forth in Paragraph 1. Such purchase shall constitute full and complete mitigation
for the Project. In that event, Lincoln shall pay to the City an amount equal to $150,000 to
compensate the City for the loss of opportunity to acquire open space within Carlsbad. This
compensation to the City is not a payt of the mitigation, and the City may utilize such amount in
any manner it chooses.
6. Miscellaneous.
6.1 Notices. Any notice required or permitted to be given under this
Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given when delivered by (i) U.S
mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, postage prepaid or (ii) overnight delivery
service showing receipt of delivery, (iii) personal delivery, or (iv) by facsimile. Notices shall be
sent to:
If to Lincoln: Lincoln Property Company N.C., Inc.
50 Executive Park, Suite 100
Irvine, California 92623-9693
Attention: Mr. Rich Simons
Business: (714) 261-9871
Fax (714) 261-1 178
with a copy to: N/A
if to City: Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
with copies to: Ron Ball, City Attorney
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Notices as aforesaid shall be effective upon the earlier of actual receipt, or
Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon, and inure
within three days after deposit in the US. mail.
to the benefit of, the parties hereto and their respective successors, heirs, administrators and
6.2
-3-
39728 V03
e e .II
assigns. Lincoln may assign its rights and delegate its obligations under this Agreement to an
affiliated entity, without City's consent thereto
Amendments Except as otherwise provided herein, this Agreement may
be amended or modified only by a written instrument executed by City and Lincoln,
Enforceability If for any reason, any provision of this Agreement shall b
held to be unenforceable, it shall not affect the validity or enforceability of any other provision (
this Agreement 2nd to the extent any provision of this Agreement is not determined to be
unenforceable, such provision, or portion thereof, shall be, and remain, in full force and effect
accordance with the laws of the State of California
6 3
6 4
6 5 Governing Law This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Agreement as of the date
first set forth above
W9/LNP Real Estate Limited Partnership,
a Delaware limited partnership
APPROVED AS TO FORM
By:
Its. eY
ATTEST City Clerk
u=- BY Its
-4-
39728 V03