HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-05-11; City Council; 15183; Commercial/visitor-serving overlay zone ZCA 98-01- -
CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGEMA BILL
AB# /<j&q m:
COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE MTG. 5/11/99 ZCA 98-OIIZC 99-03lLCPA 98-05 /
DEPT. PLN
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt City Council Resolution No. 99 -i(P ? amending the Mello I, Mello II and Agua Hedionda
Lagoon segments of the City’s Local Coastal Program and introduce Ordinance No. #se ‘lgf,
establishing the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone within the city.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
In 1997, with the opening of the LEGOLAND theme park just under two years away (March 1999),
the City Council sought a way to prevent any potential negative development impacts resulting from
increasing pressures to develop vacant commercial sites, or redevelop existing commercial sites.
As an immediate measure, an urgency ordinance was adopted which required commercial projects
and activities to receive final approval from the City Council. Concurrent with the adoption of the
urgency ordinance was the request of staff to recommend long term alternatives. Subsequent
reports to the City Council resulted in direction to staff to prepare an overlay zone which would
replace the urgency ordinance provisions by establishing codified entitlement processes and related
development standards staff has prepared. Planning Commission action on March 17, 1999,
resulted in a 7-O vote unanimously recommending that the Council adopt the overlay zone. However, the Commission also made some comments for Council’s consideration as summarized
later in this agenda bill.
Initial Council direction focused on preventing the overproliferation of certain uses such as gas stations and hotels/motels and assuring quality developments that would be parked adequately,
function in a compatible manner, have reduced but reasonable signage allowances, promote high
quality architecture and satisfy quality land use and visual objectives. Workshops with the City
Council, staff research, community input and various field visits have provided the basis for the
overlay zone. The proposed area of coverage has also been assessed and supported by Council.
The primary processing elements of the overlay zone involve: a conditional use permit (CUP) approved by the City Council after recommendation by the Planning Commission; a required pre-
filing submittal and meeting process; a required site notification process; and, rapid code enforcement provisions.
The unique development standards of the overlay zone involve: incrementally higher parking
standards for many commercial/visitor-serving uses, most notably the restaurant parking standard;
parking provisions for aspects of certain uses that were not previously regulated, such as the unit
marketing efforts associated with time share projects, or for uses that are not currently addressed
such as car rental uses; signage provisions; the establishment of required setbacks; the allowance
to review building materials and colors as part of the CUP; architectural style provisions; specific landscaping provisions; and, use separation standards for gas stations and hotels/motels. Exhibit 5
of this agenda bill provides an overview of current and proposed parking standards.
The overlay zone ordinance is designed to have minimal impacts on existing commercial/visitor-
serving uses that wish to continue existing operations, or propose incremental increases or
changes, without creating a disincentive for property maintenance or improvement. The ordinance
lists prohibited uses and requires a performance monitoring condition to be placed on all
commercial/visitor-serving uses.
/
h
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. ‘.$ /,!?3
The development and evolution of the overlay zone ordinance has been subject to an interactive
process involving public workshops with the City Council, field trips, integration of property owner and community input, staff research and close City Attorney coordination. The overriding goal has
been to produce an ordinance that is in line with the conceptual objectives initiated and supported by
the Council. In addition, staff has worked to produce an ordinance that is conservative and
restrictive in that its implementation is designed to satisfy pre-stated Council objectives.
Although the ordinance is substantially complete and has been recommended for approval by the
Planning Commission, refinements are still possible and appropriate. Three levels of refinement are
still possible. The first level involves the City Council’s own thoughts and reactions to the public
testimony. The second level involves the consideration of items recommended by staff to further
refine the ordinance as shown below. The third level of refinement would be from considering the
comments made by the Planning Commission at its March 17 hearing.
Ordinance Refinements:
1. Staff recommends that the City Council support the modifications shown in Exhibit “3”, as
attached to this agenda bill, which outlines seven changes to the ordinance. These changes are
to: (1) insert the term “commercial/visitor-serving” into section G of Intent and Purpose; (2) add
a “freestanding sign” definition to mean monument signs and not pole signs in section F of Definitions; (3) clarify sign provisions relative to freeway service facilities in section B 1 of Signs
under Development Standards; (4) add the allowance for lighting fixtures in setback areas, trash
enclosures in freeway setback areas, and clarify minimum setback requirements in section D
(Building Setbacks) under Development Standards; (5) modify and clarify landscape tree
requirements, and architecturally augment required screen walls in section G (Landscaping)
under Development Standards; (6) refine gas station design criteria in section H (Use Separation Standards) under Development Standards; and, (7) clarity the allowance for existing structures
to remodel or redevelop to the same square footage in Section 21.208.130, Existing Uses,
Building Permits and Business Licenses.
2. Staff requests that the City Council either confirm or modify the proposed prohibition of all drive-
thru facilities for commercial/visitor-serving uses within the overlay zone. Initial concept
proposals shown to staff as part of the public review of the overlay zone ordinance, have
included a drive-thru use such as a car wash or drive up pharmacy. If the Council wishes to
consider such uses on a case by case basis, the current draft ordinance (Section 21.208.060 C.)
needs revision. The citywide prohibition on drive-thru restaurants is in force and unaffected by
this consideration. If the full scope of potential drive-thru or drive up uses are to be prohibited
from the overlay zone, no changes are needed.
Plannina Commission Items:
Although the Planning Commission recommended approval of the overlay zone ordinance, the
following comments and suggestions were offered.
1. The overlay zone should apply to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (excluding LEGOLAND) due
to fairness considerations of certain uses in close proximity being subject to differing regulations.
Staff Resoonse: Council has expressed its satisfaction with this recently approved specific plan,
however, it was indicated that the specific plan should be amended to require City Council approval for commercial/visitor-serving uses. Streets commonly are dividers between different
zoning districts where differing regulations would be present in close proximity.
2. Consider applying the overlay zone to automobile dealerships in the Car Country Specific Plan.
Staff Response: Automobile dealerships were excluded because as a specialized land use with
established specific plan criteria for setbacks, architecture and parking, minimal impacts are
9
PAGE 3 OF AGE&i BILL NO. 1” 18 3
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
expected relative to the reason for forming the overlay zone. If the concern is employee parking
on streets, it may be an issue that goes beyond what the overlay zone is designed to regulate.
Consider the issue of requiring a certain “mix” of restaurants for sites where multiple restaurants
may cluster together, with a range from quality sit down to more casual dining.
Staff Resoonse: Staff is neutral on this issue. If Council so directs, staff could develop a
standard.
The overlay zone reiterates the citywide allowance for the sale of produce grown on the
premises from a small roadside stand. The issue was raised regarding the sale of items or produce sold from such stands that was not actually grown on the premises.
Staff Response: The intent is to provide for the small scale sale of produce items; if this intent is
violated then it would become an enforcement issue.
Regarding the prohibition of outdoor storage or display of goods for sale, which is a reiteration of
the citywide requirement for commercial activities to be conducted wholly within a building, the
issue was raised regarding incidental outdoor display, such as produce for sale at a retail market. Staff Response: The intent is to prevent “tacky” outdoor displays. Small scale,
incidental occurrences of this may still occur, and in those instances, it would become an
enforcement issue.
Regarding the requirement of a CUP for existing uses that wish to expand to be limited to the
new or intensified portion of the existing use, the issue was raised questioning if there is a strong
desire to “recapture” these existing uses so that over time there will be total conformity to the
overlay zone standards.
Staff Resoonse: Given the policy directions received during the development of the overlay
zone, staffs objective has been to minimize impacts to existing uses. Staff is proposing a
refinement to the ordinance to clarify the ability for existing structures to redevelop (item #7 of
Exhibit “3”). The intent is not to provide a disincentive for long term maintenance and upkeep;
limiting CUPS to new or intensified portions of existing uses will allow the incentive for long term
maintenance to remain while staying consistent with the policy of creating minimal impacts to
existing uses due to the implementation of the overlay zone.
Should truck trailer/tractor trailer parking or screening provisions be considered?
Staff Response: Developing a parking standard for such trucks may become complex, however,
staff could develop a standard that would require screening along freeway frontages with
masonry walls in combination with landscaping.
Confirm support for the overlay zone’s coverage area including northern and southern
extremities.
Staff Response: Staff feels the current coverage satisfies Council’s criteria for being included in
the overlay zone: close proximity to the Cannon Road offramp, commercial zoning designation
and/or visitor serving General Plan designation, vacant land or redevelopment potential, freeway
frontage/visibility.
Based on the City Council’s desired level of refinement, the ordinance can be immediately adopted
with the requested changes noted; or staff can take direction from Council as to the scope and
specifics of desired changes and return for Council’s final action.
Concurrent with Council’s final action, staff will submit the corresponding Local Coastal Program Amendment for processing by the Coastal Commission. Staff has presented the overlay zone to
Coastal staff and feel the LCPA processing will proceed in a routine manner. Since the proposed
overlay zone does not prohibit land uses that are allowed or promoted in the coastal zone; and likewise does not allow or promote land uses that are prohibited by existing coastal land use
policies, no modifications or text changes are required to the policies of the Mello I, Mello II or Agua
3
PAGE 4 OF AGENDA BILL NO. I<. /Rx
Hedionda Lagoon Local Coastal Program segments. Given the expiration of the current urgency ordinance on August 30, 1999, the processing of the overlay zone has been carried out so that an
effective overlay zone ordinance will be in place by September 1, 1999.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The Planning Director has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per section 15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines
and will not have any adverse significant impact on the environment. Section 15061(b)(3) exempts
projects where it can be seen with certainty, will have no possibility of having a significant effect on
the environment. Regulations associated with the proposed overlay zone qualify for this exemption;
the Planning Director will issue a Notice of Exemption upon project approval.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There will be a minimal fiscal impact resulting from expenditures of staff time required to complete
the processing of documents through the Coastal Commission. The need to provide code
enforcement for the new regulations will have an impact on the operating budget.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. 9 9 * t b 3
2. City Council Ordinance No. lv.,$a 485
3. Ordinance Refinements (bold text/strikeout format)
4. Location Map
5. Parking Standards Comparison
6. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4527, 4528 and 4529 7. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated March 17, 1999
8. Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes, dated March 17, 1999.
1 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
RESOLUTION NO. 99-163
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT
TO THE MELLO I, MELLO II AND AGUA HEDIONDA
LAGOON SEGMENTS OF THE CITY’S LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM TO ESTABLISH A COMMERCIALNISITOR-
SERVING OVERLAY ZONE WITHIN THE CITY.
CASE NAME: COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NO.: LCPA 98-05
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on March 17, 1999, hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider Local Coastal Program Amendment 98-
05 and adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 4529 recommending to the City Council
that it be approved; and
WHEREAS, LCPA 98-05 will implement the proposed CommercialNisitor-
Serving Overlay Zone since coastal zone properties are involved within the Mello I, Mello II and
Agua Hedionda Lagoon Segments of the City’s Local Coastal Program; and
WHEREAS, the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone will not have any
adverse impacts to shoreline resources or coastal zone policies regarding coastal access or
visitor-serving uses; and
WHEREAS, the approval of LCPA 98-05 will include companion amendments to
the Zoning Ordinance (ZCA 98-01) and Zoning Map (99-03), which upon adoption, will
implement the overlay zone; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 18th day of May
1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the proposed
amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Map and the City’s Local Coastal Program;
and
4-
- -
1 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
2 II and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors I
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment.
follows:
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the findings of the Planning Commission in Resolution No. 4529
constitute the findings of the City Council in this matter.
3. That the Local Coastal Program Amendment, LCPA 98-05, is approved as
shown in Planning Commission Resolution No. 4529, and Ordinance NS-
, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by y?s
reference.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council ,of the City of
Carlsbad on the 18th day of &Y 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, and Kulchin
NOES: None
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
ABSENT: Council Members Hall and Nygaard
ATTEST:
23
24
25 (SEAL)
26
27
28 6 -2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. ~-485
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 21 OF THE
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF
CHARTER 21.208 AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP TO
ESTABLISH THE COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVER-
LAY ZONE
CASE NAME: COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NO.: ZCA 98-Ol/ZC 99-03
WHEREAS, the City Council passed a motion on June 24,1997, directing staff to
study the establishment of an appropriate mechanism or process to make the Council a standard
part of the approval process for commercial projects in the general vicinity of the LEGOLAND
theme park and
WHEREAS, the City Council’s stated objectives were to prevent negative aspects
that could arise from unchecked commercial development such as signage, low quality
architecture, traffic and circulation impacts, proliferation of certain uses and the potential for a
degradation of quality of life; and
WHEREAS, on September 2,1997, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance
NS-418 to require Council’s immediate approval for commercial projects within the designated
coverage area of the urgency ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on October 15, 1997, the City Council extended the Urgency
Ordinance and directed staff to develop a commercial/visitor-serving overlay zone; and
WHEREAS, staff has performed research, solicited input from affected property
owners, participated in field trips and conducted public workshops with the City Council to
develop the overlay zone per Council’s direction; and
WHEREAS, the proposed overlay zone responds to the initial concerns of
Council by providing an entitlement process that is unique in the City, requires City Council
approval, and establishes certain criteria and standards that are unique to the overlay zone and are
designed to promote high quality commercial projects that function and operate adequately over
time; and
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
WHEREAS, the overlay zone’s coverage area, permit process and development
standards have been subject to public review and input and refinements have been made to the
ordinance to respond to various concerns so it will be a usable and effective ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the overlay zone continues the citywide prohibition on drive&t-u
restaurants.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: That Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the
addition of Chapter 21.208 to read as follows:
CHAPTER 21.208
COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
Sections:
21.208.010 Intent and Purpose.
21.208.020 Definitions.
21.208.030 Boundaries; Exceptions; Applicability.
21.208.040 Permitted Uses.
21.208.050 Uses Permitted by Conditional Use Permit.
21.208.060 Prohibited Uses.
21.208.070 Approval Process.
21.208.080 Pre-Filing Submittal and Meeting; Application for CUP.
21.208.090 Project Site Notification.
21.208.100 Development Standards.
21.208.110 Required Findings.
21.208.120 Performance Monitoring Condition.
21.208.130 Existing Uses, Building Permits and Business Licenses;
21.208.140 Administrative Enforcement Powers.
21.208.150 Administrative Notice, Hearing, and Appeal Procedures.
21.208.160 Judicial Enforcement.
21.208.170 Remedies Not Exclusive.
21.208.180 Severability.
21.208.010 Intent and Pulpose.
The intent and purpose of the Commercial/Visitor-Serving overlay zone is to supplement the
underlying zoning by providing additional regulations for Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses.
The overlay zone is intended and designed to:
A. Control the location, operation and appearance of newly proposed
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses within the overlay zone to prevent the over-proliferation of
certain uses as well as to ensure high quality appearance and operation;
-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
B. Maximize public disclosure about new Commercial/Visitor-Serving Use
proposals located within the overlay zone;
C. Design compatibility, vehicular circulation, and shuttle bus/alternative
transportation options into CommerciaWisitor-Serving Uses within the overlay zone;
D. Provide for the review of building materials and colors and establish architectural
criteria that discourages the use of corporate, standardized building forms, materials and styles;
E. Formalize the use of conditional use permits for all Commercial/Visitor-Serving
Uses within the overlay zone and empbasize the aspects of performance monitoring and
enforcement;
F. Establish the City Council as the final decision-maker for CommercialNisitor-
Serving Uses in the overlay zone;
G. Require Commercial/Visitor-Serving conditional uses as listed in the Planned
Industrial (P-M) Chapter of this Title for underlying P-M zoned properties within the overlay
zone to be subject to the conditional use permit requirements and provisions of this Chapter,
except that such uses shall be consistent with the intent and purpose of the P-M zone whose
primary purpose is not to cater directly to the general public, and allows certain commercial uses which cater to, and are ancillary to the uses allowed in the P-M zone; and,
H. Establish procedures in the overlay zone to provide for effective code
enforcement.
21.208.020 Definitions.
Terms used in this Chapter and not defined below shall be defined per Chapter 2 1.04 of this
Title. The following terms, as used in this Chapter, shall have the meaning established by this
Section:
A. “Applicant” means the property owner(s) of the site.
B. “Applicant’s agent” means the authorized representative of the property owner
responsible for processing the overlay zone conditional use permit.
C. “Commercial/Visitor-Serving Use” means uses involving the provision of goods
or services designed primarily for tourists or visitors to the city, such as any of the following
either individually or in combination: commercial development with retail sales; lodging uses;
recreation vehicle (RV) parks, overnight RV parking, campgrounds or overnight campsite uses;
sales of souvenirs, gifts or toys; activities including food and/or beverage serving uses.
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses include, but are not limited to: gas stations/mini-marts, hotels,
motels, restaurants, delis, retail stores, gift shops, museums and visitor centers. D. “Enforcement Agency” means the city’s Community Development Department.
E. “Enforcement Official” means the city’s Community Development Director.
F. “Freestanding sign” means a monument sign supported by the ground and not
supported by a pole.
G. “Time-share Project” means a project that meets the time-share definition
contained in Section 21.04.357 of this Title. Time share projects are distinguished between
“lock-off’ units and standard units for the purpose of establishing different parking requirements
as outlined in Section 21.208.100 A 2. “Lock-off” units are defined as a timeshare unit which
allows the occupancy of less than the entire unit during a timeshare period such that each
occupant may occupy a part of the unit for a timeshare period with the remaining part of the unit
being “locked-off’ and subject to use by others. Standard time share units do not have lock-off
provisions.
Ill
-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
21.208.030 Boundaries: Excentions: Arwlicabilitv.
A. This Chapter applies generally to all properties shown with the designation
“Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone” on the Zoning Map as concurrently amended with
the adoption of this Chapter (pursuant to Section 21.05.050), as amended from time to time;
excepting therefrom any properties used as automobile dealerships within the Car Country
Carlsbad Specific Plan area, as amended from time to time.
B. Notwithstanding properties being within the boundaries of the overlay zone as
established above, the requirements for a conditional use permit, and the development standards
of this Chapter shall apply to:
1. CommerciaWisitor-Serving Uses within the overlay zone, and
2. The portions of mixed use projects constituting a ComrnerciaVVisitor-
Serving Use
C. Where the provisions of this Chapter conflict with those of the underlying zone or
elsewhere in this code, this Chapter applies.
21.208.040 Permitted Uses.
1 No Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses are permitted uses, in the overlay zone. The only
permitted uses in the overlay zone are the residential, industrial and office uses authorized as
permitted uses by the zoning of the underlying zone, which are not subject to the provisions of
this Chapter. Those uses shall be developed subject to the development standards and
entitlement processes required by their underlying zoning. In addition, a roadside stand for the
display and sale of products produced on the same premises is an allowed use provided that the
floor area shall not exceed two hundred square feet and is located a minimum of 20 feet from any
street, highway or city right of way.”
21.208.050 Uses Permitted bv Conditional Use Permit.
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses may be permitted within the overlay zone by approval of
conditional use permit pursuant to this Chapter. Conditional uses otherwise allowed by
underlying zoning designations, within the overlay zone, that are not CommercialiVisitor-
Serving Uses, are not subject to this Chapter. Where the underlying zoning authorizes
conditionally approved uses (other than Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses) Chapter 21.50, not
this Chapter, applies.
21.208.060 Prohibited Uses.
Notwithstanding any underlying zoning provision, the following uses are prohibited in the
overlay zone:
A. Stand-alone liquor stores where the retail sale of liquor and/or alcoholic beverages
is the primary form of business;
B. The outdoor storage or display of merchandise, goods or services for sale;
C. Except as autborized pursuant to Chapter 8.17 and/or 8.32 of this code, or a
conditional use permit issued pursuant to this Chapter, no person shall sell or offer to sell goods, merchandise or services from, or by means of, any temporary display, vehicle, platform, wagon
or pushcart upon any public street, privately owned property, public parking lot, city right of way
or sidewalk within the overlay zone; and
D. Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas (which waive parking requirements for small
outdoor eating areas up to 400 square feet in size) are prohibited. All indoor and outdoor eating
areas shall provide parking as required by 21.208.100 A 4 of this Chapter.
-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
h
21.208.070 ADDrOVal Process.
Notwithstanding Section 21.54.040, the City Council may approve, conditionally approve or
disapprove a conditional use permit within the overlay zone after the Planning Commission has
considered the application and made a recommendation to the Council pursuant to Chapter 2 1.54
and the special procedures added by this Chapter. The conditional use permit may be approved
for a limited period of time, and shall be subject to monitoring and enforcement pursuant to this
Chapter.
21.208.080 Pre-Filirw Submittal and Meetiw: ADDk3tiOII for CUP.
A. Prior to filing an application for a conditional use permit for a
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Use within the overlay zone, the Applicant shall make a pre-filing
project submittal and then attend a pre-filing meeting.
1. Pre-Filing Submittal - The Applicant shall tile a written pre-filing
submittal and shall follow the submittal requirements in accordance with the Planning
Department’s “Preliminary Review Process” accompanied by the fee, therefore, established by
the City Council by resolution. The submittal shall demonstrate compliance with this Chapter,
including the proposal of an architectural style as required by Section 2 1.208.100 F.
2. Pre-Filing Meeting - Within 30 days of the Applicant’s pre-filing
submittal, the Enforcement Official shall respond with a written City Response Letter,
thoroughly analyzing the proposal, establishing issues for resolution, and setting a time, date and
place to conduct a pre-filing meeting subject to the following:
a) Required attendance: Applicant or Applicant’s agent, staff planner
and staff engineer.
V Optional attendance: City Manager or designated representative,
any designated representative from a city department or division with an interest in, or concern
with, the proposed Commercial/Visitor-Serving development.
3. Primary purpose: discuss the city response letter, identify issues to be
resolved and establish final application requirements.
B. Good faith participation in the pre-filing meeting, is necessary for the submittal of
a formal conditional use permit application.
C. Upon completion of the pre-filing submittal and meeting, the Applicant may file a
formal application for a CUP pursuant to Chapters 21.50 and 21.54. The application shall be
accompanied by application(s) for any other required discretionary entitlement for the project
(including, but not limited to, a coastal development permit). Application for, and approval of, a
CUP pursuant to this Chapter shall satisfy all requirements for a site development plan, for the
project if such is required by the underlying zoning. If not otherwise required, in addition to the
application requirements for a conditional use permit (including special requirements in this
Chapter) formal conditional use permit application exhibits subject to this Chapter shall show the
following: 1. All State and Uniform Building Code requirements for disabled parking
spaces and related pathways.
2. All proposed rooftop equipment, mechanical enclosures and any Uniform
Building Code requirements relating to rooftop access, ladders or other rooftop structural
features.
21.208.090 Proiect Site Notification.
In addition to the public notice requirements of Section 21.54.060, the Applicant shall provide
project site notification as follows:
-5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. Upon city determination of completeness of a formal application, the Applicant
shall physically post the following notice on the project site. The Applicant shall maintain the
posted notice in good and legible condition until the application is withdrawn or scheduled for
public hearing, whichever occurs first. Such notice shall state “APPLICATION IN PROCESS”,
and shall include:
1. A yellow color background.
2. A brief but complete explanation of the matter to be considered.
3. The Applicant’s name/phone number and Applicant’s agent (if applicable)
name and phone number.
4. Planning Department contact information.
B. Concurrent with public noticing for a public hearing, the Applicant shall
physically post a notice on the project site for the entire term of the public notice period until,
and inclusive of, the actual public hearing date. Such notice shall state “PENDING PUBLIC
HEARING”, and shall include the same information required above, but:
1. An orange color background; and
2. Date, time and place of pending public hearing.
C. Notices required by subsections A and B above shall comply with the following:
1. Sign location shall be in a conspicuous location so that the Notice is
visible from all portions of the project site which abut a private or public street.
2. Sign material shall be durable enough to withstand the elements. Signs
shall be secured to a ground mounted pole with a minimum pole height of four (4) feet and a
maximum pole height of six (6) feet.
3. Sign dimensions shall be: four (4) feet in height and three (3) feet in
length. 4. Letter height for the “APPLICATION IN PROCESS” or “PENDING
PUBLIC HEARING” headings shall be six (6) inches.
5. Letter height for the project descriptions shall be three (3) inches. 6. All other letter heights shall be two (2) inches.
7. All letter colors shall be black.
8. A city seal of the City of Carlsbad shall be displayed in the upper central
portion of the notice with a minimum diameter of three (3) inches.
9. Applicant or developer phrases or logos are not allowed.
10. Applicant must obtain project planner approval of color and text, prior to
posting.
11. The Public Hearing Notice shall be removed upon withdrawal of the
application or completion of the public hearing process, whichever occurs first.
12. Any removed or damaged notices shall be immediately replaced. Failure
to do so may cause the public hearing to be re-scheduled by the Enforcement Official,
D. The Planning Director may modify any of the criteria listed above in subsections
C l-7 if determined necessary to achieve maximum disclosure of the project and/or to optimize
visibility of the sign.
21.208.100 DeveloDment Standards.
Notwithstanding any underlying zoning provisions, the development standards below shall
supersede other provisions of this Title, and shall be applied to conditional use permits issued
pursuant to this Chapter.
A. Parking. The number of parking spaces required for Commercial/Visitor-Serving
Uses within the overlay zone shall be calculated based on the ratios established below according
-6-
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
to land use. Fractional parking spaces are to be rounded up to the nearest whole number.
Compact space provisions are provided in Section 21.44.110 of this Title. Any use not listed
below and subject to the provisions of this Chapter, shall be subject to a parking ratio to be
determined by the Planning Director based on the requirements of similar uses. The Planning
Director’s determination may be appealed in accordance with Section 21.54.140 of tbis Title; or
the determination may be incorporated into the project design and conditional use permit
application. All State and Uniform Building Code requirements for disabled parking spaces and
related pathways shall be shown on the conditional use permit application exhibits.
1. Motels/Hotels/Suites/Inns/Lodges/Resorts. 1.2 spaces per unit, plus
parking as required per’this Chapter for additional ancillary uses (restaurant, retail space, meeting
rooms, etc.) as calculated on an individual basis. In addition, these uses shall provide adequate
shuttle bus circulation and passenger drop-oftYpick-up facilities to be developed on a case-by-
case, site-by-site basis. Tour bus/passenger bus parking provisions may also be required based
on the specific project and location.
2. Time Share Projects. Lock-off units require 1.5 spaces per unit; standard
units require 1.2 spaces per unit. In addition, time share projects shall be subject to the following
requirements:
a. Adequate shuttle bus circulation and passenger drop-ofVpick-up
facilities to be developed on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis;
b. An Interim Parking/Unit Marketing Plan which will address the
initial sales efforts to sell time share units and the corresponding need to provide additional
interim parking while sales are on-going. The Interim Parking/Unit Marketing Plan shall be
approved by the City Council as one of the approving project exhibits and shall indicate where
interim parking is to be provided, the amount of spaces involved, adequate screening and landscaping, and the conversion or integration of the interim parking site into the overall time
share project.
3. Gas station/mini-mart. 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area plus
three additional employee parking spaces. Gas stations with work bays shall park the work bay
areas at a ratio of four spaces for every work bay. In addition, gas stations shall conform to the
use separation and design criteria contained in Section 2 1.208.060 H 1 of this Chapter.
4. Restaurant. 1 space/100 square feet of gross floor area up to two thousand
(2,000) square feet. Two thousand square feet or greater: Twenty spaces plus 1 space/50 square
feet in excess of two thousand square feet. Outdoor eating areas require 1 space/100 square feet
of gross floor area specifically designed, designated and approved for outdoor dining.
Recommended design features include adequate shuttle bus circulation and passenger drop-
ofYpick-up facilities in addition to tour bus/passenger bus parking provisions.
5. Coffee shop/beverage-serving use/delicatessen. 1 space/300 square feet of
gross floor area excluding seating areas for eating and/or drinking. Indoor and outdoor seating
areas shall park at 1 space/100 square feet of area.
6. Meeting rooms, assembly space, convention facilities. 1 space/100 square
feet of gross floor area.
7. Individual retail, gifts shops, toy stores, convenience stores, general sales.
1 space1300 square feet of gross floor area plus two additional employee parking spaces. 8. Shopping Center Retail. Minimum 1 space1200 square feet of gross
center. Restaurants in shopping center projects shall provide separate parking as required above
in Section 21.208.100 A 4.
9. Museums. 1 space/500 square feet of gross floor area plus a minimum of
two additional employee parking spaces. In addition, museums shall provide adequate shuttle
-7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
bus circulation, passenger drop-oWpick-up facilities, and tour bus/passenger bus parking
provisions to be developed on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis.
10. Visitor/information center. 1 space/400 square feet of gross floor area plus
two additional employee parking spaces. In addition, visitor/information centers shall provide
adequate shuttle bus circulation, passenger drop-off?pick-up facilities, and tour bus/passenger bus
parking provisions to be developed on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis.
11. Bed and breakfast. Minimum two spaces, one of which shall be covered
for the manager’s unit, plus one space per guest room.
12. Car rental agencies. 1 space1250 square feet of gross floor area for the car
rental office space and customer waiting area. The rental car fleet parking shall be addressed
through a Fleet Parking Plan which will be reviewed and considered as part of the conditional
use permit application. In addition, car rental agencies shall provide shuttle bus circulation and
passenger drop-oWpick-up facilities to be developed on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis.
13. Movie theaters. Proposals involving movie theaters shall submit land use
and parking studies or other appropriate documents to justify the proposed parking provisions as
part of the pre-filing submittal process per Section 21.208.080 of this Chapter. At the close of
the pre-filing submittal process, the Planning Director shall determine what the applicable
parking ratios are. The Applicant may appeal the Planning Director’s decision in accordance
with Section 2 1.54.140 of this Title.
B. Signs. Except as provided herein, the provisions of Chapter 21.41 apply within
the overlay zone. All signage shall be reviewed and approved as part of the conditional use
permit process. No internally illuminated thru-face channel letter signs will be allowed to face
residentially zoned properties.
1. Maximum sign area. The maximum sign area allowance shall not exceed
one square foot per lineal foot of building frontage located on the lot. For comer lots or
buildings, with two building frontages, sign allowance will be based on .90 square foot per the
combined lineal footage. Shopping centers or other combined projects subject to the provisions
of this Chapter including projects that propose freeway service facility uses and signs, as defined
in Sections 21.41.030(10)(A) and @(i-iv) and regulated by Section 21.41.070(3)(B), shall
process a sign program as part of the conditional use permit. Freeway service facility center sign
programs shall not allow more than a total of 100 square feet of freestanding sign area for
projects of eight (8) acres or less; or 150 square feet of freestanding sign area for larger sites.
Such sign programs may also allow a maximum of .60 square feet of wall signage per lineal foot
of commercial tenant/suite frontage; a maximum of .90 square feet of wall signage per combined lineal footage of tieestanding comer buildings; and, a maximum of 1 square foot of signage per
lineal foot of freestanding or anchor tenant building frontage. Shopping centers or combined
projects that do not propose freeway service facilities, shall be allowed a maximum of .75 square
feet of wall signage per lineal foot of commercial tenant/suite frontage; a maximum of 1 square
foot of wall signage per combined lineal footage of freestanding comer buildings; a maximum of
1 square foot of signage per lineal foot of freestanding or anchor tenant building frontage; and, a maximum of 125 square feet of additional freestanding signage.
2. Maximum sign height. No freestanding sign shall exceed six feet in
height, except for freeway service facility signs; and freestanding multi-tenant directory signs for
shopping centers and/or mixed use Commercial/Visitor-Serving projects, which shall not exceed 10 feet in height, pursuant to a City Council approved sign program.
3. Sign colons. Sign colors and materials are part of the discretionary review
process. Sign colors shall complement the overall building style without dominating the building
design.
-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
4. Landscaping related to signs. Freestanding signs are subject to the
landscaping requirements contained in subsection G of this Section.
C. Building Height. The allowed building height for projects subject to this Chapter
shall be determined by the development standards of the underlying zoning. Any proposed
rooftop equipment or other structural features shall be screened from public view.
D. Building Setbacks. Commercial/Visitor-Serving buildings located adjacent to
Palomar Airport Road or Cannon Road east of the I-5 interstate freeway shall maintain a
minimum setback of 50 feet. Except in the P-M zone, where the underlying zone setback shall
apply, new Commercial/Visitor-Serving buildings shall maintain a minimum public street
setback of 30 feet. All setback areas shall be exclusive of parking spaces, parking overhang,
circulation aisles and trash enclosures. Improvements in this area shall be limited to landscaping,
access driveway(s), signage, lighting fixtures, screen walls, and pedestrian walkways or
sidewalks. For parcels eight acres or less in size, the back ten feet of the required setback may be
used as circulation aisles or parking spaces provided there is adequate use of landscaping and
screen walls. The minimum building setback from any freeway right of way shall be 30 feet of
which the back twenty feet may accommodate circulation aisles, trash and/or recycling
enclosures, and/or parking spaces. All development proposals subject to this Chapter shall
provide decorative paving in the primary approach driveway to the project for an area of at least
900 square feet (30 x 30 foot area) covering, at a minimum, the width of the driveway. The
decorative paving shall be depicted on landscape plans and shall be located adjacent to, but not
on, city right-of-way adjacent to the project entrance. Side and rear setbacks not subject to the 30
foot public street setback shall be assessed as part of the discretionary review of the conditional
use permit application, however, a minimum setback of ten feet entirely landscaped shall be
required.
E. Building MaterialsKolors. Building materials and colors are part of the
discretionary review process. The use of illuminated awnings is not allowed. Metal awnings or
canopies are not allowed. High quality simulated building materials such as imitation brick,
stone, marble or wood may be approved. The primary colors of blue, red, yellow and green shall not be dominate building colors. The use of colors shall be balanced and in the context of the
proposed architectural style.
F. Architectural Style. Two primary architectural styles are allowed in the overlay
zone as described in general terms below. One of the two styles shall be proposed in conditional
use permit applications, except as provided below in subsection 3.
1. Village Architectural Style. This style involves the use of wood and
composition shingle roof materials, steep pitched (7:12 and greater) gabled roofs, gabled
windows, use of dormers in gabled roofs, no mansard roof forms, applied surface detail
ornamentation and irregular building forms with a variety of roof peaks.
2. Contemporary Southwest Architectural Style. This style involves the use
of Spanish/mission style clay roof tiles on a rectangular building form, white stucco walls, arches
and arched doorways with wooden beams, low pitched roofs, multi-pane windows and the use of
glazed/decorative tiles and tile paving.
3. Alternative Architectural Styles. An alternative architectural style may be
proposed on a conditional use permit application if it is specifically supported by the Enforcement
Official at the conclusion of the pre-filing procedures outlined in Section 21.208.080. This
alternative architectural style may accommodate a reasonable version of a user’s corporate
architectural style, provided the corporate architectural elements do not dominate the building
design so as to create incompatibility in the area; or detract from the overlay zone’s objective of
ensuring high quality appearances for Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses. Final approval of the
-9-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
proposed alternative architectural style is by the City Council as part of the conditional use permit
review.
G. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be designed to complement the project’s
proposed architectural style. Landscape plans shall be consistent with the City’s Landscape
Manual. The following landscaping regulations shall apply to development proposals subject to
this Chapter:
1. Freestanding sign landscape theme. Every freestanding sign shall provide
adjacent landscaping which promotes a common theme throughout the overlay zone. The
freestanding sign and related landscaping theme shall be shown on project landscape exhibits and
will consist of, at a minimum:
a). Six (6) bird of paradise plants (Strditzia reginae) with a minimum
container size of five gallons. These plants shall be located in clusters around the sign.
b) One Phoenix roebelenii palm tree with a minimum container size
of fifteen (15) gallons to be located to one side of the freestanding sign amidst the bird of
paradise plant clusters. The roebezenii palm may be replaced with another pahn tree species if
supported by staff to be consistent with the overlay zone’s common landscaped sign theme and
approved with the conditional use permit by the City Council.
c) Appropriate ground cover such as agapanthus shrubs, or other
similar substitute subject to discretionary review, bark and/or turf in a visually pleasing
combination.
4 The minimum area for the provision of the freestanding sign and
corresponding landscaped theme shall be 80 square feet, designed to encompass the minimum
perimeter of the sign’s base or foundation area.
e). The above requirements are not necessary for qualified freeway
service signage, however, the structural base of allowed freeway service signs shall be
adequately located and screened from view by landscaping as part of the conditional use permit
application.
2. Required Trees. Parking lot trees shah be provided at a ratio of one tree
for every six parking spaces provided. These trees shall be located in planting areas that are
outside of required setback areas. All trees shall be a minimum container size of fifteen (15)
gallons, however, at least 50% of required parking lot trees shall be a minimum of 24 inch box
size. All parking lot planter strips and parking island dimensions, configurations and
landscaping shall conform to Appendix E of the City’s Landscape Manual, except that for sites
eight acres or less in size, individual planting islands with a minimum width of 6 feet may be
provided. Such planting islands shall have a minimum length of 30 feet, however, the minimum
length shall not be less than the length of adjacent parking stalls. Street trees required by the
street tree requirements of section IV.D.3 of the Landscape Manual shall all be 24 inch box sizes.
In addition to the street tree requirements of the Landscape Manual, and except for the slope
planting requirements of section IV.E.3 of the Manual for slopes over 8 feet in vertical height,
setback landscaping trees shall be provided in clusters at a ratio of 1 tree for every 1000 square
feet of setback area. Except for street trees which shall be 24 inch box sizes, setback area trees shall be a minimum container size of fifteen (15) gallons, however, at least 50% of required
setback area trees shall be a minimum of 24 inch box sizes. For the calculation of setback areas,
multiply the length of the setback times 20 feet; for interior lot and freeway setbacks, multiply
the length of the setback times 10 feet. The use of existing on-site trees may be considered to
replace required trees at a 1 :l ratio, on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis. For existing trees to be
considered, landscape plans shall indicate tree caliper width at three feet above existing grade,
and photographs of the subject trees shall be submitted.
-lO-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3. Screening of Areas. The following areas shall be specifically designed to
be screened from public points of view:
a) Parking Areas. All surface parking areas shall be screened by the use
of forty-two (42) inch high screen walls to be complemented with landscaping in fkmt of the
walls within setback areas. Screen walls shall be architecturally finished to complement the
project’s architecture and shah provide an architectural cap on top of the wall, The screening
wall height may reduce to thirty inches to comply with engineering sight distance requirements
as necessary. Vines and attaching plant forms shall be used to further obscure the screening
walls. The use of existing trees and/or grade separations to screen parking areas may be
considered on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis.
b) Loading/Delivery/Trash Enclosure Areas. All areas used for loading
activities, receiving deliveries and trash enclosure locations shall be located onsite so as to be
screened from public points of view. Landscaping may assist this objective but is secondary to
locating these areas onsite and/or using solid masonry walls, to minimize visibility.
4. Maintenance. All landscaped areas shall be maintained in a healthy,
thriving manner. Failure to maintain such areas in conformance with approved landscape plans
and concepts, may result in administrative fines and/or revocation or other discretionary action
pursuant to the Performance Monitoring Condition (see Section 21.208.120) or other
enforcement procedures in this Chapter.
H.
standards.
Use Separation Standards. The uses below are subject to use separations
1. Gas stations, gas stations/mini-marts.
a) Location. New gas stations or gas stations/mini-marts shall only
be permitted at intersections where at least one of the streets is classified as a prime, major or
secondary arterial on the General Plan. A maximum of two stations may be allowed at each such
intersection. Where a T-intersection is involved, a maximum of one station may be allowed.
The proposed site may not adjoin any residential property.
b) Lot dimensions. The minimum lot size, or the minimum area
exclusively designated for this use in a mixed use project, shall be fiReen thousand square feet.
Street frontage along the non-arterial roadway shall be a minimum of one hundred fifty (150)
feet.
9 Design Criteria. On comer lots, no access shall be made with the
prime or major arterial roadway; no driveway access shall be allowed within 100 feet of a prime
or major arterial roadway intersection and may be limited to a right in, right out only access; and,
fuel delivery circulation design shall be accommodated onsite on a case-by-case, site-by-site
basis.
2. Motels/Hotels. Commercial/Visitor-Serving motel and hotel uses shall
maintain a minimum separation of six hundred (600) feet; business hotels or motels located on P-
M zoned property serving the adjacent industrial office area, and not the general public, are not
subject to the separation standard. Use separation standards shah be measured from proposed
building edge to existing, or approved, building edge. Separation distances shall be measured at
points of closest proximity to reveal the minimum separation involved. Individual motel or hotel
buildings that comprise one motel or hotel use are not subject to the 600 foot separation standard.
For project sites of 6 acres and larger: Up to two motels or hotels may be located onsite provided
that a minimum setback of two hundred (200) feet shall be provided from any public street(s)
adjacent to the project site; and the two motel or hotel uses/structures have a minimum separation
of one hundred fifty (150) feet. All motel/hotel structures, regardless of project site acreage,
-ll-
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
shall maintain a minimum separation of six hundred (600) feet from any residentially zoned
property line.
21.208.110 Reanired Findinm.
In addition to the findings required for the granting of a conditional use permit pursuant to
Section 21.42.020, conditional use permits issued pursuant to this Chapter are subject to the
following findings prior to approval:
A. That the proposed project is adequately designed to accommodate the high
percentage of visitor, tourist and shuttle bus/alternative transportation users anticipated given the
proposed use and site location within the overlay zone;
B. That the building forms, building colors and building materials combine to
provide an architectural style of development that will add to the objective of high quality
architecture and building design within the overlay zone; and
C. That the project complies with all development and design criteria of the overlay
zone.
D. For gas stations, motel, hotel or restaurant uses on a Planned Industrial zoned
property: That the proposed use is commercial in nature and therefore subject to the overlay
zone, however, the proposed use is consistent with the intent and purpose of the P-M zone whose
primary purpose is not to cater directly to the general public, and allows certain commercial uses
which cater to, and are ancillary to the uses allowed in the P-M zone.
E. For recreation vehicle (RV) parks, overnight RV parking, campgrounds or
overnight campsite uses: That the proposed use complies with all the provisions of
21.42.010(2)(H)(a-e) of this title.
21.208.120 Performance Monitoriw Condition.
Projects shall be continuously monitored, including at least one formal annual review, to assure
long term compliance with all conditions of approval, compatibility with adjacent properties,
enforce sign regulations and provide a basis for recommending approval of subsequent permit
extension requests. To achieve this, the following condition shall be placed on permits within
the overlay zone:
“If, at any time, the City Council, Planning Commission or Planning Director determine
that there has been, or may be, a violation of the findings or conditions of this conditional use
permit, or of the Municipal Code regulations, a public hearing may be held before the City
Council to review this permit. At said hearing, the City Council may add additional conditions,
recommend additional enforcement actions, or revoke the permit entirely, as necessary to ensure
compliance with the municipal code and the intent and purposes of the CommerciaWisitor-
Serving Overlay Zone, and to provide for the health, safety and general welfare of the City.”
21.208.130 Existing Uses. Buildiw Permits and Business Licenses.
For existing uses that propose a change in use, apply for a building permit or apply for a new
business license, the provisions of this Chapter shall not apply provided that all of the following
criteria are met: the proposal is consistent with the uses allowed by the site development plan or
specific plan, if any, applicable to the subject site; the proposal does not invoke a higher parking
standard pursuant to Section 21.208.100 A of this Chapter; and, the proposal does not involve an
increase of greater than 200 square feet to existing square footage. For such proposals, the
additional 200 square feet of area shah be parked subject to the parking standards of this Chapter.
Existing structures that propose demolition and redevelopment may be re-built to the same
square footage as allowed by a valid entitlement prior to the effective date of this ordinance, or
-12-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
up to an additional 200 square feet, without being subject to the requirements of this Chapter,
provided there is no increase in the degree of non-conformity with regards to building setbacks,
parking or signage. If a higher parking standard, or more than 200 square feet of increased
square footage is involved, the new, or intensified, portion of the existing use shall be subject to
all of the procedures, standards and conditional use permit requirements of this Chapter.
Existing sign programs and related sign permits are not subject to the provisions of this overlay
zone, except that if any existing use proposes an amendment to its existing, approved sign
program to increase overall signage allowance, or to increase or alter approved sign locations,
then the entire sign program including existing signs shah be subject to the sign standards of
Section 21.208.100 B of this Chapter pursuant to the normal processing of such sign program
amendment.
21.208.140 Administrative Enforcement Powers.
A. The Enforcement Agency and Enforcement Official can exercise any enforcement
powers as provided in Chapter 1.08 of this Code. In addition to the general enforcement powers
provided in Chapter 1.08 of this Code, the Enforcement Agency and Enforcement Official -have
the authority to utilize the following administrative remedies as may be necessary to enforce this
Chapter:
B. Civil Penalties. Any person who violates any of the provisions of this Chapter or
any condition of a conditional use permit issued pursuant to this Chapter shah be liable for a civil
penalty not to exceed one thousand dollars ($l,OOO.OO) for each day such a violation exists. The
violator shall be charged for the full costs of any investigation, inspection, or monitoring survey
which led to the detection of any such violation, for abatement costs, and for the reasonable costs
of preparing and bringing legal action under this subsection. In addition to any other applicable
procedures, the Enforcement Agency may utilize the lien procedures listed in Sections
2 1.208.150 C 5 and D 2 and Section 21.208.160 B 3 to enforce the violator’s liability.
21.208.150 Administrative Notice. Hearing. and ADDeal Procedures.
A. Unless otherwise provided herein, any notice required to be given by the
Enforcement Official under this Chapter shall be in writing and served in person or by registered
or certified mail. If served by mail, the notice shall be sent to the last address known to the
Enforcement Official. Where the address is unknown, service may be made upon the owner of
record of the property involved. Such notice shall be deemed to have been given at the time of
deposit, postage prepaid, in a facility regularly serviced by the United States Postal Service
whether or not the registered or certified mail is accepted.
B. When the Enforcement Official determines that a violation of one or more
provisions of this Chapter or any condition of a conditional use permit issued pursuant to this
Chapter exists or has occurred, any violator(s) or property owner(s) of record shall be served by
the Enforcement Official with a written notice and order. The notice and order shall state the
Municipal Code Section or the condition violated, describe how violated, the location and date(s)
of the violation(s), and describe the corrective action required. The notice and order shall require
immediate corrective action by the violator(s) or property owner(s); where the violation is a continuing violation which does not create an immediate danger to health or safety, the notice
shall provide a reasonable time, not less than three (3) working days, to correct or otherwise
remedy the violation, prior to the imposition of administrative fines. The notice and order shall
also explain the consequences of failure to comply, including that civil penalties shall begin to
immediately accrue if compliance is not immediately achieved (or, if applicable within three
days from the date the notice and order is issued). The notice and order shall identify all hearing
-13-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
rights. The Enforcement Official may propose any enforcement action reasonably necessary to
abate the violation.
C. If cure or abatement of the violation(s) is not immediately achieved (or, if
applicable within three days) from the date the notice and order is issued, the Enforcement
Official shall request the City Manager to appoint a Hearing Officer and fur a date, time, and
place for hearing. The Enforcement Official shall give written notice thereof to the violator(s) or
owner(s) of record, at least ten days prior to the date for hearing.
1. The Hearing Officer shall consider any written or oral evidence presented
to determine whether the violation(s) exists, and/or civil penalties should be imposed, consistent
with rules and procedures for the conduct of hearings and rendering of decisions established and
promulgated by the city manager. 2. In determining whether action should be taken or the amount of a civil
penalty to be imposed, the Hearing Officer may consider any of the following factors:
a) Duration of the violation(s).
b) Frequency or recurrence.
cl Seriousness.
d) History.
e) Violator’s conduct after notice and order.
f) Good faith effort to comply.
g) Economic impact of the penalty on the violator(s).
h) Impact of the violation on the community.
0 Any other factor which justice may require.
3. If the violator(s) or owner(s) of record fail to attend the hearing, it shall
constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing and adjudication of all or any portion of the notice
and order.
4. The Hearing Officer shall render a written decision within ten days of the
close of the hearing, including findings of fact and conclusions of law, identifying the time frame
involved and the factors considered in assessing civil penalties, if any. The decision shall be
effective immediately unless otherwise stated in the decision. The Hearing Officer shall cause
the decision to be served on the Enforcement Official and all participating violators or owners of
record.
5. If the persons assessed civil penalties fail to pay them within the time
specified in the Hearing Officer’s decision, the unpaid amount constitutes either a personal
obligation of the person assessed or a lien upon the real property on which the violation occurred,
in the discretion of the Enforcement Official. If the violation(s) is not corrected as directed the
civil penalty continues to accrue on a daily basis. Civil penalties may not exceed one hundred thousand dollars ($lOO,OOO.OO) in the aggregate. When the violation is subsequently corrected,
the Enforcement Official shall notify the violator(s) and/or owner(s) of record of the outstanding
civil penalties and provide an opportunity for hearing if the amount(s) is disputed within ten days
from such notice.
D. Judicial Appeal of Hearing Officer Determination.
1. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 1094.5 or 1094.6 of the Code of
Civil Procedure, within 20 days after service of the final administrative order or decision of the
Hearing Officer is made in accordance with this Section regarding the imposition, enforcement
or collection of the administrative fines or penalties, a person contesting that final administrative
order or decision may seek review by filing an appeal to be heard by the superior court, where
the same shall be heard de novo, except that the contents of the local agency’s file in the case
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
shall be received in evidence. A court proceeding under this Section is a limited civil case
authorized by Government Code Section 53069.4. A copy of the notice of appeal shall be served
in person or by first-class mail upon the local agency by the contestant.
2. The Enforcement Official shall take all appropriate legal steps to collect
these obligations, including referral to the city attorney for commencement of a civil action to
recover said funds. If collected as a lien, the Enforcement Official shall cause a notice of lien to
be filed with the county recorder, inform the county auditor and county recorder of the amount of
the obligation, a description of the real property upon which the lien is to be recovered, and the
name of the agency to which the obligation is to be paid. Upon payment in full, the Enforcement
Official shall file a release of lien with the county recorder.
21.208.160 Judicial Enforcement.
A. Criminal Penalties. Any person who violates any provision of this Chapter or any
condition of a conditional use permit issued pursuant to this Chapter is guilty of a misderneanor.
B. Injunction/Abatement of Public Nuisance; Violations deemed a public nuisance.
1. In addition to the other civil and criminal penalties provided herein, any
condition caused or permitted to exist in violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter or any
condition of a conditional use permit issued pursuant to this Chapter, is a threat to the public
health, safety, and welfare and is declared and deemed a public nuisance, which may be
summarily abated and/or restored as directed by the Enforcement Official in accordance with the
procedures identified in Chapter 6.16. 2. A civil action to abate, enjoin or otherwise compel the cessation of such
nuisance may also be taken by the city, if necessary. The Enforcement Official may also cause
the city to seek a petition to the Superior Court for the issuance of a preliminary or permanent
injunction, or both, or an action to abate a public nuisance, as may be appropriate.
3. The full cost of such abatement and restoration shall be borne by the
owner of the property and the cost thereof shall be a lien upon and against the property in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 2 1.208.140.
C. Other Civil Action. Whenever a notice and order or Hearing Officer’s decision is
not complied with, the City Attorney may, at the request of the Enforcement Official, initiate any
appropriate civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction to enforce such notice and order and
decision, including the recovery of any unpaid civil penalties provided herein.
21.208.170 Remedies Not Exclusive
Remedies set forth in this Chapter are not exclusive but are cumulative to all other civil and
criminal penalties provided by law, including, but not limited to, amortization, abatement, and
summary removal pursuant to Chapter 21.41 and or California Business and Professions Code
Sections 5412 -5412.3 and 5492 through 5497. The seeking of such other remedies shall not
preclude the simultaneous commencement of proceedings pursuant to this Chapter.
21.208.180 Severabilitv If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of the ordinance codified in this Chapter is
for any reason held to be invalid or unconditional by the decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance
codified in this chapter. The City Council declares that it would have passed the ordinance codified in this chapter and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase thereof,
irrespective of the fact that any part thereof be declared invalid or unconditional.
-15-
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
SECTION 2: Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the
amendment of the Zoning Map by the addition of the CommerciaWisitor-Service Overlay Zone
on property as shown on the exhibit marked ZC 99-03, attached hereto and made a part hereof
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
published at least once in a publication of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within
fifteen days after its adoption. (Not withstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be
eflective within the City’s Coastal Zone until approved by the California Coastal Commission.)
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the 18th day of May 1999, and thereafter.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-16-
COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZQNE
zc 99-03
Exhibit 3
ORDINANCE REFINEMENTS
COMMERCIALMSITOR SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
Item #l
21.208.010 Intent and PurDose.
The intent and purpose of the Commercial/Visitor-Serving overlay zone is to supplement the
underlying zoning by providing additional regulations for Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses.
The overlay zone is intended and designed to:
A. Control the location, operation and appearance of newly proposed
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses within the overlay zone to prevent the over-proliferation of
certain uses as well as to ensure high quality appearance and operation;
B. Maximize public disclosure about new Commercial/Visitor-Serving Use
proposals located within the overlay zone;
C. Design compatibility, vehicular circulation, and shuttle bus/alternative
transportation options into Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses within the overlay zone;
D. Provide for the review of building materials and colors and establish architectural
criteria that discourages the use of corporate, standardized building forms, materials and styles;
E. Formalize the use of conditional use permits for all Commercial/Visitor-Serving
Uses within the overlay zone and emphasize the aspects of performance monitoring and
enforcement;
F. Establish the City Council as the final decision-maker for CommerciaWisitor-
Serving Uses in the overlay zone;
G. Require Commercial/Visitor-Serving conditional uses as listed in the Planned
Industrial (P-M) Chapter of this Title for underlying P-M zoned properties within the overlay
zone to be subject to the conditional use permit requirements and provisions of this Chapter,
except that such uses shall be designed to serve the adjacent planned industrial zoning district
and not the general public; and,
H. Establish procedures in the overlay zone to provide for effective code
enforcement.
Item #2
21.208.020 Definitions.
Terms used in this Chapter and not defined below shall be defined per Chapter 21.04 of this
Title. The following terms, as used in this Chapter, shall have the meaning established by this
Section:
A. “Applicant” means the property owner(s) of the site.
B. “Applicant’s agent” means the authorized representative of the property owner
responsible for processing the overlay zone conditional use permit.
C. “Commercial/Visitor-Serving Use” means uses involving the provision of goods
or services designed primarily for tourists or visitors to the city, such as any of the following
either individually or in combination: commercial development with retail sales; lodging uses;
recreation vehicle (RV) parks, overnight RV parking, campgrounds or overnight campsite uses;
sales of souvenirs, gifts or toys; activities including food and/or beverage serving uses.
P h
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Uses include, but are not limited to: gas stations/mini-marts, hotels,
motels, restaurants, delis, retail stores, gift shops, museums and visitor centers.
D. “Enforcement Agency” means the city’s Community Development Department.
E. “Enforcement Official” means the city’s Community Development Director.
F. “Freestanding sign” means a monument sign supported by the ground and
not supported by a pole.
F. G. “Time-share Project” means a project that meets the time-share definition
contained in Section 21.04.357 of this Title. Time share projects are distinguished between
“lock-off’ units and standard units for the purpose of establishing different parking requirements
as outlined in Section 21.208.100(a)(2). “Lock-off’ units are defined as a timeshare unit which
allows the occupancy of less than the entire unit during a timeshare period such that each
occupant may occupy a part of the unit for a timeshare period with the remaining part of the unit
being “locked-off’ and subject to use by others. Standard time share units do not have lock-off
provisions.
Item #3
B. Signs. Except as provided herein, the provisions of Chapter 21.41 apply within
the overlay zone. All signage shall be reviewed and approved as part of the conditional use
permit process. No internally illuminated thru-face channel letter signs will be allowed to
face residentially zoned properties.
1. Maximum sign area. The maximum sign area allowance shall not exceed
one square foot per lineal foot of building frontage located on the lot. For comer lots, or
buildings, with two building frontages, sign allowance will be based on +5 .90 square foot per
the combined lineal footage. Shopping centers or other combined projects subject to the
provisions of this Chapter including projects that propose freeway service facility uses and
signs, as defined in Sections 21.41.030(10)(A) and (B)(i-iv) and regulated by Section
21.41.070(3)(B), shall process a sign program as part of the conditional use permit. Freeway
service facility center Sue&sign programs shall not allow more than a total of 100 square feet of
freestanding sign area for projects of eight (8) acres or less; or 150 square feet of freestanding
sign area for larger sites. Such sign programs may also allow a maximum of .60 square feet
of wall signage per lineal foot of commercial tenant/suite frontage; a maximum of .90
square feet of wall signage per combined lineal footage of freestanding corner buildings;
and, a maximum of 1 square foot of signage per lineal foot of freestanding or anchor tenant
building frontage. Shopping centers or combined projects that do not propose freeway
service facilities, shall be allowed a maximum of .75 square feet of wall signage per lineal
foot of commercial tenant/suite frontage; a maximum of 1 square foot of wall signage per
combined lineal footage of freestanding corner buildings; a maximum of 1 square foot of
signage per lineal foot of freestanding or anchor tenant building frontage; and, a maximum
of 125 square feet of additional freestanding signage.
2. Maximum sign height. No freestanding sign shall exceed six feet in
height, except for freeway service facility signs; * . .
91 w and freestanding multi-tenant directory II. .
signs for shopping centers and/or mixed use Commercial/Visitor-Serving projects, which shall
not exceed 10 feet in height, pursuant to a City Council approved sign program.
2
3. Sign colors. Sign colors and materials are part of the discretionary review
process. Sign colors shall complement the overall building style without dominating the building
design.
4. Landscaping related to signs. Freestanding signs are subject to the
landscaping requirements contained in subsection G of this Section.
Item #4
D. Building Setbacks. CommercialiVisitor-Serving buildings located adjacent to
Palomar Airport Road or Cannon Road east of the I-5 interstate freeway shall maintain a
minimum setback of 50 feet. Except in the P-M zone, where the underlying zone setback shall
apply, new Commercial/Visitor-Serving buildings shall maintain a minimum public street
setback of 30 feet. All setback areas shall be exclusive of parking spaces, parking overhang,
circulation aisles and trash enclosures. Improvements in this area shall be limited to landscaping,
access driveway(s), signage, lighting fixtures, screen walls, and pedestrian walkways or
sidewalks. For parcels under eight acres in size, the back ten feet of the required setback may be
used as circulation aisles or parking spaces provided there is adequate use of landscaping and
screen walls. The minimum building setback from any freeway right of way shall be 30 feet of
which the back twenty feet may accommodate circulation aisles, trash and/or recycling
enclosures, and/or parking spaces. All development proposals subject to this Chapter shall
provide decorative paving in the primary approach driveway to the project for an area of at least
900 square feet (30 x 30 foot area) covering, at a minimum, the width of the driveway. The
decorative paving shall be depicted on landscape plans and shall be located adjacent to, but not
on, city right-of-way adjacent to the project entrance. Side and rear setbacks not subject to the 30
foot public street setback shall be assessed as part of the discretionary review of the conditional
use permit application, however, a minimum setback of ten feet entirely landscaped shall be
required.
Item #5
G. Landscaping. Landscaping shall be designed to complement the project’s
proposed architectural style. Landscape plans shall be consistent with the City’s Landscape
Manual. The following landscaping regulations shall apply to development proposals subject to
this Chapter:
1. Freestanding sign landscape theme. Every freestanding sign shall provide
adjacent landscaping which promotes a common theme throughout the overlay zone. The
freestanding sign and related landscaping theme shall be shown on project landscape exhibits and
will consist of, at a minimum:
a>. Six (6) %n+Nj bird of paradise plants (Strelitzia reginae) with a
minimum container size of five gallons. These plants shall be located in clusters around the sign.
b) One Phoenix roebezenii palm tree with a minimum container size
of fifteen (15) gallons to be located to one side of the freestanding sign amidst the bird of
paradise plant clusters. The roebezenii palm may be replaced with another palm tree species if
supported by staff to be consistent with the overlay zone’s common landscaped sign theme and
approved with the conditional use permit by the City Council.
4 Appropriate ground cover such as agapanthus shrubs, or other
similar substitute subject to discretionary review, bark and/or turf in a visually pleasing
combination.
4 The minimum area for the provision of the freestanding sign and
corresponding landscaped theme shall be 80 square feet, designed to encompass the minimum
perimeter of the sign’s base or foundation area.
e)- The above requirements are not necessary for qualified freeway
service signage, however, the structural base of allowed freeway service signs shall be
adequately located and screened from view by landscaping as part of the conditional use permit
application.
2. Required Trees. Parking lot trees shall be provided at a ratio of one tree
for every &+w six parking spaces provided. These trees shall be located in planting areas that
are outside of required setback areas. All trees shall be a minimum container size of fifteen (15)
gallons, however, at least&% 50% of required parking lot trees shall be a minimum of 24 inch
box sizes. All parking lotmedian planter strips and parking island dimensions, configurations
and landscaping shall conform to Appendix E-l of the City’s Landscape Manual, except that for
sites up to eight acres in size, individual planting islands with a minimum width of 6 feet
may be provided. Such planting islands shall have a minimum length of 30 feet, however,
the minimum length shall not be less than the length of adjacent parking stalls. Street trees
required by the street tree requirements of section IV. D. 3 of the Landscape Manual shall
all be 24 inch box sixes. In addition to the street tree requirements of the Landscape
Manual, and except for the slope planting requirements of section IV. E. 3 of the Manual
for slopes over 8 feet in vertical height, setback landscaping trees shall be provided in dense
clusters at a ratio of 1 tree for every 2&I 1000 square feet of setback area. Except for street
trees which shall be 24 inch box sixes, #A-l setback area trees shall be a minimum container
size of fifteen (15) gallons, however, at least 50% of required setback area trees shall be a
minimum of 24 inch box sizes. For the calculation of setback areas, multiply the length of
the setback times 20 feet; for interior lot and freeway setbacks, multiply the length of the
setback times 10 feet. The use of existing on-site trees may be considered to replace required
trees at a 1 :l ratio, on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis. For existing trees to be considered,
landscape plans shall indicate tree caliper width at three feet above existing grade, and
photographs of the subject trees shall be submitted.
3. Screening of Areas. The following areas shall be specifically designed to
be screened from public points of view:
a) Parking Areas. All surface parking areas shall be screened by the
use of forty-two (42) inch high screen walls to be complemented with landscaping in front of the
walls within setback areas. Screen walls shall be architecturally finished to complement the
project’s architecture and shall provide an architectural cap on top of the wall. The
screening wall height may reduce to thirty inches to comply with engineering sight distance
requirements as necessary. Vines and attaching plant forms shall be used to further obscure the
screening walls. The use of existing trees and/or grade separations to screen parking areas may
be considered on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis.
4 aq
Item #6
H. Use Separation Standards. The uses below are subject to use separations standards.
1. Gas stations, gas stations/mini-marts.
4 Location. New gas stations or gas stations/mini-marts shall only
be permitted at intersections where at least one of the streets is classified as a prime, major or
secondary arterial on the General Plan. A maximum of two stations may be allowed at each such
intersection. Where a T-intersection is involved, a maximum of one station may be allowed.
The proposed site may not adjoin any residential property.
b) Lot dimensions. The minimum lot size, or the minimum area
exclusively designated for this use in a mixed use project, shall be fifteen thousand square feet.
Street frontage along the non-arterial roadway shall be a minimum of one hundred fifty (150)
feet.
4 Design Criteria. On comer lots, no access shall be made with the prime or major arterial
roadway; no driveway access shall be allowed within 430 100 feet of a prime or major arterial
roadway intersection and may be limited to a right in, right out only; access and? fuel delivery
circulation design shall be accommodated onsite on a case-by-case, site-by-site basis.
Item #7
21.208.130 ExistinP Uses. BuildinP Permits and Business Licenses.
For existing uses that propose a change in use, apply for a building permit or apply for a new
business license, the provisions of this Chapter shall not apply provided that all of the following
criteria are met: the proposal is consistent with the uses allowed by the site development plan or
specific plan, if any, applicable to the subject site; the proposal does not invoke a higher parking
standard pursuant to Section 21.208.100(A) of this Chapter; and, the proposal does not involve
an increase of greater than 200 square feet to existing square footage. For such proposals, the
additional 200 square feet of area shall be parked subject to the parking standards of this Chapter,
Existing structures that propose demolition and redevelopment may be re-built to the same
square footage as allowed by a valid entitlement prior to the effective date of this
ordinance, or up to an additional 200 square feet, without being subject to the
requirements of this Chapter, provided there is no increase in the degree of non-conformity
with regards to building setbacks, parking or signage. If a higher parking standard, or more
than 200 square feet of increased square footage is involved, the new, or intensified, portion of
the existing use shall be subject to all of the procedures, standards and conditional use permit
requirements of this Chapter. Existing sign programs and related sign permits are not subject to
the provisions of this overlay zone, except that if any existing use proposes an amendment to its
existing, approved sign program to increase overall signage allowance, or to increase or alter
approved sign locations, then the entire sign program including existing signs shall be subject to
the sign standards of Section 21.208.100 B of this Chapter ti pursuant to the normal
processing of such sign program amendment.
EXHIBIT 4
COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
ZC 99903IZCA 98-OIILCPA 98-05
a9
L
c
- h
PARKING STANDARDS COMPARISON
EXHIBIT 5
PARKING/USE CURRENT PROPOSED
STANDARD STANDARD
Motels/Hotels 1.2 spaces/unit 1.2 spaces/unit plus
ancillary uses park
separately
Time-Shares Minimum 1.2 spaces/unit 1.2 spaces/standard unit
and 1.5 spaces/“lock-off’
unit plus Interim Parking
- Unit Marketing Plan
Gas Stations/mini-marts 1:300 plus 4 spaces per 1:300 plus 4 spaces per
work bay work bay plus 3 employee
spaces
Restaurants 1:lOO then 150 after 1: 100 then 1:50 after
4,000 SF 2,000 SF
Coffee shops, beverage No clear current standard 1:300 except all eating
serving uses, delis areas park at 1: 100
Meeting rooms, assembly 1: 100 or 1 space/5 seats, 1:lOO
space, convention whichever is more
facilities restrictive
Individual retail 1:300 1:300 plus 2 employee
spaces
Shopping Center retail 1:200 1:200 except that
restaurants park
separately per overlay
Museums 1:500 1:500 plus minimum of 2
employee spaces
Visitor/Info Center No current standard 1:400 plus 2 employee
spaces
Bed and Breakfast 2 spaces plus one per Minimum 2 spaces +
room 1 /room
Car Rental Agency No current standard 1:250 + Fleet Parking
Plan
Movie Theaters 1 space/5 seats Applicant submits
documents justifying the
proposed standard as part
of the pre-filing process
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
PLANNING COMMISSION WOLUTION NO. 4527
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT TO ADD
CHAPTER 21.208 TO TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A COMMERCIAL/
VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NAME: COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NO: ZCA 98-01
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has initiated this zone code amendment to
establish a Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone in the City;
WHEREAS, the City Council has directed staff to develop an overlay zone that
would make the City Council the final decision makers for new Commercial/Visitor-Serving
uses, or the commercial intensification of existing uses, within the overlay zone;
WHEREAS, the City Council has conducted public workshops and directed
staff to research and develop an overlay zone that would assist in ensuring the long term
compatibility and quality of such projects in the overlay zone given the proximity of
Legoland, a new, major theme park in the City;
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is set forth in the draft City Council
Ordinance, Exhibit “X” dated, March 17, 1999, and attached hereto COMMERCIAL/
VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE, ZCA 98-01; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of March, 1999, hold
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Zone Code Amendment; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
COMMENDS APPROVAL of COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE, ZCA 98-01, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1.
2.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
That the proposed Zone Code Amendment ZCA 98-01 is consistent with the General
Plan in that the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone was initiated by the City
Council in order to retain a high quality of life given the likely pressures to intensely
develop vacant CommerciaWisitor-Serving sites, or to increase the commercial
intensity of existing uses, due to the opening of Legoland, a new major theme park
within the city. The overlay zone will not alter any existing General Plan laud use
designations nor impact any General Plan policies or implementing programs. The
overlay zone will supplement existing zoning regulations to implement the General
Plan by establishing new procedures, development standards and enforcement
provisions for applicable Commercial/Visitor-Serving uses within the overlay zone
area.
Approval of the proposed zone code amendment will replace the interim Urgency
Ordinances that the City Council has effectuated over the past year and a half to
allow for the formal establishment of an overlay zone which will be a new chapter
added to the City’s Municipal Code.
PC PESO NO. 4527 -2- 32
I
2
7
4
4 I
6
5
E
9
1c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannii
1 Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 17th day of March, 1999, by the followii
vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Noble, Savary, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COURTNEY E. HEINEMAN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J.mLZaLER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4527 -3- 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4528
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE TO FORMALLY
ESTABLISH THE COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVER-
LAY ZONE ON PROPERTY LOCATED AS SHOWN ON THE
REVISED ZONING MAP.
CASE NAME: COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NO: zc 99-03
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has initiated this zone change to establish a
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone in the City;
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the City of Carlsbad to
implement the new overlay zone regulations for properties included within the
configuration and coverage of the overlay zone to be reflected on the City’s Zoning Map;
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Zone Change as shown on
Exhibit ZC 99-03 attached to the draft City Council Ordinance, Exhibit “Y” dated March 17,
1999, and attached hereto, COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE, ZC 99-
03 as provided by Chapter 21.52 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of March, 1999, hold
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Zone Change; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
34
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
W That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
COMMENDS APPROVAL of COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE, ZC 99-03 based on the following findings:
Findins:
1. That the proposed Zone Change to formally establish the City Council mandated
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone is consistent with the goals and policies of
the various elements of the General Plan, in that entitlement procedures and
development standards that are implemented through the overlay zone are designed
to assist in ensuring high quality developments and long term compatibility for
Commercial/Visitor-Serving uses within the designated overlay zone area.
2. That the Zone Change will not impact the current level of consistency between the
General Plan and Zoning as mandated by California State law and the City of Carlsbad
General Plan Land Use Element, in that the proposed overlay zone will not alter
underlying Zoning or General Plan land use designations but rather superimpose
additional zoning regulations consistent with the direction given by the City Council
during the development of the overlay zone.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 17th day of March, 1999, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Noble, Savary, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
COURTNEY E. HEINEMAN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
PC RESO NO. 4528 -2- 3.5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4529
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE SEGMENTS OF
THE CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO MARE
THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM CONSISTENT WITH REGARDS TO THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE COMMERCIALNISITOR-
SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NAME: COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NO: LCPA 98-05
WHEREAS, the City is adding Chapter 21.208 to Title 21 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code to establish a new overlay zone to regulate Commercial/Visitor-Serving
uses within the designated overlay zone area;
WHEREAS, the Zoning Ordinance is the implementing ordinance for the City’s
Local Coastal Program;
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program and
Zoning Ordinance be in conformance and therefore, amendments to the implementing ordinance
also require an amendment to the Local Coastal Program to ensure consistency between the two
documents; and
WHEREAS, a verified application for an amendment to the Local Coastal
Program has been filed with the Planning Department;
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal
Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit “X” dated March 17, 1999, attached to Planning
Commission Resolution No. 4527, as provided in Public Resources Code Section 30574 and
Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 5.5 of Title 14 of the California Code of
Regulations of the California Coastal Commission Administrative Regulations;
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
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of March, 1999, hold
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request;
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment;
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review period for
any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
W At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on February 4,
1999, and ending on March 18, 1999, staff shall present to the City Council a
summary of the comments received.
0 That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
COMMENDSAPPROVAL of COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE, LCPA 98-05, based on the following findings:
Findin ys:
1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment is consistent with all applicable
policies of the Mello I, Mello II, Agua Hedionda, East Batiquitos and West
Batiquitos segments of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program, in that the proposed zone
code amendment and overlay zone is limited in its nature in that it will not alter any
coastal zone regulations, land use designations or policies, that future projects
subject to the overlay zone must still comply with.
2. That the proposed amendment to the -segments of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program is
required to maintain consistency between the proposed overlay zone/zone code
amendment and the City’s Local Coastal Program.
PC PESO NO. 4529 -2- 33
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
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 17th day of March, 1999, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Noble, Savary, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COURTNEY E. HEINEMAN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HaLZfvfILLER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4529 -3-
- i-
The City of Car&bad Planning Department
EXHBIT 7
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 7
P.C. AGENDA OF: March 17,1999
3
Project Engineer: Bob Wojcik
SUBJECT: ZCA 98-Ol/ZC 99-03/LCPA 98 05 - w COMME RCIALNISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE - Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Map and
the City’s Local Coastal Program to establish a Commercial/Visitor-Serving
Overlay Zone for various properties that are located near, or on roadways leading
to, the Legoland theme park within the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
I. COMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 4527,4528, and
4529, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of Zone Code Amendment ZCA 98-01, Zone Change
ZC 99-03 and Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 98-05, based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The proposed CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone is being processed pursuant to City
Council direction to prepare new procedures and regulations for certain uses in general proximity
to the Legoland theme park within the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The primary concern is to
ensure high quality commercial/visitor-serving developments, prevent the over-proliferation of
certain uses and establish the City Council as the final decision maker for such projects within
the overlay zone coverage area.
The primary elements of the overlay zone involve: new procedural details for processing a
commercial/visitor-serving project within the overlay ‘zone; the requirement of a conditional use
permit for commercial/visitor-serving projects; new parking standards for certain uses;
architectural, signage and landscape provisions; and, new enforcement provisions.
The configuration and coverage area of the proposed CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone
is the result of direct City Council input as to which areas and parcels need to be covered by the
provisions of the overlay zone. The basic rationale was to include commercially designated
parcels near the Legoland theme park, or adjacent to freeway frontage. Vacant parcels as well as
developed parcels are included. The overlay zone will replace an Urgency Ordinance which is
currently in effect until August 30, 1999. It is anticipated that City Council consideration of the
overlay zone will take place in April or May, 1999. By May 3 1, 1999, LCPA 98-05 will be
submitted to the Coastal Commission for processing so that the Local Coastal Program
Amendment, and therefore the overlay zone, will be effective by September 1, 1999.
ZCA 98-Ol/ZC 99-03/LCYA 98-05 - COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
March 17,1999
Page 2
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Below is a timeline of past and future events for the CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
June 24, 1997 - Mayor requested a City Council agenda item to discuss the need for City
Council review and approval of commercial projects near the Legoland theme park.
September 2, 1997 - Urgency Ordinance NS-418 passed and adopted by the City Council.
Requires City Council review and approval of any commercial project within the Urgency
Ordinance’s coverage area.
October 15, 1997 - Consistent with Government Code Section 65858(a), which regulates
urgency ordinances, Urgency Ordinance NS-424 is passed and adopted which extends NS-418
for 10 months and 15 days, until August 30, 1998. Council also accepted staffs findings which
recommended the development of an overlay zone to replace the Urgency Ordinance.
March 12, 1998 - City Council Workshop conducted to assist in the development of, and
provide policy guidance for, the proposed overlay zone. Public input was solicited and received.
April 30,1998 - Anaheitiuena Park field trip conducted by Planning staff with Mayor Lewis
and then Mayor Pro-Tern Finnila to visually assess various elements in the urban landscape
which should be prohibited, encouraged, or otherwise regulated, by the overlay zone.
August 4, 1998 - One year extension of the Urgency Ordinance NS-424, consistent with
Government Code Section 65858(a), by the Council adoption of NS-454. This allows for the
completion of the staff work on the overlay zone and is a one time extension until August 30,
1999. No more extensions of the Urgency Ordinance are allowed by the applicable government
codes.
December 9, 1998 - A noticed Public Workshop to fi.u-ther develop the overlay zone was
conducted with the City Council, affected property owners, and the general public.
December - March 1999 - Finalization of the contents and format of the overlay zone.
Coordination with the City Attorney’s office; extensive property owner contact and briefings;
and final preparation of the overlay zone, staff report and related documents.
March 17,1999 - Planning Commission public hearing.
. av. 1999 - City Council public hearing takes place.
May 31.1999 - Submit LCPA 98-05 to the Coastal Commission by the end of May 1999
June - August. 1999 - Coastal Commission review and approval of the LCPA/overlay zone.
Sentember 1. 1999 - Urgency Ordinance expires; replaced by the new CommerciaWisitor-
Serving Overlay Zone which will be effective by September 1, 1999. 40
--
ZCA 98-Ol/ZC 99-03/LCPA 98-05 - COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
March 17,1999
The proposed CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone is attached to Planning Commission
Resolution No. 4527 as Exhibit “X”, dated March 17, 1999. A brief overview is provided below.
The overlay zone defines CommerciaWisitor-Serving Uses and requires such developments
within the overlay zone to process a conditional use permit that would be approved by the City
Council; the Planning Commission typically is the final decision maker for conditional use
permits. The overlay zone has some requirements that are unique including a mandated pre-
filing submittal and review process; a project site notification process that physically posts a sign
on the project site during project processing; and, enforcement provisions designed to provide
rapid, effective code enforcement for code violations within the overlay zone.
A Performance Monitoring Condition is required and will be a standard condition of approval for
conditional use permits within the overlay zone. Required findings are also provided to ensure
that applicable projects satisfy the intent and purposes of the overlay zone.
Existing uses will be subject to the provisions of the overlay zone if they propose new or
expanded CommerciaWisitor-Serving uses that either invoke a higher parking standard, or add
more than 200 square feet of floor area to existing structures. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan
is not part of the overlay zone; residential, church, school, industrial and office uses are exempt
fi-om the overlay zone; and, automobile dealerships within the Car Country Specific Plan are
exempt from the overlay zone.
The Development Standards section of the overlay zone addresses the following: Parking, Signs,
Building Height, Building Setbacks, Building MaterialsKolors, Architectural Style, Landscaping
and Use Separation Standards. In general terms, the overlay zone provides for: increased
parking space requirements for certain uses; less signage than is allowed citywide (1 square foot
of signage per lineal foot of building frontage vs. current allowance of 1.5 square feet of signage
per lineal foot of building frontage); architectural criteria and the allowance for the review of
building materials, texture and colors; and, specific landscaping criteria. Motels/hotels are
subject to a 600 foot separation standard and gas stations are assigned locational and design
criteria within the overlay zone. Prohibited uses within the overlay zone include: stand-alone
liquor stores, RV parks, campgrounds, outdoor display of goods or services, any drive-thru
facility, and sales from temporary displays or mobile platforms on private or public property.
Under the Parking Development Standards, parking provisions are established in the overlay
zone for the following: Motels/hotels/suites/inns/lodges/resorts; Time Share Projects; Gas
Stations/mini-marts; Restaurants; Coffee shops/beverage-serving uses/delicatessens; Meeting
rooms/assembly space/convention facilities; Individual retail/gift shops/toy stores/convenience
stores/general sales; Shopping center retail; Museums; Visitor/information center; Bed and
Breakfasts; Car rental agencies; and, Movie theaters. In most cases, the overlay zone requires
incrementally more parking than do current codes citywide and/or accounts for employee
parking. Some uses are assigned parking provisions in the overlay zone that are not directly
addressed in citywide parking provisions.
ZCA 98-Ol/ZC 99-03/LCPA 98-05 - COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
March 17,1999
IV. ANALYSIS
1. Does the proposed CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone address the concerns of the
City Council which prompted the initial adoption of an Urgency Ordinance in June 1997?
2 Are the requested legislative actions adequate to establish the new overlay zone?
3. Is the proposed overlay zone consistent with the City’s General Plan and Local Coastal
Program?
DISCUSSION
1. CommerciaWis’ itor-Servine Overlav Zone
The prospect of a major new theme park opening in the City (Legoland) caused the City Council
to reconsider the standard approval process for commercial projects within the area around, and
near roads leading to, the Legoland theme park. Based on the experience of other cities which
have undergone an accelerated economic stimulus due to new land uses, the City Council wanted
a safeguard against unchecked, uncontrolled commercial development. Council clearly wanted to
be established as the final decision maker for such projects. The overlay zone is intended to be a
tool by which the Council can become part of the standard processing of commercial/visitor-
serving projects while also instituting regulations to ensure high quality projects. It is also
intended to be sufficiently detailed so that property owners and development applicants may
design projects using established standards and criteria.
The contents of the proposed overlay zone have been conceptually supported by the City Council
during previous workshops designed to solicit and incorporate Council direction. Property
owner input has also been considered and integrated into the ordinance where applicable.
Section 21.208.060 lists prohibited uses in the overlay zone and gas stations, motels and hotels
are subject to use separation and locational standards. The overlay zone focuses on quality
appearance, adequate and compatible functioning of a commercial use, adequate parking
provisions, controlling signage, ensuring high quality architecture and providing detailed
landscaping criteria.
The conditional use permit is designated as the entitlement permit for applicable projects in the
overlay zone. Related to the processing of such conditional use permits are unique regulations
requiring pre-filing interaction between the city and applicant, project site notification to
maximize public disclosure about a pending project, and new enforcement provisions which
provide more rapid code enforcement compared to current citywide enforcement procedures.
Given the above described elements of the overlay zone, and considering the circumstances
leading to Council’s involvement in this issue, the intended objectives of the overlay zone and
the high degree of City Council direction and input into the development of the overlay zone,
staff recommends that the Planning Commission support the Commercial/Visitor-Serving
Overlay Zone.
ZCA 98-Ol/ZC 99-03/LCPA 98-05 - COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
March 17,1999
2. Required Legislative Actions
Adding a new overlay zone chapter to the City’s Zoning Ordinance requires a Zone Code
Amendment (ZCA 98-01). Placing the overlay zone onto the City’s Zoning Map to establish its
boundaries and coverage area requires a Zone Change (ZC 99-03). Since the City’s Zoning
Ordinance is the implementing ordinance for the City’s Coastal Zone, a Local Coastal Program
Amendment (LCPA 98-05) is necessary to ensure consistency between coastal and city
designations and regulations. Subsequent to Coastal Commission’s consideration of LCPA 98-
05, these legislative actions will collectively establish the CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay
Zone within the City.
Staff believes that the new development standards, use of a CUP, and designating the City
Council as final decision maker, is adequate to establish the level of commercial development
control desired by the Council without over-regulating, or placing excessive limitations on future
development.
3. General Plan and LCP Consistency
The proposed overlay zone does not alter any General Plan or LCP land use designations or
regulations. In fact, several development standards are more restrictive than underlying
designations so that inconsistency between zoning and the General Plan or the LCP will not
result. Existing zoning regulations, which implement the General Plan, will be supplemented via
new processing procedures, standards and enforcement provisions for commercial/visitor-service
uses within the overlay zone.
V. ENVIRONMENTAl, REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that the project is exempt from the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA
Guidelines and will not have any adverse significant impacts on the environment. Section
15061(b)(3) exempts projects which can be seen with certainty, will have no possibility of
having a significant environmental impact. The proposed Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay
Zone qualifies for this exemption because the overlay zone’s procedural regulations and
development standards will not create environmental impacts when applied to applicable projects
in the future. A Notice of Exemption will be issued by the Planning Director after project
approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4527 (ZCA)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4528 (ZC)
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4529 (LCPA)
4. Location Map
EM:eh
EXHIBIT 8 -
7. ZCA 98-011ZC 99-03/LCPA 98-05 - COMMERCIAL VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE -
Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Map and the City’s Local Coastal Program to
establish a Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone for various properties that are located near,
or on roadways leading to the LEGOLAND theme park within the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
Assistant Planning Director, Gary Wayne introduced the item and announced that the Commission’s
action is not final and will be forwarded to the City Council for its consideration. Mr. Wayne introduced
Senior Planner, Eric Murioz who described the project and presented the staff report as follows: Since
June, 1997, when the City Council placed an emergency ordinance over the area surrounding LEG0 and
directed staff to work on the overlay zone, there have been workshops and property owner input and
those results are reflected in this report. (Mr. MuAoz submitted an errata sheet to the Commission and the
public). Using slides and other exhibits, Mr. Muiloz described the overlay zone and discussed the errata
sheet as follows: The Overlay Zone was initiated by the City Council. The current Urgency Ordinance
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 10
expires on August 30, 1999. The City Council supports the overlay zone’s area of coverage. The overlay
zone has unique Conditional Use Permit processing requirements, unique development standards, and it
has rapid enforcement provisions. The location of the overlay zone centers itself around Cannon Road,
Palomar Airport Road, and Interstate Highway 5. It also extends to the north to include commercially
zoned properties around Tamarack Avenue and the east side of Interstate Highway 5 and extends
southward along the freeway frontage to the area around Poinsettia Lane at l-5. The unique Conditional
Use Permit processing details are as follows:
1. The Conditional Use Permit is the required permit and it is approved by the City Council.
There is a pre-filing submittal process, a pre-filing meeting process, a project site
notification procedure, and there is a performance monitoring condition, all standard to the
overlay zone.
2. The Development Standards that are covered by the overlay zone include parking, signs,
building height, building setbacks, building materials and colors, architectural style,
landscaping, and use separations.
A. There is a reduction in the overall signage allowance compared to elsewhere in
the City.
B. The building height requirements are basically reiterating the underlying zoning
designations, so there is no true change of standard with regards to building
height but requires assessment of some special details (roof-top equipment, etc.,)
that are not currently required. This will allow building elevations to be properly
reviewed.
C. Currently there are no building setbacks, on commercially zoned property,
specified in the zoning ordinance. It has been left to negotiations with staff and
the ultimate decision maker(s). The building setbacks that are in the overlay zone
allows a project to be designed to specified standards. Where underlying zoning
designations are in place (the PM Zone, for example) those setbacks will remain
in place.
D. Currently, building materials and colors are not regulated and the Site
Development process prevents that review. This overlay zone allows the review
of building materials and colors.
E. Architectural style is open for proposal. However there are two styles promoted
in the overlay zone; Contemporary Southwest and Village Architecture. There is
a third alternative, however, which leaves the door open for any architectural style
to be proposed as long as it receives support, is appropriate for the area, and is a
high quality design.
F. There are some specific landscaping criteria, with regard to free-standing signs
and the landscaping around them, the landscaping requirement of setback areas,
some ratios requiring greater sized trees where there are ratios required for trees
relative to setback areas or parking spaces. Ratios have also been established
for larger size trees (24 inch box vs. 15 gallon).
G. Use separation standards apply to hotels and motels (a 600 foot separation
proposed), gas stations (specific design and location criteria put forward in the
overlay zone).
H. Currently the parking standard for hotels, motels, and resorts is 1.2 spaces per
unit. The proposed standard is also 1.2 spaces per unit with the exception of
additional uses associated with a hotel or motel (gift shop, meeting rooms,
restaurants, etc.) will need to park independently of the 1.2 space requirement.
Time-share projects currently have a requirement of 1.2 spaces per unit. “ Lock-
off” units are being defined and a higher ratio will be required for those units
MINUTES w-
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 11
because they may generate more parking demand. Standard units will remain
1.2 spaces per unit. One feature of the time-share regulations concerns the
interim parking/unit marketing effort for time-share projects. Time-share
developers can pre-plan their sales efforts, and prove to the satisfaction of the
Commission that they will be able to park the full scope of their marketing and
initial sales efforts. The restaurant parking ratio is doubled in the overlay zone.
Many of the restaurants in the area are currently suffering from parking shortages
and this parking requirement will add more parking spaces to future restaurants.
Shopping center retail parking standards have not changed from the current
code, with the exception of adding some spaces for employees, and restaurants
required to park independently of shopping center ratio. Museums and Visitor
Centers currently have a ratio of 1500. The 1500 is being restated and adds
spaces for employees. Car rental agencies are not clearly addressed in the
current zoning ordinance, at this time, but the overlay zone has a standard as well
as a requirement for a fleet parking plan so that a car rental agency operator can
properly plan for the maximum size fleet they anticipate and have adequate
storage and can provide screening for the vehicles. The current code requires 1
space for every 5 seats in movie theaters. However, it is a very old code and the
movie theater industry has become very dynamic and changes quickly. This has
been addressed by requiring the applicant to justify their proposed movie theater
parking ratio as part of the pre-filing submittal process so that a reasonable
parking provision for movie theaters can be made on a case-by-case basis.
In summary; prohibited uses are listed in the overlay zone to clearly delineate the uses that are not
allowed in the overlay zone. There is a limited impact to existing uses unless they want to expand or
intensify their uses beyond the thresholds that are contained in the code. The ordinance does reflect the
City Council’s support, via past workshops and solicitation of input. The plan is to have City Council
consideration in April or May, 1999; Coastal Commission processing completed by September 1, 1999;
and the overlay zone effective by September 1,1999.
Mr. Mufioz reviewed and explained several items in the errata sheet to help clarify its contents, including
new wording to clarify the allowance of produce selling stands in response to an inquiry by Attorney Nick
Banche, regarding Leslie Farms..
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Muiioz to comment on the letters received from F.F.R. Fisher and
Attorney L. Gail Gordon (copies of which are on file in the Planning Department).
Mr. Murioz stated that the letter from Ms. Gordon primarily raises legal issues and deferred that portion of
the question to Mr. Rudolf. In response to Mr. Fisher’s concern that if he ever does a redevelopment of
his current restaurant site, he will be required to conform with the new restaurant parking standard. Mr.
Mufioz stated that the direction given to staff by the City Council, is to put out the most restric-
tive/conservative ordinance possible. This overly ordinance reflects that direction. Staff would still
propose that the overlay zone’s restaurant standard and a redevelopment of the size of the building will be
subject to the constraints of the site and the appropriate development standards. The general feeling is
that restaurants get a lot of use and there are times when their parking areas are completely occupied.
This ordinance is intended to relieve those types of parking problems.
Commissioner Compas stated that his interpretation of Mr. Fisher’s letter is that this ordinance would
place an unfair financial burden on the future of the existing properties such as his, and asked Mr. Murioz
if he agreed with Mr. Fisher’s assessment.
Mr. Muiioz replied that without seeing what Mr. Fisher wants to do in the future, it is all conjecture.
Without a Site Plan it is impossible to respond to whether or not there might be a financial burden or any
other burden.
Commissioner Noble asked if it is true that this property has presented several different proposals, over
time, all of which have been denied for lack of parking.
Mr. Wayne interjected and stated that that was several years ago and nothing has been received recently.
MINUTES 46
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 12
Commissioner Welshons referring to a point early in Mr. Muiioz’s staff report, where he stated that
“existing uses will be subject to the provisions of the overlay zone if they propose new or expanded
commercial/visitor expanded uses”, asked Mr. Muiioz if he has made any changes in the errata sheet that
would affect that statement.
Mr. Muiioz replied by stating that the threshold of invoking the higher parking standard or creating more
than 200 square feet of footage is already in the ordinance under 21.208.130. The staff report made a
general statement that existing uses would not be exempt unless they intensify; the thresholds that define
that intensification is found in the code. The staff report was general and the ordinance gives the specific
thresholds.
Commissioner Welshons then asked if the intent of this ordinance is to go back and re-capture old
developments to bring them in line with the standards that are being established in the overlay zone.
Mr. Mutioz replied that that is not necessarily the intent. If the existing use wishes to keep operating the
way they have been, there will be no effort to impose the new standards on them.
Commissioner Welshons asked if, in addition to the 200 square foot threshold triggering the increased
parking requirement, will that 200 square foot expansion also trigger the new requirements regarding
signs, landscaping, etc.
Mr. Munoz replied that they only have to park that additional 200 square feet and that is their window of
expansion without triggering the full scope of the overlay zone, including the CUP requirement.
Commissioner Welshons asked what would trigger the full scope of the overlay zone.
Mr. Mutioz replied that the trigger would be an expansion of more 200 square feet or invoking a higher
parking standard, (for example, by changing from a retail use to a restaurant). Also, the Conditional Use
Permit is only for the new or intensified portion of the existing use.
Commissioner Welshons asked if they would be required to obtain a CUP in the case of remodeling.
Mr. Mufioz replied that if there is no change, and no triggering of the previously discussed thresholds, and
the remodel is only to cosmetically enhance the building, there would be no requirement for a CUP.
Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. MuAoz to explain the reason for the modification of the first sentence
of 21.208.100H2 to clarify that the hotel/motel separation standard is only applied to CommercialNisitor-
Serving hotels and motels and not business hotels located on PM zoned property.
Mr. Muiioz replied that the PM zoned property with a business hotel/motel should not factor into the
location of a commercial/visitor serving hotel/motel on commercially zones property.
Commissioner Welshons asked if Council has expressed any interest in having a like separation or a mix
of restaurants instead of 3 fast food versus sit-down types of restaurants all in a row.
Mr. Muiioz replied that Council did not get into that level of differentiation between types of restaurants,
He added that, as a use, hotels and motels are seen as more sensitive, given Council’s concerns. He
also stated that he doesn’t think that restaurants have the same level of concern warranting the same
separation standard as hotels and motels.
Commissioner Welshons pointed out that specifically left out of this overlay zone is the Carlsbad Ranch
and yet many of the things that are being regulated in this new proposal exist or will be existing in the
Carlsbad Ranch area such as time-share parking, parking for rental cars, or selling items from roadside
stands that are grown on the premises. Yet at the Flower Fields, they sell flowers that are not grown there
and they sell other items that are not produced on the premises. Commissioner Welshons then asked if
there is a reason why the Carlsbad Ranch has been specifically left out of this proposed overlay zone.
Mr. MuAoz replied that original staff recommendations were to include the Carlsbad Ranch but since it is a
MINUTES . , ~
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 13
recently approved Specific Plan, it was determined by Council that there is enough protection in place.
However, Council did suggest in workshops leading up to this overlay zone that they wanted the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan amended to put the City Council as the final decision maker for Commercial/Visitor
Serving Uses. They did not go further with that to direct staff to implement the standards of the overlay
zone within the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan as well. Their primary objective was to establish a level of
control with their decision making ability.
Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Rudolf to address the possibility of discrimination suits brought by
neighboring uses (in the overlay zone) in close proximity to the Carlsbad Ranch. Commissioner Welshons
pointed out that there are markets that currently display fruits and vegetables on tables outside the
markets and asked if such display will now be prohibited.
Mr. MuAoz replied that, technically, Commissioner Welshons is correct.
Commissioner Welshons then asked if this proposed ordinance also addresses any kind of freeway signs
or do all of those types of signs fall under the existing ordinances.
Mr. Muiioz replied that freeway service facility signs would fall under the sign provisions of the zoning
ordinance and are referenced in this overlay zone.
Commissioner Welshons then asked if pole signs will no longer be allowed.
Mr. MuAoz replied that tall pole signs are only allowed for a qualified freeway service facility use which has
to be in a certain location 600 feet from the apex of the intersection, etc., and that provision has not been
taken away by the overlay zone. Except for such freeway service facilities, the maximum height for
freestanding signs (mounted on a pole) is six feet within the overlay zone.
Commissioner Welshons asked if Council asked for something more restrictive than that after looking at
other sites, such as Disneyland, with large pole signs along the approaches to the park.
Mr. Munoz replied that signage was one of the top three issues of major importance to the Council and
their primary comment was to reduce the overall signage allowance. The current signage allowance is 1.5
square feet for every linear foot of building frontage. As an example, a building with 200 linear feet along
the frontage, their sign allowance would be 300 square feet of signage. Those kinds of numbers caused
the Council great concern about the City’s sign allowance, citywide, but especially in the overlay zone.
Council’s concern was not so much about pole signs as much as the overall signage allowance and their
feeling that the allowance should be reduced.
Chairperson Heineman asked Mr. Rudolf to respond to the letter from L. Gail Gordon and also to
Commissioner Welshons’ question.
Mr. Rudolf stated it would be nice to have comments, such as the ones in the letter, in advance so as to
have a little time to prepare answers regarding constitutionality. However, he stated that he is not
impressed that there are any great constitutional problems that the City need be concerned about the
current form of the ordinance. There are some interesting points, all of which have good answers. He
stated his feeling that the author of the letter does not seem to have ever visited Disneyland nor to have
read the introductory remarks in the ordinance about what it is that the Council is attempting to achieve by
adopting this ordinance. The author also does not seem to have a lot of familiarity with zoning (in general)
or in this City (particularly). There are many things that are not approved administratively in this City and
are approved either by the Planning Commission or the City Council and that is the way it normally occurs
in most of the cities and counties he is familiar with in the U.S. The fact that this is a very highly regulating
ordinance does not make it unconstitutional; it just makes it difficult. Mr. Rudolf further stated that he finds
interesting the argument that the City’s control over architecture is a First Amendment violation. In his
opinion that is not what the law is. He pointed out that there are cases going both ways (constitutional and
unconstitutional) across the country. He also pointed out that the City has gone far in providing equal
protection and due process protections in this ordinance, more so than in any other ordinance in this City.
The provisions that are in place, with regard to approvals, review, and enforcement are even-handed and
fair and are in appropriate relationship to the evils sought to be regulated by the ordinance. He stated he
is more than ready to defend the ordinance, in a court of law.
MINUTES
4g
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 14
In response to Commissioner Welshons question, Mr. Rudolf pointed out that there are many instances of
two different zones divided by a street or road with different rules applicable to each and the City
Attorney’s office has consistently found that to be constitutional.
Responding to Commissioner Welshons’ question regarding roadside stands and the merchandise sold
from them, Mr. Wayne stated that each is governed by the zone in which they are located. If a merchant
is in violation of a zone code, it becomes a Code Enforcement issue and is dealt with accordingly.
Chairperson Heineman opened Public Testimony and offered the invitation to speak.
Mark Berger, Pacific Development Partners, 177 S. Beverly Drive, Beverly Hills, addressed the
Commission regarding a property in the southeast quadrant of Poinsettia Lane and Interstate Highway 5.
He pointed out that the overlay zone certainly does have a place in the overall scheme. However, the
very small 5 acre property he has referred to will be severely impacted by this overlay zone. He passed
out a sketch of the conceptual Site Development Plan and a list of prospective tenants for the project
proposed for the property. He stated that they had met with the Board of Directors of the adjacent
residential community to determine how they would develop the site. As a result of the meetings, the
design was created taking into account all of the things the residents of Sea Cliff wanted to see developed.
The homeowners had a voice in the way everything is laid out in the plan and the overlay zone would
require a reconfiguration that would radically change the overall concept as well as go against the wishes
of the neighbors. One of the things the Sea Cliff residents want is a 24 hour pharmacy with a 24 hour
access drive-up window. Mr. Berger went on to point out that this overlay zone will adversely impact this
property perhaps more so than the other properties in the overlay zone because of its small size.
John Edwins, Pacific Development Partners, P.O. Box 2488, Del Mar, stated that this property has a
burden greater than most because in 1983, the State of California recorded CC&Rs against the property
with development standards that included setbacks, building heights, signage, landscaping, etc., so that
the site plan (as it exists today) was designed with the help of the neighboring homeowners keeping those
setbacks in mind. The difference between the original setbacks for this property and the ones proposed in
the overlay ordinance is that the area in the setbacks could not be used for anything but landscaping. In
reviewing the draft overlay plan, there are many areas of concern. One of the concerns is the building
setbacks. If this property were required to conform to this overlay ordinance, 27% of the entire project site
would be in setbacks. For a small piece of property like this one, that is a significant amount of real estate
to be tied up on setbacks. Based on the landscaping standards, this project would be required to plant
300 trees, (150 of them 15-gallon and 149 of the 24-inch box trees). The problem with that is that in
working with the neighbors, they agreed to preserve the views for many of the homeowners. Now, with
this proposed ordinance, they will be required to eliminate or abandon their view preservation promises.
By contrast, the standard landscaping standards would require them to plant only six trees because the
property is so small. Another problem is the proposed requirement for a 42 inch wall around the entire 5
acres which creates an aesthetic problem as well as a practical one. Finally, because of the recently
passed restriction on drive-through facilities, there is a question as to whether a drive-up pharmacy
window will be considered as a drive-through. In closing, Mr. Edwins stated that if they meet the overlay
zone they can’t meet the homeowners’ conditions and if they can’t keep the homeowners happy, they
can’t expect to have a viable NeighborhoodKommercial center.
Commissioner Compas asked if Pacific Development Partners has an alternate proposal.
Mr. Edwins replied that they would like to be released from the overlay zone, and they would like to
develop the property under their Coastal conditions that are recorded against the property.
Commissioner Noble asked if Mr. Edwins realized that the wall requirement is intended as a noise
mitigation wall.
Mr. Edwins replied that he understood it to be for screening of automobiles and that a 42 inch wall would
do nothing for noise mitigation.
Morgan McPherson, 520 S. Virgil Avenue, Los Angeles, representing the Carpenter’s Pension Trust which
owns Pea Soup Andersen and the property surrounding it, stated that the proposed overlay zone will
MINUTES 49
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 15
create the opposite effect than what it intended. He pointed out that he has been negotiating with two
restaurants to take over the restaurants at Pea Soup Andersen and because of the proposed overlay
provision, both restaurants have refused to continue negotiations until legal opinions can be gathered. It
has literally brought the negotiations to a stop. These are very well known, high quality restaurants that he
is sure will be welcomed in Carlsbad. He stated that they are sympathetic to the intent of the overlay in
that Carlsbad wants to assure the community that the developments will be quality developments.
L. Gail Gordon, Attorney at Law, representing the Carpenter’s Pension Trust, 725 S. Figueroa St., Suite
1200, Los Angeles, responded to Mr. Rudolf’s earlier comments regarding her letter dated March 17,
1999. She stated that she believes there are serious equal protection questions relating to this ordinance.
She further stated that in all of her years as a Deputy City Attorney and in private practice, she has never
seen as restrictive an ordinance as this one, and, for that reason feels that it has serious constitutional
impediments that should be researched thoroughly. Ms. Gordon added that she and her colleagues were
not present at this meeting to try to intimidate or make anyone uncomfortable about a court challenge, but
were there only to say that there will be an enormously detrimental effect on the possibility of quality
development if these kinds of standards are imposed. That is why the law exists. She quoted the U.S.
Constitution as follows: “Property rights are only those economic advantages that the law protects. Take
away the laws defacto protection and all you are left with are some empty words on an old piece of
parchment.” She urged the Commission to ask the City Attorney to look at the equal protection
arguments, the trademark infringement arguments, the potential taking arguments, and beyond that, think
about fairness. Ms. Gordon urged the Commission to continue this matter and ask the City Attorney to
report back on his findings.
Regarding Carpenter’s Trusts expressions of cooperation and interest in presenting a good image,
Commissioner Welshons pointed out that she has observed rows and rows of vehicles, storage units,
trash bins, tractor-trailer rigs, etc., parked against the fence behind the Pea Soup Andersen property and
questioned the consistency of image on their property.
Mr. McPherson responded by stating that many of the items mentioned are there because of the
refurbishment to the property that is in progress. As for the tractor-trailer rigs, Pea Soup Andersen
accommodates truckers who sometimes stay only for one night or they may stay for several days running,
depending on their particular hauling schedules.
Ron Rouse, representing Mr. and Mrs. Winter, their children, and grandchildren, who collectively own
several small properties representative of nearly every element in the overlay zone. What they don’t have
is the benefit of a fair or level playing field in relation to the immediately surrounding retail and commercial
serving circumstances. Regarding Item #6 in the errata sheet, Mr. Rouse suggested that the third line,
beginning with “. . . the adjacent industrial office area, and not the general public,. . .” be deleted and
replaced with “ . . . and meeting the requirements for such uses contained in the PM zone.” That way the
exact restrictions and prohibitions will be carried into the overlay ordinance. Mr. Rouse also expressed
concern as to the fairness of the calculations for signage where very small properties or frontages are
concerned. He also suggested a formula for calculating signage for a corner property where one frontage
is narrower than the other. For example: A corner lot with a building 100 feet long and 25 feet wide would
be allowed approximately 87 square feet of signage under the current signage allowance. However, if the
signage allowance were to be calculated using the longer of the two measurements (in this case 100 feet)
or .75% of the combined linear footage, the signage allowance would be considerably more fair and an
owner of a corner parcel could never be cheated out of his or her fair signage allowance. Mr. Rouse
further stated that to impose severe setback requirements on properties, when the immediate neighbor
does not have the same requirements, in his opinion is counter productive and also susceptible to some
legal concern. Regarding gas stations, Mr. Rouse suggested that there are some major inconsistencies.
On one hand gas stations are required to be on intersections of prime, major, or other arterials, and on the
other hand access is prohibited off prime and major arterials. With regard to the 600’ separation rule for
hotels and motels, Mr. Rouse suggested that such a rule would be a disincentive for people who would
otherwise upgrade and rehabilitate their properties. In conclusion, Mr. Rouse stated his belief that the City
should re-think this proposed overlay zone.
Leonard Martyns, 7304 Lantana Terrace, Carlsbad, a member of the Project Review Committee appointed
by the Sea Cliff Homeowners Association Board of Directors, stated his support for the continued inclusion
of the 5.1 acre parcel, located on the southeast corner of Poinsettia Lane and Paseo del Norte, in the
MINUTES
25-Q
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 16
proposed overlay zone. Because of major impact issues it is imperative that any and all development be
carefully scrutinized by the City. By retaining this parcel within the overlay zone, the proper objectives can
be achieved. Mr. Martyns also stated that this is the first he has heard that any residents of Sea Cliff have
been able to review a Site Development Plan for any proposed project on that parcel.
Nicco Carrigan, Hofman Planning Associates, 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 150, Carlsbad, stated that his
company has reviewed the proposed overlay zone and the changes in the errata sheet and are
comfortable in their support of it.
Ted Rhoads, 7452 Trigo Lane, Carlsbad, stated that he is the owner of a motel on Pio Pica in Carlsbad
and voiced strong objections to that property being included in the proposed overlay zone. Mr. Rhoads
pointed out that at the last widening of the freeway, he lost approximately 35 feet of his property to that
widening. As a result of that loss and the additional setback requirements with the overlay, Mr. Rhoads
stated that he will never be able to expand or improve his motel property. He stated that he feels that this
sort of ordinance is designed for much larger parcels with much more modern development and should
not be forced upon the small business owner. He went on to say that his property was never included in
the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and should not have to suffer because of it. He also pointed out that his
motel is located on a very lightly traveled, almost 60 year old street. His property does not adversely
impact the neighborhood or the traffic in that neighborhood and should therefore be excluded from the
overlay zone.
Seeing no one else wishing to testify, Chairperson Heineman closed Public Testimony.
Mr. Munoz responded to some of the Public Hearing comments as follows:
1. In all of the time this project has been in progress, he has minimal comment or
correspondence regarding any concerns.
2. Regarding Mr. Burger’s comment regarding the importance of collaboration, Mr. Muiioz
stated that if that were the case, they would have acted upon both written and verbal
repeated invitations (over the last 4 months) to come in and meet with staff in an attempt
to work through some of the technical issues they feel are impacting their development in
the overlay zone. They have never responded to any of the invitations to meet with Mr.
Muiioz.
3. Staff is working on some new allowances for setbacks and without seeing the Site
Development Plan (Pacific Development Partners), he cannot address Mr. Edwin’s
setback concerns at this time.
4. Regarding the trucks at Pea Soup Andersen, Mr. Muiioz stated that something may have
been overlooked.
5. Regarding corner lots and the way signage is calculated for them, if the Commission or
City Council feels that the current method of calculation is too restrictive, that can be
adjusted. Also, a corner lot with its building visible from two elevations instead of one, is a
form of visual exposure that the interior lots will never have.
6. Regarding the 600 foot separation standard, it was a part of the December 9, 1998, draft
ordinance and has been out for public review since then. The only difference is that it
was designed specifically for motels and now it also covers hotels. In the December 9,
1998 version of the draft ordinance there was an architectural design based difference
between hotels and motels, in that motels are generally thought of as lesser quality than
are hotels and focus on travelers in motor vehicles. The motel is defined by individual
doors, all facing the outside of the building, and a hotel is considered more of a resort with
a different design. Therefore the December draft ordinance only covered motels. The
Council workshop disagreed and said that hotels and motels, regardless of design
attributes, need to be subject to a separation standard.
7. Regarding Mr. Rhoads’ motel on Pio Pica, the reason his motel has been included in the
MINUTES 3-i
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 17
overlay zone is that the entire block has a Travel/Recreation/Office General Plan
Designation. Since the time the motel was built, the R-3 zone has eliminated the
allowance for hotels and motels. There is probably a larger challenge there for either a
zone change or a zone code amendment to reintroduce the allowance for hotels and
motels in an R-3 zone. That aside, if he wished to expand his motel, this ordinance would
require a Conditional Use Permit for the new intensified portion and is theoretically
possible. It is also theoretically impossible, without a design and site plan, to say what is
possible. The other reason it was included in the overlay is not so much for what it is
today, compared to newer buildings that were referenced elsewhere in the City, but by its
redevelopment potential because it is immediately adjacent to the freeway with freeway
visibility, and adjacent to the last off ramp before you cross Agua Hedionda Lagoon and
reach the off ramp to LEGOLAND.
Regarding the references to gas stations, Mr. Wojcik stated that it is recognized that it is a rather tough
standard but it is felt that driveways should not be permitted on prime or major arterials because it
degrades the service level of the intersection as well as the road segment itself. As far as the 130 feet
standard, a lot on the corner of Avenida Encinas and Cannon was observed and found to have a depth of
150 feet. As a result, that corner was used as a model to emphasize the need to get as far away from the
arterial intersection as possible because it was recognized that without an additional driveway on that
arterial, the allowable driveway would have to be a left turn in and left turn out. Again emphasizing the
need to get it further away from the intersection to avoid gridlock at the intersection.
Referring to Mr. Rouse’s comment regarding dis-incentives, Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Mutioz if
he agrees with Mr. Rouse’s statement.
Mr. Mutioz replied that if the basis for their improvement is along the lines or paralleling the reason for the
overlay zone, now that LEGOLAND is in, an economic stimulus is there that was never there before, the
thought may be that they want to put some money into renovation and expand the envelope of the original
approval and try to increase the intensity as much as possible. If that is the case, then that could impact
that type of proposal. If, however, the thought is to expand within those windows of allowance for not
being subject to the overlay zone, then it would be a non-issue as far as the proposal at hand. It comes
down to magnitude and degree of the specific proposal.
Commissioner Compas asked Mr. Mutioz if anything said during this meeting has given him cause to re-
think or change anything he has proposed.
Mr. Muiioz replied that unless there is some legal basis for changes, he would not change anything unless
directed by Council to “pull back” on certain items.
Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. Muiioz for his impressions regarding comments about visual
discrimination between the existing 20 foot setbacks on Cannon and the overlay ordinance requirements
for new development of 50 feet.
Mr. Muiioz replied that what is there now was built according to the existing codes. However, it was City
Council that directed that there be 50 foot setback on all new construction only on Cannon Road and only
east of Interstate Highway 5.
Referring to Carlsbad Boulevard, Commissioner Welshons asked Mr. MuAoz if he expects to see the
overlay zone being spread to include any parcels along the boulevard if the alignment of Carlsbad
Boulevard changes.
Mr. Mufioz replied that it is a possibility because the realignment project is in its early stages now, and
nothing can really be precluded or eliminated from the potential of what it could produce. Also, there are
some parcels in the overlay zone that may be affected by such an alignment of the boulevard.
Commissioner Welshons stated that, as pointed out, the low income housing project was approved earlier
in this meeting, and asked if there is any conflict with the potential approval of this overlay zone.
Mr. MuAoz replied that that area is a recently approved Specific Plan, with Council’s recent support, and
MINUTES
d;s
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 18
primarily residential land use is excluded from the overlay zone. Also, in a recently approved Specific
Plan, commercial properties have been approved and Council probably feels that safeguards are in place
and therefore not subject to the overlay zone. He therefore sees no conflicts.
Commissioner Welshons asked if it is appropriate to attach suggestions to the City Council with the
recommendation of approval.
Mr. MuAoz replied that all suggestions would be welcomed at Council.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Welshons, and duly seconded, adopted Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 4527, 4528, and 4529, recommending approval of
Zone Code Amendment ZCA 98-01, Zone Change ZC 99-03, and Local Coastal
Program Amendment LCPA 98-05, based upon the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein, including the errata sheet dated March 17, 1999 as
submitted by staff.
Commissioner Noble stated his support for the proposed overlay zone.
Commissioner Savary stated that she can support changes in ordinances and is in support of this overlay
ordinance.
Commissioner Welshons stated her agreement with the proposed overlay zone. She added that there is
probably some fine tuning that will be required. She asked that her following comments be made part of
the record for the benefit of City Council.
1. While part of the overlay ordinance addresses the subject of not allowing four gas stations
on four corners of one intersection, it is the Commissioner’s suggestion that a similar
restriction be put in place to require a mix of restaurants in an area so as to not end up
with several fast-food restaurants in a row. An example would be the mix of restaurants
west of Interstate 5, between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road.
2. Commissioner Welshons stated that she feels that the overlay ordinance should apply to
everything that is being excluded, specifically the Carlsbad Ranch, Car Country, the
Flower Fields, etc. The concerns that Council specifically asked to be regulated in this
overlay zone ordinance are occurring in the Flower Fields (selling products not produced
on the premises), in Car Country (employee parking on the streets), and in the Time
Shares (specifically the rental cars that could be stored there).
3. Commissioner Welshons feels that the undeveloped properties in the Poinsettia
Properties project should be covered by this overlay zone ordinance as well as the other
properties if they expand more than the allowed 200 square feet. The suggestion would
be that the intent of the new ordinance should be to eventually make everything subject to
the new ordinance by recapturing older parcels and making them consistent with the new.
4. Commissioner Welshons believes there should be an ordinance to control the
tractor/trailer rigs parked on premises for a period of time.
Commissioner Nielsen stated that the standards appear to be appropriate and he does support the
proposal.
Commissioner L’Heureux agreed with Commissioner Nielsen and supports the proposal.
Commissioner Compas stated he feels the concept is a good one but questions whether the overlay zone
should be extended as far north and as far south as it is. He stated that he feels it may be somewhat over
restrictive and is going to be unfair to some. He agreed that Carlsbad Ranch should be included in the
zone. The Commissioner stated that he will support it but hopes that Council will hear what has been
discussed and suggested here at this meeting.
MINUTES
A-j-3
PLANNING COMMISSION March 17, 1999 Page 19
Chairperson Heineman stated that he echoes the sentiments of all of the Commissioners and since this is
an ordinance that carries out the views of the City Council, he feels that the Commission’s job is to
comment, not to change. He stated his support with the assurance that comments made this evening will,
indeed, go to City Council.
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
7-o
Heineman, Compas, Nielsen, L’Heureux, Welshons, Savary, Noble
None
None
AGENDA I’I’EM # v
e: MiRy0r
City CuuncU
City Manager
City Attorney
Altn: hlr. Eric Munoz City Clerk
City of Carl&ad Planning Department
Fax: 760-438-0894 \
4.4.99
Re: Overlay Zone Public Hearing
Dear Mr. Munoz:
We are planning to build a gas station , wilh a car wash, in the Poinsettia ViIlage
Shopping Center on Via Encinas and this ared would be inc-luck! in the
proposed overlay zone.
I un~lerstdml that the staff report for the ll* may public hearing on the above
issue will be on or about May 7ul 1999. I would appreciate it very much if you
can fax me a copy of the portion of the staff report dealing specificnlly with the
proposed “drive through” restrictions. I would then submit my written
comments to the City Council, based partly upon the contents of the staff report.
My position on the “drive through ” restrictions is as follows. As a matter of
principle the City should not try to micro-manage the business of any individual
or business owner. The City should define what their broad ccmcerns are i.e.
traffic, aesthetic etc. anti so long as the business owner can satisfy these
conct>rns there should not be any “drive through ” restrictions.
You are defining ” drive through ” as any usage where the customer can obtain
a product or service while driving through the designated area. ExampIes can
be a drive-through restaurant, bank, pharmacy etc. But such a broad definition
\vould also cover self service or full service gds slations where the customer
drives to the gas dispenser, pays at the pump, gets the gas and drives out. ln a
full service gas station, the customer does not even have to come out of the car.
The term “drive through ” would, therefore, include all gas stations also. Is it the
intention of the City to not to permit any gas stations (including those attached
to Costco, Albertson or similar grocery stores) in the overlay zone ?
Car washes attached to a gas station cannot truly be defined as “drive through “
because after a customer drives through the car wash tunnel he goes into the
area where he has to stop so that a car wash employee can dry the car, vacuum
the inside of the car etc if the customer so desires. Car washes provide a unique
service and are controlled closely. Most filter dnd q-circulate approx. 92 % of
the water used for washing the car. In addition the remaining w,+tcBr is properly
directed inlo drain basins. Without a car wash, the public would be washing
their cars in their driveways and using large amounts of water which goes in the
City’s drainage system. The City of San Diego discourages car washlng on
iridlvidudl drivewdys.
e
.
; .
,1--’ /
,’
C
My position, therefore, is (I) the City should broadly define their conwrns and
sallow the USLI~C whcrc ouch concerns can he properly taken care off and (II) car
washes dlnched to a service station Are not “drive through “ and in any case
provide d urlique service to the Community and should be spccific,illy permitted
in the owrlay zone. 1 rcqucst that the staff address these points and include
these in the staff report to the City Council.
Yours sinctvcly,
K.B.Nnrain
i’.O.Box 1918
Rnncho Smta Fe, CA. 92067
Tel:619-756-1831 Fax: 619-756-4888
l .
S-10-99; 9:26AM;ClTy Of Cat-lSD3Q
85/1!3/1999 88: 19 -- -. 7604382443
wnsger
HOFMLN PLANNING
;l 760 434 1967 0 2 ‘f’ 2
PAGE 82
Hofman Planning
Associates
Planning Project Monagement Fiscal AnolysiS
May 7, 1999
J3uddyLti
1200 CarlsbadVIlqgcDrire
Cadsbad, Ck 92008
7
, ALL RECEIVE t
i CnY COUNCIL
ci * cc
5/m/94 p-II?
‘/ DATE CITY MANAGER :
‘AGENDA ITEM # 8
RE: DRIVE-THRU FACILITIES IN THE COMMERCIAUVISITOR OVEJZLAY ZONE
Dear MaymLewis:
We appreciate the opportunity to review and comment on t&e proposed CommerciaWiitor
overlay zone. The only wncenl we have is section 21.208.060 c, which p&&it8 au new
drimthru fiuilities inchding driv4uu restauraxts. We b&eve that thh eextion of the proposed
ordinance shcmld be modified to only refer to drive-thru rwwants.
Drivedhru car washes, drive&u banks and cehin other drivethm kAities protide a stice to
the travdiq public and should not be prohibited outright, but should be considered on a taae by
case basis. We believe that this makes more Bense from a planning point of view rather than a ban on alI drive-tbru uses. The proposed Overlay Zone provides Strict development standards
that alI new projects must comply with lfthe council believes that a proposed drive-thru
hiiity does not meet the criteria or till coutibute to traffic cungestioq the project can be
denied.
We understand the Council’s concerns about traffic generated by driv&wu restauranta and this
prohibiion is already in effect. We believe that hniq alI drive-thru fhilities as recommended
by staff goes fbrther than neeumy. Other thaa the Modification to Section 21.208.06O.C, we
have no other comments on the proposed CoxnmkaWsitor Overiay Zone.
Mike Ho&es
cc cit)rcouncil
City Manager
City Attorney
5900 Pasteur Court 9 Suite 150 - Carlsbod l CA 92008 l (760) ~38-1465 l Fox. (760) 438-24413
-
AGENDA ITEM # t?
T8 ‘d
I’he Uty Council
city of Car&ad
4.11.99
cl Mayor
City Council
city Nlanager
Re: Overlay Zone Public Hearing WY Attorney w Q*&
We are planning to build a gas station , with a car wash, in the Poinsettia Village
Shopping Center on Via Encinas and this area would be included in the proposed
overlay zone.
The planning department has defined a ” drive through ” as any usage where the
customer can Ohtdill a product or service while driving through the designated area and
has recommended that all “drive through” be prohibited in the Overlay Zone. Based
upon this definilion the planning department considers a car wash as a “drive
through” usage and not permitted in the overlay zone.
Such d broad definition would also cover self service or full service gas stations where
the customer drives to the gas dispenser, pays at the pump, gets the gas and drives out.
In a full service gas station, the customer does not even have to come out of the car. The
term “drive through ” would, therefore, include all gas stations also. Is it the intention
of the City to not to permit any gas stations (including those attached to Costco,
Albortson or similar grocery stores) in the overlay zone ?
Car washes attached to a gas station cannot truly be defined as “drive through “
because after a customer drives through the car wash tunnel he goes into the area
where he has to stop so that a car wash employee can dry the car, vacuum the inside of
the car etc if the customer so desires. In addition Car washes provide a unique service
and are controlled closely. Most car washes filter and re-circulate approx. 92 % of the
water used for washing the car. In addition the remaining water is properly directed
into drain basins. Without a car wash, the public would be washing their cars in their
driveways and using large amounts of water which goes in the City’s drainage system.
‘The Cily of San Diego discourages car washing on individual driveways.
My position, therefore, is (1) the City should broadly define their concerns dnd allow the
usage where such concerns can be properly taken care off and (II) car washes attached
to a service station are not “drive through ” and in any case provide a unique service to
the community and should be specifically permitted in the overlay zone.
Yours sincerely,
K. B.Narain
P.O. Box 1918
Rancho Santa Fe, CA. 92067
Tel:61 9-756-l 83 1 Fax: 619-756-4888
NIW&IUN’~‘X ww zz:c;c1 r=.C;--Tr-lul.l
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2010 8 2011 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Diego
t 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 Proof of Publication of
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the
Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of
California, under the dates of June 30, 1989
(Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times-
Advocate) case number 171349 (Blade-Citizen)
and case number 172171 (The Times-Advocate)
for the cities of Escondido. Oceanside, Carlsbad,
Solana Beach and the North County Judicial
District; that the notice of which the annexed is a
printed copy (set in type not smaller than
nonpareil), has been published in each regular and
entire issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
Public Hearing --_---_--_-----m-v -----__
-s--------w--- 4 ---- -------
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CA 9%Ol/ZC-99-03ILCPA 98-05 -
COMMERCIALNISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the ity of Carlsbad
will hold a pubic hearing at the City Council Chambers, 200 Carlsbad
Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m., on Tues 1 ay, May 11, 1999,
to consider approval of Zone Code Amendment, Zone C ange, and Local
Coastal Program Amendment to establish a isitor-serving over-
lay zone over various properties within the City.
April 30, 1999
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
s3-t Marcos Dated at California, this 30th day
of April, 1999
----- &?!!hLr& ------
This space is for the County Clerk Filing Stamp
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cc
attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff report will I
after May 7, 1999.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, or woul
of the decision, please contact Eric
Munoz in the City of Carisbad
Planning Department at (760) 433
1161, extension 4441.
If you challenge the Zone Code
Amendment, Zone Change, and/or
Local Coastal 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, on in written corre-
spondence delivered to the City of
Carlsbad City Clerk’s Office at, or
prior to, the public hearing.
I COMMERCIAI
Legal 63&7 April 30, 1999 OVEI
zc 99-03/&z/
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
tially invited to
? available on or
like to be notified
JISITORSERVING AY ZONE
W-WLCPA 9w)S
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ZCA 9%Ol/ZC 99-03/LCPA 98-05 - COMMERCIALMSTOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at
the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday May 11, 1999, to consider approval of a Zone Code Amendment, Zone Change, and Local Coastal
Program Amendment to establish a commercial/visitor-serving overlay zone over various properties
within the City.
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 or after May 7, 1999.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, or would like to be notified of the decision, please
contact Eric Munoz in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department at (760) 438-l 161, extension 4441.
If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment, Zone Change, and/or Local Coastal 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 City Clerk’s Office at, or
prior to, the public hearing.
PUBLISH: April 30,1999
COMMERCIALn/lSlTOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
ZC 99903IZCA 98-O 1 ILCPA 98-05
(Fora A)
TO: CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the matcrlals necessary for you to notice
ZCA 98-Ol/ZC 99-03/LCPA 98-05 - Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone
for a public hearing before the Clty Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of May 4, 1999
Thank you.
l/8 Page Ad
April 15, 1999
Date
City of Carlsbad
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will
hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 17, 1999, to consider a Zone Code
Amendment, Zone Change, and Local Coastal Program Amendment to establish a
commerical/visitor-serving overlay zone over various properties within the City.
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 March 11, 1999.
If you have any questions, please call Eric Munoz in the Planning Department at (760)
438-l 161, extension 4441.
If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment, Zone Change, and Local Coastal
Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or
someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written
correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: ZC 99-03/ZCA 98-01 /LCPA 98-05
CASE NAME: COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
PUBLISH: MARCH 4.1999
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2075 La Palmas Dr. l Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 l (760) 438-l 161 - FAX (760) 438-0894 @
m
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST
801 PINE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SD COUNTY PLANNING
SUITE B
5201 RUFFIN FiD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
SUITE 50
330 GOLDENSHORE
LONG BEACH CA 90802
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE
2730 LOKER AVE WEST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKSlENG DEPT
PROJECT PLANNER
ERIC MUNOZ
SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DIST
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
CITY OF SAN MARCOS CITY OF VISTA
1 CIVIC CENTER DR PO BOX 1988
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949 VISTA CA 92085
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY )
SUITE B I
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD j
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331 j
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST ’
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNITY
SERVICES I
VALLECITOS WATER DIST
788 SAN MARCOS BLVD
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
SANDAG
SUITE 800
400 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
I.P.U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND
URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
(ABOVE ADDRESS - For City
Council Notices Only)
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
Mea & c&,, C&k- Id
MfhLiiJGf 4/a/9$
CARLTAS co
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BRUCE ROBERT E TRUST
6272 SILVERWOOD DR
HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92647
.-
CALVARY CHAPEL NORTH
7 188 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CARMART L P
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD POINT CORP
PO BOX 178870
SAN DIEGO CA 92 177
.
CAROLINES SURVIVORS
6452 AVENIDA MANANA
LA JOLLA CA 92037
CHRYSLER REALTY CORP
C/O TAX AFFAIRS 483
800 CHRYSLER DR
AUBURN HILLS MI 48326
CORPORATION OF THE P
C/O PROPERTY RESERVE
##4
10 E SO TEMPLE
SALT LAKE CITY UT 84111
DIXON MOUNEAN J
24 LAGUNITA DR
LAGUNA BEACH CA 9265 1
ECKE PAUL SR TR (DCS)
VOGEL BELJEAN TRUST
C/O PALOMAR & CO
5850 AVENIDA ENClNAS
CARLSBD CA 92008
-.
AR0 PARTNERS
NOA
1015 CHESTNUT AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CB RANCH ENTERPRISE
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CAIUSBAD CA 92008
CANNON ROAD LLC
1745 ROCKY RD
FULLERTON CA 92831
CARLSBAD CORPORATE L
PO BOX 34089
LASVEGAS NV 89133
CARLSBA PROPERTIES
C/O CARPENTERS SOUTH
520 S VIRGIL AVE
LOS ANGELES CA 90020
CARPENTERS PENSION TRUST
C/O CARPENTES SOUTH
520 S VIRGIL AVE
LOS ANGELES CA 90020
COLDWELL BANKER COMM
C/O CORP ACCTNG
#700
970 W 190TH ST
TORRANCE CA 90502
CRAIG REALTY GROUP C
#lOO
1500 QUAIL ST
NEWPORTBEACH CA 92660
DONAHUE SCHRIBER REA
3501 JAMBOREE RD
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
FREMONI N V
C/O BUTLER PROP MGMT
2726 SHELTER ISLAND
SAN DIEGO CA 92106
-
BROOKING DORIS TR
375 SKYLINE DR
VISTA CA 92084
CABOT lNDUSTRIAL PRO
C/O ASSET MGR
#2OOS
2 CENTER PLAZA
BOSTON MA 02108
CARLBUS ASSOC
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD ESTATE HOLDER
c/o LPP INC
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD RANCH COMPANY
C/O CHRIS CALKINS
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARRE
6070 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CONTE CARLO R & DOROTHY
350 RJVER PARK DR
REDDING CA 96003
DIRT-TA INVESTMENTS
C/O DAN HONEYCUTT
PI0 BOX 91940
PASADENA CA 91109
ECKE PAUL SR TR (DCS)
#E
573 1 PALMER WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FINNEY JAMES B FAMILY
5445 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FOUR SAC SELF-STORAGE
2727 N CENTRAL AVE
PIHOENIX AZ 85004
GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE ATTN
GARY HILL
5345 ARMADA DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GRANT W T TRUST
PO BOX 979
CARLSBAD CA 92018
HELIX LAND CO LTD
C/O GREGORY T LAMBRO
PO BOX 15453
SAN DIEGO CA 92175
HOEHN ASSOCIATES II
5566 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KREG-OC LP
C/O KOLL REAL ESTATE
#2
4275 EXECUTIVE SQ
LA JOLLA CA 92037
KELLY ROBERT P TR
2770 SUNNY CREEK RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KING COMMUNITY TRUST
5 120 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LEVINE FAMILY TRUST
8929 UNIVERSITY CTR
SAN DIEGO CA 92 122
-.
MANASSAKIS KONSTANTI
6030 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
-
~ .~
GAISER JAMES & DOROTHY
3340 RIDGECREST DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
GLASJAR FUNDING LP
C/O TAX DEPT #135 1
#5
1465 1 DALLAS PKWY
DALLAS TX 75240
HKH CORP
C/O R TODD CARPENTER
ELEVEN GREENWAY PLZ
HOUSTON TX 77046
HERRICK HOLDINGS LTD
#200
755 RAINTREE LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
HOEHN GROUP THE
5454 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KAISER FOUNDATION
393 E WALNUT ST
PASEDENA CA 91101
KILLION INTER VIVO T
5055 AVENLDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KOTOFF FAMILY TRUST
130 1 VISTA COLINA DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
LOT 15 CARLSBAD RANCH
C/O DAVID MEYER
#lO
619 SO VULCAN AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
MCWIN CORP
6 102 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
GALLAGHER JOSEPH AL
C/O J A GALLAGHER
4982 LASSEN DR
OCEANSIDE CA 92056
GLENDORA MOTORCARS
6830 AVENIDA ENCJNAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
HADLEY PAUL & PEGGY TR
PO BOX 12727
PALM DESERT CA 92255
HOEHN ASSOCIATES
5566 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
JONES FAMILY TRUST
C/O TOYOTA CARLSBAD
5424 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KELLY RANCH CORP
C/O THE ALLEN GROUP
#8
4365 EXECUTIVE DR
SANDIEGO CA 92121
KILROY REALTY LP
C/O DELOITTE & TOUCH
PO BOX 18825 1
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LEGOLAND CARLSBAD
ATTN BILL HAVJLUK
1 LEG0 DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
MAIER FAMILY TRUST
11559 W SUNSET BLVD
LOS ANGELES CA 90049
MITCHELL LAND & IMPROV
C/O D W MITCHELL
29 19 GARDENA AVE
SIGNAL HILL CA 90806
MOORSTEEN KAY TR
C/O FOODMAKER
PO BOX 783
SAN DIEGO CA 92 112
I
NICHOLS GENEVA M FAM !
1506 S COAST HWY
LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651
PACIFIC SALES KITCHEN
C/O GARY TURPANJIAN
2080 WASHINGTON AVE
TORR4NCE CA 90501
.-
PALOMAR & CO
5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PRICE CO THE
C/O EZCISE TAX DEPT
999 LAKE DR
ISSAQUAH WA 98027
RANCH PAUL ECKE
PO BOX 239488
ENCINITAS CA 92023
RUBY CHARLES E AND SANDRA
PO BOX 805
CARDIFF CA 92007
,-
SHARP FAMILY LTD PTN
C/O DONALD D SHARP
5411 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SPIEKER PROPERTIES
C/O RICHARD L ROMNEY
9255 TOWNE CENTER DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92 12 1
TOMJCMCO
C/O JUNG N TOM
1524 DORCAS ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92110
MOTEL 6 OPERATION
C/O TAX DEPT #47 1
#5
1465 1 DALLAS PKWY
DALLAS TX 75240
ORD JOHN & MARGARET
PO BOX 1789
CARLSBAD CA 92018
-
PALOMAR BEACH RESORT
#A
829 2m ST
ENCINITAS CA 92024
PAYLESS DRUG STORES
PO BOX 843 1
HARRISBURG PA 17105
PRJCESMART INC
C/O BOB GANS
4649 MORENA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92 117
RODRIGUEZ-WINTER DUA
1282 CREST DR
ENCINITAS CA 92024
SAN-GAL TRUST THE
C/O PHILIP L GILDRED
#1820
550 W ‘C’ ST
SANDIEGO CA 92101
SIERRA CAPITAL CORP
#20
50 CALIFORNIA ST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94111
SPIEKER PROPERTIES
C/O REGIONAL ASSISTANT
#285
19600 FAIRCHILD
IRVINE CA 92612
TOWNSEND FAMILY TRUST
5434 PASEO DEL NORTE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
NATIONAL ASSN OF MUSIC
C/O COWLEY & CHIDESTER
PO BOX 2329
’ RANCH0 SANTA FE CA 92067
i
PAC-SAN DEVELOPMENT
2260 RUTHERFORD RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
PALOMAR CANNON PARTNERS
C/O SUEKINT
5522 LOCKHAVEN DR
BUENA PARK CA 90621
PRENTISS PROPERTIES
c/o LYNN MINNICI
3890 W NORTHWEST HWY
! DALLAS TX 75220
RALPHS GROCERY CO
1100 W ARTESIA BLVD
COMPTON CA 90220
ROSE CHILDRENS TRUST
, C/O RICHARD J ROSE
I ORCO CONSTRUCTION
I 2100 RITCHEY ST
’ SANTA ANA CA 92705
SHARP FAMILY LIMITED
C/O CHRYSLER REALTY
800 CHRYSLER DR
AUBURNHILLS MI 48326
j SNYDER LEASING
C/O INN-N-OUT BURGERS
13502 E VIRGINIA AVE
BALDWIN PARK CA 9 1706
TOHIDI JOHN
10501 WILSHIRE BLVD
LOS ANGELES CA 90024
TOWNSEND ROBERT & MA
588 CAMINO DEL RIO NO
SANDIEGO CA 92108
UKEGAWA JAMES S
42 18 SKYLINE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008
WILLIAMS RICHARD & DES
PO BOX 177
SAN LUIS REY CA 92068
WINTER RAY TR
MOBIL ADMIN SERVS/L
PO BOX 290
DALLAS TX 75221
RUTH BESECKER LOVE
SDG&E
PO BOX 1831
SAN DIEGO CA 92112-4150
DENNIS CUNNINGHAM
PLANNING SYSTEMS
STE 100
1530 FARADAY AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BOB LADWIG
STE 300
703 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
JOHN BUZA
PO BOX 8617
RANCH0 SANTA FE CA 92067
WALDORF FAMILY TRUST
424 ANDREW AVE
LEUCADIA CA 92024
WINTER FAMILY TRUST
1745 ROCKY RD
FULLERTON CA 92831
JAN SOBEL
CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMM
PO BOX 1605
CARLSBAD CA 92018
JEFF SEGAL
STE 102
7020 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
RON ROUSE ESQ
STE 200
600 W BROADWAY
SANDIEGO CA 92101
L GAIL GORDON
HUGHES HUBBARD & REED
350 SO GRAND
LOS ANGELES CA 90071-3442
TED THOADES
7452 TRIG0 LN
CARLSBAD CA 92009
WESELOH CHARLES B JR
1520 HUNSAKER ST
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
WINTER RAY & CONSTAN
1909 MEADOW RD
WALNUT CREEK CA 94595
MIKE HOWES
HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES
STE 150
5900 PASTEUR CT
CARLSBAD CA 92008
RICHARD APEL
LEGOLAND CARLSBAD
1 LEG0 DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
LEONARD MARTYNS
7304 LANTANA TER
CATLSBAD CA 92009
NANCY PATTERSON
URBAN SOLUTIONS STE 11
1049 CAMlNO DEL MAR
DEL MAR CA 92014
ED NAVARRO
CA STATE DEPT OF PARKS & REC
STE 200
9609 WAPLES ST
SANDIEGO CA 92121
H:\ADMIMLiBELS\LCP
INTERESTED PARTIES .
UPDATED 3-99
OLIVENHAIN M.W.D.
1966 OLlVENHAlN ROAD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CRAIG ADAMS
SIERRA CLUB
SAN DIEGO CHAPTER
3820 RAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LESLIE ESPOSITO
1893 AMELFI DRIVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
LANIKAI LANE PARK
SHARP; SPACE 3
6550 PONTO DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KIM SEIBLY
SAN DIEGO GAS 81 ELECTRIC
PO BOX 1831
SAN DIEGO CA 92112
,-
PERRY A LAMB
890 MERE POINT ROAD
BRUNSWICK MAINE 04011
RICHARD RETECKI
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
SUITE 1100
1330 BROADWAY
OAKLAND CA 94612
DALE/DONNA SCHREIBER
7163 ARGONAURA WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
,- GOPlES TO:
I, wrYCLERK
+ MAIN LI&WRY
+ sRANCH’tLI&?ARY
+ WATER blS+l?lCT
-
CITY OF ENCINITAS
COM DEV DEPARTMENT
505 S VULCAN AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
REGIONAL WATER QUAL. BD
EXECUTIVE OFFICER
SUITE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92124
GUY MOORE JR
6503 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CYRIL AND MARY GIBSON
12142 ARGYLE DRIVE
LOS ALAMITOS CA 90702
JOHN LAMB
1446 DEVLIN DRIVE
LOS ANGELES CA 90069
MARY GRIGGS
STATE LANDS COMMISSSION
SUITE 100 SOUTH
100 HOWE AVE
SACRAMENTO CA 958258202
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
PLANNING & LAND USE DEPT
JOAN VOKAC - SUITE B-5
5201 RUFFIN ROAD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
ANTHONY BONS
25709 HILLCREST AVE
ESCONDIDO CA 92026
MR/MRS MICHAEL CARDOSA
6491 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICES
2730 LOKER AVE WEST
/ CARLSBAD CA 92008
TABATA FARMS
PO BOX 1338
CARLSBAD CA 92018
<
KENNETH E SULZER
$ANDAG - EXEC DIRECTOR
IST INT’L PLAZA, SUITE 800
401 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
JAN SOBEL
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
PO BOX 1605
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BILL MCLEAN
c/o LAKESHORE GARDENS
7201 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SPIERS ENTERPRISES
DWIGHT SPIERS
SUITE 139
23 CORPORATE PLAZA
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
SUPERVISOR BILL HORN
A-ITN: ART DANELL
COUNTY OF SD, ROOM 335
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LEE ANDERSON
CRA PRESIDENT
5200 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FLOYD ASHBY
416 LA COSTA AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
GEORGE BOLTON
6583 BLACKRAIL ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
LABELS - 5 163 i SANDAG (SAN DIEGO COUNTY)
LCPA MAILING LIST (GOVERNMENT AGENCIES) gTy8;y PLAZA
APPENDIX A (LIST IS REQUIRED BY COASTAL 401 B STREET
COMMISSION) SANDIEGO CA 92101
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
ROOM 700
110 WEST A STREET
SANDIEGO CA 92101
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
OFFICE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AFAIRS
) 1400 TENTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
.--.
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
350 MCALLISTER STREET
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE
1 STEVE SHAFFER, AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
1 ROOM 100
1220 N STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION & HSG AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WILLIAM G. BRENNAN ROOM 5504
DEPUTY SECRETARY AND SPECIAL COUNCIL 1120 N STREET
SUITE 2450 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
980 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DISTRICT 11 CALTWiNS
TIM VASQUEZ, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
2829 SAN JUAN ST
SANDIEGO CA 92138
RESOURCES AGENCY
, RM 1311
1416 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95812
I
I
U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE : COASTAL CONSERVANCY
S.UITE 130 SUITE 1100
3310 EL CAMINO AVENUE : 1330 BROADWAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95821 i OAKLAND CA 94612
ENERGY RESOURCES, CONSERVATION
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
CHUCK NAJARIAN
15 16 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
RONALD D REMPEL, CHIEF
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
RM 1341
1416 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 958 14
MARINE RESOURCES REGION, DR & G
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR
350 GOLDEN SHORE
LONGBEACH CA 90802
-,% ..- .- ~~ --..-
SOUTHERN REGION
JOHN WALSTROM, TECHNICAL SERVICES
8885 RIO SAN DIEGO DRIVE
SANDDIEGO CA 92108
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
DWIGHT SANDERS
SUITE 1005
100 HOWE AVE
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
DOUG WICKIZER, ENVIROMENTAL COORD
RM 1516-2
1416 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
BILL TRAVIS
30 VAN NESS AVENUE
SANFRANCISCO CA 95814
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
POBOX 100
SACAR4MENTO CA 95801
C
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
SUITE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331
DEPARTMENT OF AGRJCULTURE
ATTN: GARY
RESOURCE CONSERVATIONIST
SUITE 102
2121-C SECOND STREET
DAVIS CA 95616
PACIFIC REGIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
ADMIN - OCRM, 55MC4
N/ORM - 3
1305 EAST-WEST HIGHWAY
SILVERSPRING MD 20910
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
SUITE 700
333 MARKET STREET
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
611 RYAN PLAZA DR STE 400
ARLINGTON TX 760 1 l-4005
BARRY BRAYER, AWP-8
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
WESTERN REGION
PO BOX 92007
LOS ANGELES CA 90009
USDA - RURAL DEVLOPMENT
430 ST DEPT 4169
DAVIS CA 95616
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
CHAIRMAN,
722 JACKSON PLACE NORTH WEST
WASHINGTON DC 2006
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
LOS ANGELES DISTRICT ENGINEER
PO BOX 2711
LOS ANGELES CA 90053
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
COMMANDANT, ELEVENTH NAVAL DISTRICT
DISTRICT CIVIL ENGINEER
SANDIEGO CA 92132
U. S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
2135 BUTANO DRIVE
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
CLIFFORD EMMERLING, DIRECTOR
SUITE 350
I 901 MARKET STREET
i SANFRANCISCO CA 94103
I
.~ .- -. I . ~~~~- - --
U. S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVE
LOWER COLORADO REGION 1 DUNCAN LENT HOWARD, REGIONAL ADMIN
PO BOX 427 450 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE
BOULDER CITY CO 89005 1 SANFRANCISCO CA 94102
. .
SUPERINTENDENT
CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARR
1901 SPINNAKER DRJVE
SAN BUENAVENTURA CA 93001
U. S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
1 MID-PACJFIC REGION
I 2800 COTTAGE WAY
, SACRAMENTO CA 95825
I ‘i. ,--- . _ --__- ~~ .-. _
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
RONALD M. JAEGER
I 2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
DOUGLAS WARNOCK, SUPERINTENDENT
REDWOOD NATIONAL PARK
DRAWERN
1111 2m STREET
CRESCENT CITY CA 95531
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SUITE 200
3 111 CAMINO DEL RIO NORTH
SAN DIEGO CA 92108
MAY- 18-99 TUE IQ:30 CI,‘! OF CARLSEAD COMM DE FAX NO, 4380894 -
I ‘ ALL RECEIVE I
P, 2
CllY COUNCIL i CA d -
I Cc/ PACIFIC
$\I% km
BVEL0PMEH-r
? ARTNERS,LLC
May 18,1999
bAE CITY MAPlAGER
IGENDA ITEM # ia SENT MA FAX (760) 4N-O8!M .-
MAYOR& CITY COUNCIL
cn-rOFclAlu.sBAD 2075 Lam Pdaa~ Drive
c8rlsbnd+ CA !mos1576
RE: Comme~Iaitor-Serving thctlay Zone ZCA %UWZC 9%03/LCPA 9805
ekwa. Car&bd b&ULgo~d-Ovwky 2%~.
Dear Mayar and C@ Council Persow
Upon my review of tit current M Cumme~ciol/V~~a~ Oweriay Zone Section
aM, a Prebibited uw, x &ve ibc.fouow concmn:
~tioa B - The outdoor s&we or t&&y of mcrcbudhe~ poodr or uervkm for mle.
A8 dcvehpcr of rhe pmpeny d the SWC of Poiasctltn and Pm del Norte, wu me conccrncd
about the fotrre inteqmt&ioa snd enforcement of term tioutdoor storags or dirplry of
merchaadiec, goods or iuvices for aale” as it rcl*tor to nmrk& ud drug storer. TndAtiomUy,
BII mulroa, and dnrg storm have shopflag cwta outsidt nt the front door: oITer rcasoa~l sekr
items such as flowers, pumpkim. Christmu trtea, eta; plus moda ancl water dirpcnseru; ATM,
and tcltpbonerr. Sinor cht CC&R’u Lr 4 new ret&l ccntzm itnve vmy strict bgusge nnd
enforcement addmsimg the iuoe of outdoor stunqp, display of m@r~Mndba or Mctdoor sale of
gooda ad serviws, I wauld like to uuggat t&t Sectiom & be landed 8s fdlom;
Sceti~n- B The outdoor stonm or dimbw of mer&mdk twd or scdces for srlc that
art not. tr~diiioti ut ciriivbasincr, omemtiarr,
Than& you for your midtmtioo of thb nutkr.
John D. Edrvins
Project Directm
177 S. BEVERLY INWE
BEVERLY HLLLS, CA 902123002
310.278.9595
3 10.278.6566 PAX
D
.
l m m
MflY 19 ‘?9 13:31 FR PM5 SF 415 983 1200 TO 917607209461 P. 0246
. c
Pillsbury
PI
Madison &
Sutro LLP
AGENDA ITEM # 1s
a Mayor
city .alncil
CXys ttaniqjer
cizy clttorney
~'l'l'f~ltNKYJ AI’I.AW
225 MONtCOMHlY 3TREF.T
SAN PRANCISCII.~.AI.IF~~,RNIA~,~~~L
TELEP~~ON~I WS) PW-IO00 FAX! 11151 913.12UO
MAILlhb .ADUHEQS: y.IJ. BOX 7UUU
SAN FRANCISCO. CALIFORNIA ‘J4lZIb7~dO
;.rrmrf:p;I~lrwrluu.rum
(415) 983- 1496 Telephone
(4 15) 983- 1200 Facsimile
E-mail: vanbuskir-re@pillsburylaw.com
May 18, 1999
BY FACSIMILE ONLY
The Honorable Claude A. Lewis, Mayor,
and Members of the City Council
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: Citv Council consideration of Commercial/Visitor-Serving
Overlay Zone (ZCA 98-Ol/ZC: 99-03ILCPA 98-05)
Dear Mayor Lewis
and Members of the City Council:
We write on behalf of our client, The Carpenters’ Pension Trust,
with regard to the proposed Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone
Ordinance (“Overlay Ordinance”) scheduled to be considered by the City
Council this evening.
As you may know, our client owns a vacant parcel of land on the
western side of Paseo de1 Norte north of the Palomar Airport Road exit
from the freeway. While the Carpenters’ Pension Trust supports the
efforts of the City to ensure high quality commercial development in this
area, and to avoid some of the potential development concerns highlighted
in the Staff Report, we are very concerned that the Overlay Ordinance
SAN FHANCISCO LO) AlvGtLYS NCCW lllKK IlR4NLF LoUPITY Su-fl4MF.NtIl SaN DIRCO Sll.lCl-lN VALLEY Wh3WINCTON. 0.C IlONG KONL TOKYO
twf 18 ‘99 13:31 FR PM5 SF 215 983 1200 TO 917607209461 P .03/06
The Hon. Claude A. Lewis
May 18, 1999
Page 2
may be counterproductive to the ability of landowners to attract
investment and high-quality visitor serving uses as desired by the City.
While the Overlay Ordinance raises a number of concerns, our main
focus is on the Ordinance’s proposed imposition of extremely detailed
“development standards” in Section 21.208.100. Specifically, our
concerns relate to four development standards as set forth below. As a
general comment, however, we believe the establishment of such detailed
standards--seemingly more appropriate in the design review and
permitting process--may produce too draconian and inflexible a result for
zoning purposes. While the City’s desire to foster high quality
development in the area is commendable, the use of overly-strict standards
in a zoning ordinance may work in reverse, as investors and/or financing
entities could be discouraged from even considering development in
Carlsbad.
With regard to the Carpenters’ Pension Trust property, as weIl as
many other in-fill properties located within the proposed Overlay Zone,
the combination of these development standards would operate to impose
extremely limiting conditions on any proposed property development
envelope. The standards of primary concern are as follows:
. Parkinn requirements (6 21.208.100(A)). We believe the
parking requirement for a normal high-quality restaurant (above 2,000 sq.
ft.) of one space for every 50 sq. ft. is unreasonable and excessive. For
example, in the case of an 11,000 sq. ft. restaurant, this would require 180
parking spaces. This is far more than industry standard. It is also more
than has been required in any other similar local development. Moreover,
there is no provision for a parking overlay if adjacent properties (such as
a hotel) have excess parking capacity especially at key use periods.
While a particular location might require more parking than others, this
issue can and should be addressed in the normal design review process
and permitting process. We submit the parking requirements should be
decreased or left to the underlying zone.
WY 18 ‘99 13:31 FR PMS SF 415 983 1200 TO 917607209461 P. 04/06
The Hon. Claude A. Lewis
May 18, 1999
Page 3
. Building Setbacks (4 21.208.lOO(DN. The 30-foot setback
itself is constraining. However, it is unnecessary and unreasonable to then
exclude all parking from this setback area. This creates in effect a 30-
foot “buffer zone,” which is extraordinary given the nature of many small
in-fill parcels in this area. We submit that parking should be allowed in
some or all of the setback area.
. Landscauing/Tree planting (& 21.208.100(G)(2)). The
planting of one tree for every four parking spaces is also unduly
constraining. ’ In addition, given the requirement for substantial use of
24-inch boxes, the end result will be to produce a vegetation situation
which is unwieldy and needlessly consumes too much lot area. This
requirement, taken in combination with the parking and setback
requirements, produces a situation leaving inadequate building envelopes;
and in our opinion very few high-end restaurants or similar uses would be
interested in relocating to Carlsbad.
. Architectural Style (4 21.208.lOOtF’I~. We believe the
limitation to two architectural styles is unduly restrictive. For example, a
first-class Italian restaurant may not be interested in “Village” or
“Contemporary Southwest” styles. The presence of the “possibility” of
another design approval in sub-section (C) is of small comfort to
investors, who must look at the difficulty of moving through a conditional
use permitting process, faced with the two “standard” architectural design
standards.
Of equal concern to the problem of overly-restrictive development
standards being decreed at the zoning level is the lack of any express
provision for variances, hardship, and the like. These kinds of strict
standards might be more reasonable where large parcels remain to be
planned and developed, but they are unduly restrictive as applied to the
many small in-fill parcels covered by the proposed Overlay Ordinance.
This could discourage needed rehabilitation of older structures, as well as
1 The Staff Report recommends one tree for every six spaces.
MWf 18 ‘99 13:32 FR PMS SF 115 983 1200 TO 917607209461 P. OS06
The Hon. CIaude A. Lewis
May 18, 1999
Page 4
high-quality development of vacant in-fill parcels. Yet, no express
variance or hardship provision has been provided.
Speaking to broader issues, we do not understand the
“gerrymandered” nature of the draft Overlay Ordinance boundaries. It
excludes significant properties located directly to the east of our client’s
property, including Legoland and related parcels. While these parcels
may be subject to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, that plan does not
contain the same sorts of standards as the Overlay Zone. To the extent
the Overlay Zone is designed to prevent certain types of development
either on vacant parcels or in rehabilitation of existing uses, there is no
rational basis to exclude these lands. A similar exclusion exists for the
Car Country area and al1 uses in the zone which are not commercial.
Again, these do not seem to be rationally based.
In reviewing the record of the workshops and Planning Commission
action, we do not see “legislative evidence” that such draconian
restrictions in a zoning ordinance are justified. We also have concerns
that the development standards and other provisions of the Overlay
Ordinance may discourage visitor-serving uses contrary to Coastal Act
policies.
The Staff Report recognizes that these are “unique development
standards” and states that “refinements are still possible and appropriate.”
We believe that some modest revisions to the Overlay Ordinance could
mitigate many of our concerns. We are hopeful that might be
accomplished either through amendments at the hearing or at a continued
hearing before a final decision on the Overlay Ordinance is made.
Very truly yours,
Ronald E. Van Buskirk
cc: Ronald Ball, Esq.
-‘=lY’ 18 ‘99 13:32 FR PMS SF
The Hon. Claude A. Lewis
May 18, 1999
Page 5
Mr. Eric Munoz
4:s 983 1~~~ TO 917607209461 P. 0646
Mr. M. McPherson
MAY 18,1999
TO: CITY COUNCILMEMBERS
FROM: Senior Planner Munoz
ZCA 9%Ol- COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
ERRATA SHEET
Please note the following clarifications to the Overlay Zone Ordinance. If the Council concurs,
these changes should be included with Council’s action for ordinance approval. New text is in
bold or bold/italic text; deletions have strike-out text.
1. Note the two changes to the following section of the Ordinance: (1) the addition of the new
Whereas to further clarify the existing citywide prohibition on drive-thru restaurants; and (2)
the addition of 21.208.180 Severability, to the listing of chapter sections after 21.208.170
Remedies Not Exclusive.
WHEREAS, the overlay zone’s coverage area, permit process and development
standards have been subject to public review and input and refinements have been made to the
ordinance to respond to various concerns so it will be a usable and effective ordinance:; and
WHEREAS, the overlay zone continues the citywide prohibition on drive-
thru restaurants.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: That Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the
addition of Chapter 21.208 to read as follows:
CHAPTER 21.208
COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
Sections:
21.208.010 Intent and Purpose.
21.208.020 Definitions.
21.208.030 Boundaries; Exceptions; Applicability.
21.208.040 Permitted Uses.
21.208.050 Uses Permitted by Conditional Use Permit.
21.208.060 Prohibited Uses.
21.208.070 Approval Process.
21.208.080 Pre-Filing Submittal and Meeting; Application for CUP.
21.208.090 Project Site Notification.
21.208.100 Development Standards.
21.208.110 Required Findings.
21.208.120 Performance Monitoring Condition.
21.208.130 Existing Uses, Building Permits and Business Licenses.
21.208.140 Administrative Enforcement Powers.
21.208.150 Administrative Notice, Hearing, and Appeal Procedures.
21.208.160 Judicial Enforcement.
21.208.170 Remedies Not Exclusive.
21.208.180 Severability
2. Note the following changes to the Prohibited Uses section.
. . 21.208.060
Notwithstanding any underlying zoning provision, the following uses are prohibited in the
overlay zone:
A. Stand-alone liquor stores where the retail sale of liquor and/or alcoholic beverages
is the primary form of business;
B. The outdoor storage or display of merchandise, goods or services for sale;
this code, or a
conditional use permit issued pursuant to this Chapter, no person shall sell or offer to sell goods,
merchandise or services from, or by means of, any temporary display, vehicle, platform, wagon
or pushcart upon any public street, privately owned property, public parking lot, city right of way
or sidewalk within the overlay zone; and
BD. k&t%&& Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas (which waive parking requirements
for small outdoor eating areas up to 400 square feet in size) are prohibited. All indoor and
outdoor eating areas shall provide parking as required by 21.208.100 A 4 of this Chapter.
ERIC MUNOZ
Senior Planner
-
LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON &SCRIPPS LLP
ATroRNEys AT L&w l POUNDED 1873
RONALD W. ROUSE, PARTNER
DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (619)699-2579
DIRECT FAX NUMBER (619) 645-5342 2/47A/Burrd m- Cougar.
E-MAIL ADDRESS: RROUSE@LUCE.COM
OUR FILE No.: 15457-00005
May 18, 1999
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Mayor Bud Lewis
and Members of City Council
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: Proposed “Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone”
Agenda Bill 15,183
Dear Mayor Lewis and Councilmembers:
We represent two families, who collectively own approximately six individual parcels within the
proposed overly zone area. Three of those parcels are already improved and three other parcels are
not yet developed. On behalf of my clients, I have participated in each public workshop and the
Planning Commission Hearing.
As a general proposition, my clients believe that the already high quality standards and
development for development existing in the City of Carlsbad fully and adequately protect the City
against the evils it identifies as the basis for the proposed overlay zone. Further, my clients believe
the proposal to single out a relatively few properties to be treated in a different and discriminatory
fashion by imposing higher development standards, conditions and exactions then comparable
property elsewhere in the City, is not fair or legally justifiable. In that regard, we would like to
incorporate by reference the previous comments and testimony submitted at the prior hearings and
workshops.
However, in the event the Council chooses to proceed with adoption of an ordinance, we believe
that certain modifications should be made which will clarify and avoid inconsistencies, as well as
authorize the m to exercise some discretion to modify the required setbacks in the event that the
literal application of the setbacks with respect to small, or irregularly configured parcels, would
result in an undesirable site plan.
In that regard, we request the following modifications:
1. In Section 21.208.010 G., which applies to commercial and visitor serving uses in
the Planned Industrial (P-M) Zone, we suggest using the same definition as set forth in the P-M
Zone Ordinance Section 21.34.010( 1) which states: “. . . whose primary purpose is not to cater
directly to the general public, and certain commercial uses which cater to and are ancillary to the
uses allowed in this [P-M] Zone . . . “. (See P-M excerpts attached).
600 Wwr BROADWAY, SUITE 2600 l SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNU 92101 l TELEPHONE (619) 236-1414 l FACSIMILE (619) 232-8311
SAN DIEGO l LA JOLU l NEW YORK l Los ANGELES l SAN FRANCISCO l CHICAGO
- -
LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON &SCRIPPS LLP
AITORNEYS AT LAW l FOUNDED 1873
Mayor Bud Lewis
and Members of City Council
May 18, 1999
Page 2
2. The same change should be made to the proposed Section 21.208.110 D. In this
way, the reference to conditional uses under the P-M Zone will incorporate the restrictive P-M
Zone language, rather than have confusing and different standards applicable to P-M Zone
conditional uses. The rest of the overlay zone would still apply.
3. With respect to proposed Section 21.208.100 D. “Building Setbacks” (see page 8 of
proposed ordinance), we ask that a provision be incorporated to allow them to make a variance
or modification to the required setbacks, if the literal application of the setbacks to a small or
irregularly shaped parcel would result in an unattractive or undesirable site plan. The goal is not to
eliminate the setbacks, but in certain instances, there may need to be flexibility in the literal
application of the setback so that the site plan will function properly and promote the goals and
objectives of the City. In that regard, we would suggest the addition of the following language at
the end of the above-referenced section:
“Provided however, the City may, in its discretion, make
modifications or refinements to the strict application of the above-
referenced setback or access standards, if the City is satisfied that (i)
the particular parcel is of such size, irregular shape or located such
that the strict application of the setback standards would not result in
the most desirable site development plan and (ii) any such variations
from the setback standards are reasonable in light of the benefits to
be achieved by a reconfigured site plan.”
We believe the foregoing comments are both constructive and helpful in formulating a workable
program. We ask that this letter be incorporated in the record.
c&@J. EA
of
LUCE, FORWARD, HAMILTON & SCRIPPS LLP
RWlUjr
cc: City Clerk
City Attorney
Planning Department/Mr. Eric Munoz
1393391.1
Chapter 21.34
P-M PLANNED INJXJSTRIAL ZONE*
Sections:
2134.010
2134.020
21.34.030
2134.040
2134.050
21.34060
21.34.070
21.34.080
2134.090
21.34.110
2134.120
21.34.130
2134.140
2134.150
21.34.160
Intent and purpose.
Permitted uses.
Conditional uses.
Residential uses permitted by
conditional use permit.
Planned industrial permit.
Industrial subdivisions.
Development standards.
Design criteria.
Performance standards.
Amendments.
Final map.
Final planned industrial
development plan.
Certification of occupancy.
Maintenance.
Failure to maintain.
* Prior history: Ods. 1256. 1261,906O. 9216 arid 9674.
2134.010 Intent and purpose.
The intent and purpose of this chapter is to ac-
complish the following:
(I) Allow the location of business and light in-
dustries engaged primarily in research and/or testing,
compatible light manufacturing, business and profes-
sional offices when engaged in activities associated
with corporate offices or in ac
purpose is not to cater directly to the general public,
and certain commercial uses which cater to and are
allbillaly to tb uses allowed in this zone; c (2) Promote an attractive and high-quality design
in developments which upgrades the city’s natural
environment and identity;
(3) Provide for the phasing of development
which is coordinated with the development of public
improvements and services;
(4) Encourage reduced energy consumption by
building design and by allowing, in certain cases,
2134.010
compatible residential development which provides
housing for employees of this zone;
(5) Provide for alternative transportation modes
for employees of this zone by a combination of bus
facilities, ride-share programs, and pedestrian and
bicycle circulation systems. (Ord. 9693 $ 1 (part),
1983)
21.34.020 Permitted uses.
The following uses ate permitted in the P-M zone
without the granting of a conditional use permit:
(1) Research and testing facilities;
(2) Manufacturing and processing facilities;
(3) Storage, wholesale and distribution facilities;
(4) Administrative offices associated with and
accessory to a permitted use;
(5) On-site recreational facilities intended for the
use of employees of the planned industrial zone;
(6) Business and professional offices which are
not retail in nature, do not cater to the general pub-
lic, and do not generate walk-in or drive-in t&tic,
and are incidental to the industrial uses in the vicini-
ty as follows:
Accountants
Administmtive offices
Advertising agencies
Advertising - direct mail
Agricultural consultants
Airlines offices, general offices
Air courier service
Answering bureaus
Appraisers
Arbitrators
Architect design and planners
Attorney services
Attorney (no legal clinics)
Audio-visual services
Billing service
Blueprinters
Bookkeeping service
Building designers
Building inspection service
Burglar alaxm systems
Business offices for professional and labor orga-
IliZatiOnS
21.-X020 -
Business consultants
Civil engineers
Collection agencies
Commercial artists
Commodity brokers
commlmicatiorls consuItarlts
Computer programmers
Computer service (time-sharing)
Computer systems
Construction manager
Corporate headquarters office
Corporate travel agencies and bureaus
Credit rating service
Data communication service
Data processing service
Data systems consultants
Diamond and gold brokers
Display designers
Display services
Drafting services
Economics research
Educational consultants
Educational research
Electric contractors (sales and administrative
offices only)
Electronics consultants
Energy management consultants
Engineering offices
EnvironmentaJ services
Escrow service
Estimators
Executive recruiting consultants
Executive search office
Executive train@ consultants
Export consultants
Financial planners and consultants
Fire protection consultants
Foreclosure assistance
Foundationeducational research
Franchise services
Fund-raising counselo~~
Gemologists General contractors (no equipment storage pennit-
ted) Geophysicists
Government contract consultants
Governmental agencies (general and adminisua-
tive offices only)
Graphics designers
Human factors research and development
Human services organization (administrative
offices only)
Importers
Industrial medical (workers camp.)
Incorporating agency Information bureaus
Insurance companies (administrative offices only)
Interior decorators and designers (no merchandise
storage permitted)
Investigators
Investment advisory
Investment securities
Labor relations consultants
Leasing services
Lecture bureaus
Literary agents
Magazine subscription agents
Mailing list service
Management consultants
Manufacturers agents
Marketing research and analysis
Message receiving service
Mutual funds
Patent searchers
Pension and profit sharing plans
Personal service bureau
Photographic (industrial and commercial only)
Printing services
Product development and marketing
Public relations services
Public utility companies
Publicity services
Publishers representatives
Radio communications
Real estate brokers (commercial and industrial
OdY) Real estate developers
Recording service
Relocation service
Repossessing service
(Chlsbd 1 I-98) 636
Research labs (5) Health and athletic clubs; Retirement planning consultants
Safety consultants
Sales training and counseling
Searchers of records
Securities systems Security firms
Sound system consultants
Space planning consultants
Space research and developments
Stock and bond brokers
Surveyors
Tax service and consultants (no consumer orient-
ed uses)
(6) Retail uses limited to the sales of goods and
services required for the convenience of the occu-
pants of this zone;
(7) Specified hazardous waste facilities (as de- fmed in Chapter 21.04). (Ord. NS-439 0 10, 1998;
Ord. NW09 0 17, 1997; Ord. NS-208 0 5, 1992;
Ord. 9693 0 1 (part), 1983)
2134.040 Residential uses permitted by
conditional use permit. The following residential uses are permitted in
the P-M zone upon the granting of a conditional use
permit by the city council: Telephone cable companies
Telephone systems
Title companies
Tour operators
Trademark consultants
Translators and interpreters
Trust companies
( 1) Single-family, multiple-family residential uses
or a combination thereof which serve to house the
employees of businesses located in the P-M zone.
Prior to the approval of a conditional use permif the
city council shall make the following fIndings:.
Uses substantially similar to those identified
above if approved by the land use planning man-
ager,
(A) A planned development permit for the pro-
ject has been approved, or is approved concurrently
with the conditional use permit, by the city council.
(B) The msidential development is an integral
part of an industrial park or large industrial use.
(7) Government facilities and offices;
(8) Accessory uses and structures where related
and incidental to a permitted use;
(9) Signs subject to the provisions of Chapter
21.41;
(C) The residential development is designed to
be compatible with the industrial use it serves by
means of landscaping, open space separations, etc.
(10) Satellite television antennae subject to the
provisions of Section 2153.130 of this code;
(11) On-shore oil and gas facilities subject to the
provisions of Section 21.42.010(15). (On!. NS-87 g
5, 1989; Ord. 98oQ 9 6; (part), 1986; OKL 9785 0
21, 1986; Ord. 9693 3 1 (part), 1983)
(D) The industrial development served by the
residential development shall provide for convenient
and efficient vehicular, bicycle or pedestrian trans-
portation to and from the residential development.
The maximum allowable density for the residen-
tial development shall be established by the city
council but in no event shall the density exceed
forty dwelling units per acre. (Ord. 9693 8 1 (part>,
1983)
2134.030 Cenditiond uses.
The following uses are pcmitted in the P-M zone
upon the granting of a conditional use permit:
(1) Eating and drinking establishments (with the
exception of drive&u restaurants);
(2) Hotels and motels;
(3) Automobile service stations:
(4) Child day care centers, subject to the provi-
sions of Chapter 21.83 of this title;
2134.050 Planned industrial permit.
(a) Land Use Manager Approval. No develop
ment of a permitted use pursuant to Section
2134.020, change of use of building modifications
in excess of twenty-five percent of the building
valuation of the existing development shall be done
without first obtaining a planned industrial permit
from the land use planning manager. In his review
2134.020
637 (CM&d IIY8)