HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-01-04; City Council; 15560; Inns Of AmericaAB# j5;5bO TITLE:
MTG. 01/04/00 INNS OF AMERICA
DEPT. PLN e’ CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
DEPT. HD.
CITY ATTY.
CITY MGR %
I
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No.
Permit CUP 99-03 and Coastal Development Permit CDP 99-06.
am0-08 APPROVING Conditional Use
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The project proposed by Inns of America consists of a 98 unit business hotel located at the
southeast corner of Avenida Encinas and Cannon Road. Because the project site is within the
recently established CommercialNisitor-Serving Overlay Zone, the City Council is the designated
final decision-maker for commercial or visitor-serving uses. The Planning Commission considered
this project at the November 17, 1999 Planning Commission hearing and voted 7-0 to recommend
that the City Council approve the project.
The two primary issues involved with this project are: (1) concurrence with the business hotel
finding, and, (2) compliance with the Overlay Zone.
The subject parcel, while located within the CommercialNisitor-Serving Overlay Zone, has an
underlying zoning designation of P-M (Planned Industrial) which puts limitations on the scope and
nature of commercial uses. The P-M zone is not intended to serve the general public and
commercial uses within the P-M zone are required to be designed for the use and convenience of
the occupants of Planned Industrial zoning districts adjacent to a site and within the vicinity. The
proposed project has been designed for the business traveler by providing in-room amenities as well
as common facilities for use by business clients. The attached Planning Commission staff report
further outlines these amenities. Both the Planning Commission and staff are recommending that
the business hotel finding be made by the Council via approval of the project.
The business hotel does comply with all applicable sections of the CommercialNisitor-Serving
Overlay Zone. It meets the parking, signage, building heighffsetbacks, and landscaping. The
proposed architectural style is contemporary southwest with clay colored Mission style barrel
roofing, “Navajo white” stucco walls and “sand pebble” trim and accent bands. The attached staff
report provides a table that further summarizes Overlay Zone compliance. In addition, the project
was processed pursuant to the new procedures of the Overlay Zone including a mandated
preliminary review process and project site notification. The proposal can satisfy the required
findings of the Overlay Zone as well as the standard conditional use permit findings, and will be
subject to on-going performance monitoring per the Overlay Zone.
The project site is located within the coastal zone and therefore requires a coastal development
permit, there are no coastal issues or impacts to coastal resources or shoreline access provisions.
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed business hotel
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that the project will not cause significant environmental
impacts and issued a Negative Declaration on October 14, 1999. No comments were received.
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA blLL NO. /5, r 60
FISCAL IMPACT:
This is a private development proposal that meets all applicable city standards and codes; there will
be no direct fiscal impacts to the City associated with this project other than standard project
administration, inspection and monitoring.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. &kJ -68
2. Location Map
3. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4677, 4678 and 4679
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated November 17, 1999
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes dated November 17, 1999.
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
follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 2ooo-08
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, CUP 99-03, AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT,
CDP 99-06, TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 98 UNIT
BUSINESS HOTEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER
OF CANNON ROAD AND AVENIDA ENCINAS ON P-M ZONED
PROPERTY WITHIN THE COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE.
CASE NAME: INNS OF AMERICA
CASE NO.: CUP 99-03KDP 99-06
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
WHEREAS, on November 17, 1999, the Carlsbad Planning Commission held a
duly noticed public hearing to consider a proposed Negative Declaration, Conditional Use Permit
and Coastal Development Permit to allow the development of a 98 unit business hotel, and
adopted Resolutions No. 4677, 4678 and 4679 recommending to the City Council that the
Negative Declaration, Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit be approved;
and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on 4th day of January ,
2000, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the recommendation and heard all persons
interested in or opposed to CUP 99-03 and CDP 99-06.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of the Negative Declaration, Conditional Use Permit CUP 99-03 and Coastal Development Permit
CDP 99-06 is approved and that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4677, 4678 and 4679 on file with the City
Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City Council.
3. Prior to City Council adoption of this project, the Council shall review and
approve the colors proposed for the exterior elevations of the Inns of America business hotel,
CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06.
4. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions of Chapter 1 .I6 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limits for Judicial
Review” shall apply:
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
- --._
“NOTICE TO APPLICANT
“The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is
governed by Code of Civil Procedures, Section 1094.6, which has been
made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter
1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the
appropriate court no later than the ninetieth day following the date on which
this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision
becomes final a request for the record of proceedings accompanied by the
required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of
preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in
court is extended to not latter than the thirtieth day following the date on
which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his
attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the
record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California 92008.”
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 4th day of JanuarY t 2000, by the following vote, to wit:
I AYES: Council Members Lewis, Hall, Finnila, Nygaard and Kulchin
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
A-l-TEST:
(SEAL)
-2-
EXHIBIT 2
. .
INNS OF AME.RICA
CUP 99-03lCDP 99-06
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4677
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION TO DEVELOP
A BUSINESS HOTEL LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF CANNON ROAD AND AVENIDA ENCINAS,
WITHIN THE CITY’S COASTAL ZONE, THE
COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE AND
IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 3.
CASE NAME: h-NS OF AMERICA
CASE NO.: CUP 99-03KDP 99-06
9 WHEREAS, Herrick Development Inc., “Developer”, has filed a verified
10 application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Ray and Barbara Winter,
11 “Owner”, described as
12
13
14
A portion of Lot H per Map 823, Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, as
recorded in the Office of the County Recorder, San Diego
County, State of California on May 1,1915. APN: 210-090-52
15
16
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction with said
17
II
project; and
18
19
20
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of November, 1999,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
21 .
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
22
and arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
23
24
25
26
,27
28
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
W That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMEND APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration
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
-
according to Exhibit “ND” dated October 14, 1999, and ‘PII” dated October 6,
1999, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findinm:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered Negative Declaration (for CUP 99-
03/CDP 99-06) the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and
any comments thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project;
and
b. the Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with requirements of
the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the
Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and
C. it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
d. based on the EL4 Part II and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence
the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. * .
PC RESO NO. 4677 -2-
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 of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day of November, 1999, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COURTNEY E. HEINEMAN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
R I
8 PC RESO NO. 4677 -3-
- -.
City of Carlsbad
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Address/Location: Southeast comer of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. APN:
2 1 o-090-52
Project Description: 98 room business hotel proposed for the pre-graded, 2.7 acre site.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a
Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the
environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning
Department, 2075 Las Palrnas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are
invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date
of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Eric Munoz in the Planning Department at
(760) 438-l 161, extension 4441.
DATED: OCTOBER 14,1999
CASE NO: CUP 99-03KDP 99-06
CASE NAME: INNS OF AMERICA .,
PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 14; 1999 -
MICHAEL J. HtiZ&LER
Planning Director
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 l (760) 438-l 161 l FAX (760) 438-0894
-
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II ’
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: CUP 99-03KDP 99-06
DATE: 1 O/6/99
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Inns of America
2. APPLICANT: Her-rick Develonment.
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 755 Raintree Drive, Suite 200. Carlsbad,
CA - (760) 43 1-6661
4. DATE EL4 FORM PART I SUBMITTED: Februarv 10.1999
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Business hotel consisting of 98 units.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
q Land Use and Planning
0 Population and Housing
q Geological Problems
q Water
q Air Quality ’
IXI Transportation/Circulation
q Biological Resources
Cl Energy & Mineral Resources
cl Hazards
u Noise
L-J Public Services
El Utilities & Service Systems *
cl Aesthetics
El Cultural Resources
cl Recreation
cl Mandatory Findings of Significance
Rev. 03/28/96
- -
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
lxl
q
cl
0
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE . DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant effect 1) has been gdequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on .attached sheets. A Negati,ve
Declaration is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects have been analyzed adequately in an earlier environmental review,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
Planner Signature Date
.
IOl0k
Planning Directo&&naku#e Date
Rev. 03/28/96
L
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human
factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to
use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
l A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each
question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A
“No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
0 “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted
general standards and policies.
l “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level.
l “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant.
l Based on an “EIA-Part II”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
effect on the environment, but &l potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon
. the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
l When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of
Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
l A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
3 Rev. 03/28/96
l If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this
case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated”
may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
l An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has
not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and
the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than
significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant impact has
not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not
reduce the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not
possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant
effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the
form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined
significant.
Rev. 03128196
-
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially
Source #l: EIR for General Plan Update 1994 (MEIR 93-01) Significant
Source #2: Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 Impact
I.
4
b)
c)
4
e>
II.
4
b)
c)
III.
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
6)
h)
i)
IV.
a)
b)
cl
LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18)
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18)
Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
(#l:Pgs,5.6-1 - 5.6-18)
Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g.
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses? (#l:Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-18)
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? (#l :Pgs 5.6-l - 5.6-)
POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l :5.5-)
Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l -
5.5-6)
Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6)
GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result
in or expose people to potential impacts involving:
Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l - 5.1-15)
Seismic ground shaking? (#l :Pgs 5.1- 1 - 5.1- 15)
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (#l:Pgs
5.1-l - 5.1.15)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#1 :Pgs 5. l-l -
5.1-15)
Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l - 5.1-15)
Erosion, changes in’ topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs
5.1-l - 5.1-15)
Subsidence of the land? (#l :Pgs 5.1- 1 - 5.1- 15)
Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l - 5.1-15)
Unique geologic or physical features? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l -
5.1-15)
WATER. Would the proposal result in:
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff! (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-
11)
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.,2-l 1)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
q
q
cl
El
q
q
0
q
q q q
q
q q
q q q
q
q
0
Potentially
Significant Unless
Mitigation Incorporated
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q q q
q
q q
q q q
q
q
q
Less Than Significant Impact
0
q
0
q
q
q
q
q
q q q I El
q q
q q q
q
El
q
h0
Impact
lxl
lxl
lxl
,w
[XI
El
[XI
lzl
ta-
lxl
El
Ix1
lxl
Ix]
151
El
lxl
LSI
lxl
lxl
5 Rev. 03128196
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Source #l: EIR for General Plan Update 1994 (MEIR 93-01)
Source #2: Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3
4
e)
f,
8)
V
0
V.
a>
b)
cl
4
VI.
a)
b)
c)
4
e)
f-l
8)
VII.
4
b)
c)
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
(#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-
11) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs
5.2-l - 5..2-11)
Potentially Significant
Unless Mitigation
incorporated q
q
q
lxl
El
txl
El
lxl
lxl
AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3-
1 - 5.3-12)
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l
- 5.3-12)
Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result in:
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs
5.7-l - 5.7.22)
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22) .
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l -
5.7.22)
q
lxl
l.xl
lxl
0’
Ix]
lxl
IXI
(XI
Ix]
lxl
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal
result in impacts to:
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? (#l :Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24)
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
(#l:Pgs 5:4-l - 5.4-24)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24)
q
q
q
q
q
q
IXI
0
q
q
lxl
q
q
q
q
q
0
LJ
q
q
q
0
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
Tl
q
q
0
El
q
q
q
q
q
cl
q
q
q
cl
q
q
q
q
q
cl
q
6 Rev. 03128196
Potentially
Significanl
Impact
Less Than Significant
Impact
X0 Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Source #l: EIR for General Plan Update 1994 (MEIR 93-01)
Source #2: Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3
4
e)
VIII.
a>
b)
cl
IX.
4
b)
c)
4
e)
X.
A)
b)
XI.
4
.b)
c)
d)
e)
XII.
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
(#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24)
Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l
- 5.4-24)
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans?
(#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 & 5.13-I - 5.13-9)
Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -5.12.1-5 & 5.13-
1 - 5.13-9)
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-I - 5.12.1-5
& 5.13-l - 5.13-9)
HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l -
5.10.1-5)
Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l -
5.10.1-5)
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-I - 5.10.1-5)
Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
Increases in existing noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-l - 5.9-
15) Exposure of people.to severe noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-
1 - 5.9-15)
PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any of the following areas:
Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6)
Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.6-l - 5.12.6-4)
Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5)
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (1,
Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7)
Other governmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -
5.12.8-7)
UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
7
Potentially Significant
Impact
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
0,
q
q
q
q
q q q q
q
Potentially
Significant
Unless Mitigation
Incorporated q
q
q
El
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q q q q
q
Less Than Slgniticanl
Impact
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
0
q q 0 q
q
X0 impact
El
lxl
lxl
lxl
Ix)
lxl
Ix]
Ix1
El
lzl-
IXI
lxl
Ix1
IXI
IXI
El
El
Rev. 03128196
-
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Source #l: EIR for General Plan Update 1994 (MEIR 93-01)
Source #2: Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3
4
b)
cl
d)
e)
f)
8)
XIII.
a)
b)
cl
XIV.
4
b)
cl
4
e)
xv.
a)
b)
XVI.
4
Power or natural gas? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5 &
5.13-l - 5.13-9)
Communications systems? (#l; Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-
7) Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 - 5.12.3-7)
Sewer or septic tanks? (#l:Pgs 5.12.3-1 - 5.12.3-7)
Storm water drainage? (#l:Pg 5.2-8)
Solid waste disposal? (#l:Pgs 5.12.4-1 - 5.12.4-3)
Local or regional water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.12.2-1 -
5.12.3-7)
AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? (#l:Pgs
5.1171 - 5.11-5)
Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? (#l:Pgs
5.1 l-l - 5.11-5)
Create light or glare? (#l:Pgs 5.11-l - 5.1 l-5)
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Disturb paleontological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-
10) Disturb archaeological resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-
10) Affect historical resources? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10)
Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? (#l:Pgs
5.8-l - 5.8-10)
Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? (#l:Pgs 5.8-l - 5.8-10)
RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
Increase the demand, for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-l -
5.12.8-7,)
Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#l :Pgs
5.12.8-I - 5.12.8-7)
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
q
q
q
q q q q
0’
q
q
q
q
q ’ q
q
q
q
q
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation Incorporated q
q
q
q q q q
q
q
q
q
q
q q
q
q
q
q
Less Than Significant
Impact
q
q
q
q q q q
LJ
q
q
q
q
q q
q
q
q
q
TV0 lmpacr
IXI
lzl
[XI
El
El
Ix]
Ix1
lxl
ISI,
lxl
IXI
lzl
Ix1
lxl
Ix]
txl
Ix]
Ix]
8 Rev. 03128196
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Potentially Less Than Ko
Source #l: EIR for General Plan Update 1994 (MEIR 93-01) Significant Significant Significant Impact
Source #2: Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 Impact Unless Impact
Mitigation Incorporated
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? q q q lxl
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incrementa effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
q q q lxl
Rev. 03128196
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
With the exception of the Master EIR analysis of the General Plan Update of 1994 for
citywide traffic and air quality impacts, no earlier analyses were conducted for this
project although the existing graded pad site is a result of the adjacent industrial office
subdivision and grading This is one of two remaining parcels (with P-M zoning) in the
immediate area.
10 Rev. 03/28/96
DISC1 JSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This project is for the development of a business hotel consisting of 98 units at the southeast
comer of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. The hotel is designed to be a business hotel
featuring amenities for use by business travelers such as a mail center, conference/meeting room ,
of 500 square feet, and in-room telecommunication amenities. The project also includes parking,
landscaping, swimming pool and pedestrian walkways.
The site is a ‘previously graded pad which was done during the mass grading for the adjacent
industrial office subdivision. The uses adjacent to the site are as follows: Cannon Road to the
north; office building to the south; Avenida Encinas to the west; and Interstate 5 to the east. The
area is located within the newly established Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
11 Rev. 03/28/96
-
II. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
B. Environmental Impact Discussion
Land Use and Planning
The site is zoned P-M (Planned Industrial) and a business hotel is an allowed use via the
approval of a conditional use permit. There will be no conflicts with applicable environmental
plans or policies that are under the jurisdiction of any resource or regulatory agency. The site is
pre-graded and disturbed with no habitat or agricultural uses present.
Population and Housing
The project will impact or affect population patterns, projections or affordable housing
provisions.
Geologic Problems
The site if free of any known or documented seismic, or geologic instabilities. No landslides,
faultlines or soils with expansive or unstable properties are found on-site.
Water
The project is designed to meet all applicable Engineering standards regarding drainage and
surface run-off. The development of the existing pad will impact groundwater flow or quality; or
change the flow of surface run-off; or impact public water supplies.
Air Quality
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated
c 1994 General Plan will result in increased gas and electric power consumption and vehicle miles
traveled. These subsequently result in increases in the emission of carbon monoxide, reactive
organic gases, oxides of nitrogen and sulfur,‘ and suspended particulates. These aerosols are the
major contributors to air pollution in the City as ,well as in the San Diego Air Basin. Since the
San Diego Air Basin is a “non-attainment basin”, any additional air emissions are considered
cumulatively significant: therefore, continued development to buildout as proposed in the
updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air quality of the region.
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan buildout, a variety
of mitigation measures are recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include: 1) provisions
for roadway and intersection improvements prior to or concurrent with development; 2)
measures to reduce vehicle trips through the implementation of Congestion and Transportation
Demand Management; 3) provisions to encourage alternative modes of transportation including
mass transit services; 4) conditions to promote energy efficient building and site design; and 5)
participation in regional growth management strategies when adopted. The applicable and
appropriate General Plan air quality mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the
design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Operation-related emissions are considered cumulatively significant because the project is
located within a “non-attainment basin”, therefore, the “Initial Study” checklist is marked
12 Rev. 03/28/96 J!
“Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the
preparation of an EIR is not required because the certification of Final Master EIR 93-O 1, by City
Council Resolution No. 94-246, included a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for air
quality impacts. This “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent
projects covered by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no
further environmental review of air quality impacts is required. This document is available at the
Planning Department.
Transportation/Circulation
The implementation of subsequent projects that are consistent with and included in the updated
1994 General Plan will result in increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate
to accommodate buildout traffic; however, 12 full and 2 partial intersections will be severely
impacted by regional through-traffic over which the City has no jurisdictional control. These
generally include all freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad
Boulevard. Even with the implementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections
are projected to fail the City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildout.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan buildout, numerous
mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include measures
to ensure the provision of circulation facilities concurrent with need; 2) provisions to develop
alternative modes of transportation such as trails, bicycle routes, additional sidewalks, pedestrian
linkages, and commuter rail systems; and 3) participation in regional circulation strategies when
adopted. The diversion of regional through-traffic from a failing Interstate or State Highway
onto City streets creates impacts that are not within the jurisdiction of the City to control. The
applicable and appropriate General Plan circulation mitigation measures have either been
incorporated into the design of the project or are included as conditions of project approval.
Regional related circulation impacts are considered cumulatively significant because of the
failure of intersections at buildout of the General Plan due to regional through-traffic, therefore;
the “Initial Study” checklist is marked “Potentially Significant Impact”. This project is
consistent with the General Plan, therefore, the preparation of an EIR is not required because the
recent certification of Final Master.EIR 93-01, by City Council Resolution No. 94-246, included
a “Statement Of Overriding Considerations” for circulation impacts. This “Statement Of
Overriding Considerations” applies to all subsequent projects covered by the General Plan’s
Master EIR, including this project, therefore, no further environmental review of circulation
impacts is required.
Biological Resources
The disturbed, previously graded site supports no significant habitats for sensitive plants or
animals. The proposed project will not impact biological resources.
Energy
The use and loss of mineral resources is not associated with this project; neither is the use of non-
renewable resources. Typical energy resources would be required for project construction.
13 Rev. 03/28/96
-
Hazards
The proposed business hotel will not increase the degree of risk resulting from an explosion or
releases of hazardous substances. Emergency and evacuation plans wiIl not be impacted by the
project and no new fire hazards vvill result. Engineering and Fire Department of the project has
ensured that typical safety features and provisions are designed into the project.
Noise
The business hotel will not create new sources of noise in the area. Freeway noise will impact .
the east elevation of the hotel but no noise standards will be violated. In addition, standard
building code compliance will reduce freeway noise to insignificance for the hotel guests inside
the guest rooms.
Public Services/Utilities and Services Systems
All public and utility systems necessary for the long term operation of the proposed business
hotel will. be available and supplied. This project will not impact the ability to deliver these
services.
Aesthetics
The project will not negatively impact the scenic qualities of Interstate 5 or Cannon Road. The
project has been designed architecturally to be visually pleasing without the creation of light or
glare.
Cultural Resources
The pre-graded pad does not contain any cultural resources.
Recreation
The pre-graded pad does not contain any recreational resources or opportunities.
14 23 Rev. 03/28/96
III. EARLIER ANALYSES USED
The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of
Carlsbad Planning Department located at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California, 92009,
(760) 438-l 161, extension 4447.
1. Final Master Environmental Imnact Renort for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update
(MEIR 93-Ol), dated March 1994, City of Carlsbad Planning Department.
2. Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 per the City’s Growth Management
Program, dated May 19, 1987, City of Carlsbad. Planning Department.
l5 d4 Rev. 03/28/96
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICiBLE)
none
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
none
16 Rev. 03/28/96
--
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND
CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
17 Rev. 03128196
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. 4678
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL. OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO DEVELOP
A 98 UNIT BUSINESS HOTEL ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CANNON
ROAD AND AVENIDA ENCINAS, WITHIN THE CITY’S
COASTAL ZONE, THE COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE AND I-N LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 3.
CASE NAME: INNS OF AMERICA
CASE NO.: CUP 99-03
WHEREAS, Herrick Development, Inc., “Developer”, has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Ray and Barbara Winter,
“Owner”, described as
A portion of Lot H per Map 823, Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, as
recorded in the Office of the County Recorder, San Diego
County, State of California on May 1,1915. APN: 210-090-52
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Conditio’nal Use
Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “A “-“K” dated November 17, 1999, on file in the Carlsbad
Planning Department, INNS OF AMERICA, CUP 99-03, as provided by Chapter 2 1.42 and/or
2 1.50 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 17th day of November, 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 CUP.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of INNS OF AMERICA - CUP 99-03, based
on the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinw:
1 Conditional Use Permit Findings
I 1. That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is
essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and
is not detrimental to existing uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the
proposed use is located, in that the proposed business hotel is designed for use by
business visitors to the city and the adjacent industrial office zoning districts. The
use will not be detrimental to the existing office uses or future permitted uses of the
P-M zone in which the proposed use is located because development standards are
similar and the site has been designed to adequately handle the operations of a
business hotel. The project is consistent with the General Plan, and the underlying
P-M zone, by supplying a commercial use within the planned industrial zoning
district to serve the needs of the industrial office users and business visitors to the
city.
2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, in
that the site design and other elements of .the project have been designed in
compliance with all applicable development standards, including required parking
setbacks and business hotel amenities.
3. That all the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to
adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be
provided and maintained, in that the project has been designed, and is conditioned to
maintain over time, various features of the project including. setbacks, perimeter
landscaping, parking lot landscaping and screen walls. These features will help the
project maintain compatibility with adjacent sites.
4. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic
generated by the proposed use, in that the proposed trip generation caused by this
project of approximately 980 average daily trips can be accommodated by the
adjacent Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas street systems. The design capacities
for Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas are 20,000-40,000 ADT and lO,OOO-20,200O
ADT, respectively. The most recent traffic counts at the Cannon Road/Avenida
Encinas intersection is approximately 11,500 ADT. Which is within the capacity
range.
Commercial/Visitor-Serving; Overlay Zone Findings
5. 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, in that the proposed business
PC RESO NO. 4678 -2- 618
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
hotel will be able to accommodate future overnight visitors to the area. In addition,
the project has a shuttle bus circulation path designed into the front entrance with a
Porte cochere; and a shuttle bus service will be available to hotel guests.
6. 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, in that the proposed
architectural style is a version of contemporary southwest architecture which is a
supported architectural style within the overlay zone. The clay colored mission style
barrel roofing, white walls with off-white @and pebble”) accent bands compliment
each other in this architectural style. The building features interior hallways so that
exterior elevations do not contain outdoor hallways leading to individual rooms.
The quality of the proposed architecture is further enhanced by the ten foot
architectural projection that peaks at 45 feet in the form of two architectural towers
with peaked roofs and mission style roofing.
7. That the project complies with all development and design criteria of the overlay zone, in
that that the business hotel complies with all standards including the parking
standards which require parking spaces based on the number of rooms, as well as
on the size of the business meeting room which is an amenity that assists this project
in qualifying as a business hotel in the context of the P-M zoning district. In
addition, building setbacks off Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas exceed the
setbacks required by the overlay zone because the underlying P-M zoning standards
requires the 50 foot setback off both streets. All other standards and criteria are
either met or exceeded, including signs and landscaping; most notably, the ratios of
larger sized landscaping trees exceed minimum requirements of the overlay zone.
8. 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, in
that the business hotel has amenities designed into it that specifically cater to
business visitors: a 500 square foot meeting room with audio-visual capabilities; a
24 hour mail center with overnight mail service; a business center with computers, a
printer, work space, a copy machine and a fax machine; an exercise room, and; on-
line computer capabilities for business applications in every room. In addition, four
rooms will have a conference table inside, all rooms will have business/desk
furniture, and a shuttle bus service will be in place for use by guests. The location of
the project site at the northern end of a P-M zoning district will enable the use to
serve the adjacent P-M zone as well as other industrial office parks in the vicinity.
9. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed
to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the
degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
PC RESO NO. 4678 -3- 29
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
- -
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to building
permit issuance.
1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their tern-is, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of
this Conditional Use Permit.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the CUP 99-03 documents, as necessary to make them internally
consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall
occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
3. Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project
are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section
66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid
unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with
all requirements of law.
5. The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and
hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims
and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising, directly
or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Conditional Use Permit, (b)
City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-
discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c)
Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby,
including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the
facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions.
6. The Developer shall submit to Planning Director a reproducible 24” x 36”, mylar copy
of the Site Plan reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body.
7. Developer shall provide proof to the Director from the affected school district that this
project has satisfied its obligation to provide school facilities.
PC PESO NO. 4678 -4- 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
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required
as part of the Zone 3 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing
water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that
adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the
time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and
facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy.
A. This Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Director on a
yearly basis to determine if all conditions of this permit have been met and that
the use does not have a substantial negative effect on surrounding properties or
the public health and welfare. If the Planning Director determines that the use has
such substantial negative effects, the Planning Director shall recommend that the
Planning Commission, after providing the permittee the opportunity to be heard,
add additional conditions to reduce or eliminate the substantial negative effects.
B. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of ten years. This permit may
be revoked at any time after a public hearing, if it is found that the use has a
substantial detrimental effect on surrounding land uses and the public’s health and
welfare, or the conditions imposed herein have not been met. This permit may be
extended for a reasonable period of time not to exceed ten years upon written
application of the permittee made no less than 90 days prior to the expiration date.
The Planning Commission may not grant such extension, unless it finds that there
are no substantial negative effects on surrounding land uses or the public’s health
and welfare. If a substantial negative effect on surrounding land uses or the
public’s health and welfare is found, the extension shall be denied or granted with
conditions which will eliminate or substantially reduce such effects. There is no
limit to the number of extensions the Planning Commission may grant.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of Coastal Development Permit, CDP
99-06, and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution
No. 4679 for those other approvals.
If a grading permit is required, all grading activities shall be planned in units that can be
completed by October 1st. Grading activities shall be limited to the “dry season”, April
1 st to October 1st of each year. Grading activities may be extended to November 15th
upon written approval of the City Engineer and only if all erosion control measures are in
place by October 1st.
The Developer is aware that the City is preparing a non-residential housing impact fee
(linkage fee) consistent with Program 4.1 of the Housing Element. The applicant is
further aware that the City may determine that certain non-residential projects may have
to pay a linkage fee, in order to be found consistent with the Housing Element of the
General Plan. If a linkage fee is established by City Council ordinance and/or resolution
and this project becomes subject to a linkage fee pursuant to said ordinance and/or
resolution, then the Developer, or his/her/their successor(s) in interest shall pay the
linkage fee. The linkage fee shall be paid at the time of issuance of building permits,
PC PESO NO. 4678 -5- 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
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
except for projects involving a request for a non-residential planned development for an
existing development, in which case, the fee shall be paid on approval of the final map,
parcel map or certificate of compliance, required to process the non-residential PUD,
whichever pertains. If linkage fees are required for this project, and they are not paid, this
project will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will
become null and void.
The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape
and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan
(Exhibit “J”, dated November 17, 1999) and the City’s Landscape Manual. The
Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved Final
Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds,
trash, and debris. The precise landscaping and planting around the screen walls and
emergency turn-around area just south of the Cannon RoadlAvenida Encinas
intersection on the west side. of the site, shall be reviewed by the City’s Landscape
Architect, Planning Department staff and the applicant as part of the Final
Landscape Plan required prior to building permit issuance.
The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the
landscape plan check process on file in the Planning Department and accompanied by the
project’s building, improvement, and grading plans.
The Developer shall provide bus stops to service this development at locations and with
reasonable facilities to the satisfaction of the North County Transit District and the
Planning Director. Said facilities, if required, shall be free from advertising and shall
include at a minimum include a bench and a pole for the bus stop sign. The facilities
shall be designed to enhance or be consistent with basic architectural theme of the
project.
The Developer shall report, in writing, to the Planning Director within 30 days, any
.address change from that which is shown on the permit application.
Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the
County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the Planning Director, notifying all
interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a
Conditional Use Permit by Resolution No. 4678 on the real property owned by the
Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the
file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any
conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The
Planning Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice
which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer
or successor in interest.
The Developer shall construct trash receptacle and recycling areas enclosed by a six-foot
high masonry wall with gates pursuant to City Engineering Standards and Carlsbad
Municipal Code Chapter 21.105. Location of said receptacles shall be in substantial
conformance with the project’s Exhibits. Enclosure shall be of similar colors and/or
materials to the project to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
PC RESO NO. 4678 3J
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
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
The Developer shall pay its fair share for the “short-term improvements” to the El
Camino Real/Palomar Airport Road intersection prior to the issuance of a building
permit. The amount shall be determined by the methodology ultimately selected by
Council, including but not limited to, an increase in the city-wide traffic impact fee; an
increased or new Zone 3 LFMP fee; the creation of a fee or assessment district; or
incorporation into a Mello-Roos taxing district.
No outdoor storage of materials shall occur onsite unless required by the Fire Chief. If so
required by the Fire Chief, the Developer shall submit and obtain approval of the Fire
Chief and the Planning Director of an Outdoor Storage Plan, and thereafter comply with
the approved plan.
The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of an exterior lighting
plan including parking areas. All lighting shall be designed to reflect downward and
avoid any impacts on adjacent properties.
The swimming pool equipment enclosure area shall be designed to the minimum
height necessary to perform its function, with roofing and appropriate architectural
treatments, to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
The applicant shall replace or repair the Turfstone feature if damaged or otherwise
unsuitable for the driving of fire trucks, as determined by the Planning Director or
Fire Marshal.
Enpineerinp Conditions
25.
26.
Developer shall comply with the requirements of the City’s anti-graffiti program for wall
treatments if and when such a program is formerly established by the City. *
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site
within this project, Developer shall submit to and receive approval from the City
Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and
requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation.
27. Developer shall prepare, obtain City Engineer approval and record onsite and
offsite reciprocal access easements for access for shared driveway to Avenida
Encinas as shown on the preliminary grading plans involving the adjacent property
owner.
Fees/Aueements
28.
29.
The owner shall execute a hold harmless agreement for geologic failure.
Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, the owner shall give
written, consent to the annexation of the tiea shown within the boundaries of the
subdivision plan into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping
District No. 1 on a form provided by the City Engineer and approved by the City
Attorney.
PC RESO NO. 4678 -7- 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
-.
Grading
30. No grading for private improvements shall occur outside the limits of the project unless a
grading or slope easement or agreement is obtained from the owners of the affected
properties and recorded. If Developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement,
or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case Developer must either amend
the site plan or modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the project site in a
manner which substantially conforms to the approved site plan, as determined by the City
Engineer and Planning Director.
Dedications/Imnrovements
31. Developer shall cause Owner to waive direct access rights for the project frontage with
Avenida Encinas and Cannon Road by separate deed document recorded prior to
building permit issuance. The waiver of access shall not apply to the approved access
as shown on the approved site plan. Said waiver shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
32. Developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provide best management
practices as referenced in the “California Storm Water Best Management Practices
Handbook” to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to
sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer.
Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants of
the following:
A. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with
established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and
hazardous waste products.
B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil,
antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such
fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain
or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fimgicides,
herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet
Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective
containers.
C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants
when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements.
33. Plans, specifications, and supporting documents for all public improvements shall be
prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In accordance with City Standards, the
developer shall install, or agree to install and secure with appropriate security as provided
by law, improvements shown on the site plan and the following improvements:
A. Install full-width median improvements on Avenida Encinas, together with a
left-turn pocket to serve the development. The improvements shall include
signing and striping plans.
PC PESO NO. 4678 -8- 3L/
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 list of the above improvements shall be constructed or secured by an improvement
agreement to the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit.
34. Prior to occupancy of any buildings, Developer shall install wheelchair ramps at the
public street comers abutting the project site in conformance with City of Carlsbad
Standards.
35. The structural section for the access aisles must be designed with a traffic index of 5.0 in
accordance with City Standards due to truck access through the parking area and/or aisles
with an ADT greater than 500. The structural pavement design of the aisle ways shall be
submitted together with required R-value soil test information and approved by the City
Engineer as part of the building site plan review.
Fire Conditions
36. Developer shall provide a total of two additional on-site fire hydrants, located
generally at the North and South ends of the development. Developer shall consult
with the Fire Department to determine exact locations prior to building permit
issuance.
Water Conditions
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
The following note shall be placed on the cover sheet of project exhibits; “This project is
approved upon the expressed condition that building permits will not be issued for
development of the subject property unless the District serving the development has
adequate water and sewer capacity available at the time development is to occur, and that
such water and sewer capacity will continue to be available until time of occupancy.”
Water, Sewer and Irrigation laterals shall be located in accordance with City and District
Standards to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities.
All water and sewer improvements shall be designed and constructed substantially as
shown on the Preliminary Grading Plan in accordance with all City and District Standards
to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities.
All District pipelines and appurtenances required for this project by the District shall be
within public right of way or within easements granted to the District or the City of
Carlsbad.
All potable water and recycled water meters shall be placed within public right of way.
Developer shall construct and dedicate to the District a public fire flow system for
this development, and it shall be constructed as a looped pipeline system (a
minimum of two connections to existing water mains).
The Developer/Owner and Developer/Owner’s Engineer is responsible for meeting with
the District’s representative and obtaining preliminary “layout” approval on the required
public pipelines required. This includes the “looped” on-site water pipeline system,
PC RESO NO. 4678 -9- 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
sewer lateral(s), water and irrigation meter locations and fire detector check valve/fire
department connection location. These water facilities may have significant cost impacts,
the magnitude of the financial impact is usually best sorted out during the financing
process.
Code Reminders
The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to
the following:
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to
prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance
with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer,
The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which will be
collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The San Diego
County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of application for
any meter installation.
Developer shall pay the citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City Council Policy
#17, the License Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section
5.09.030, and CFD #l special tax (if applicable), subject to any credits authorized by
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable
Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone 3, pursuant to Chapter 21.90. All such
taxes/fees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If the taxes/fees and not paid, this
approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall become void.
The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section
20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
This approval shall .become null and void if building permits are not issued for this
project within 24 months from the date of project approval.
Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of the
Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building
permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
The project shall comply with the latest non-residential disabled access requirements
pursuant to Title 24 of the State Building Code.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and
concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, in
substance as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the
Directors of Community Development and Planning.
Addresses, approved by the Building Official, shall be placed on all new and existing
buildings so as to be plainly visible from the street or access road; color of identification
and/or addresses shall contrast to their background color, as required by Carlsbad
Municipal Code Section 18.04.320.
PC PESO NO. 4678 -lO- 36
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
Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum ‘be designed in conformance
with the City’s Sign Ordinance and this project’s allowed signage as shown on Exhibit
“K”, and shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation
of such signs.
NOTICE .
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
I . . .
. . .
PC RESO NO. 4678 -ll- 37
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 of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day of November, 1999, by
II
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairpersdn Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons
NOES:
I/
ABSENT:
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
PC RESO NO. 4678 -12- 38
-_
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4679
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CDP 99-
06 TO DEVELOP A 98 UNIT BUSINESS HOTEL ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF CANNON ROAD AND AVENIDA ENCINAS,
WITHIN THE CITY’S COASTAL ZONE, THE COM-
MERCIALMSITOR~SERVING OVERLAY ZONE AND IN
LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 3.
CASE NAME: INNS OF AMERICA
CASE NO.: CDP 99-06
9
10
WHEREAS, Herrick ‘Development, Inc., “Developer”, has filed a verified
11
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Ray and Barbara Winter,
“Owner”, described as
A portion of Lot H per Map 823, Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, as
recorded in the Office of the County Recorder, San Diego
County, State of California on May 1,1915. APN: 210-090-52
17
18
19
20
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a *Coastal
“ Development Permit as shown on Exhibits A “-“KY’ dated November 17, 1999,0n tile in the
Planning Department, INNS OF AMERICA, CDP 99-06, as provided by Chapter 21.201.040 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
21 .
22
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 17th day of November 1999,
23
24
25
26
,27
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 CDP.
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of INNS OF AMERICA, CDP 99-06,. based on
the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. That the proposed development is in conformance with the Certified Local Coastal
Program and all applicable policies in that the proposed business hotel is a
conditionally allowed use for the Planned Industrial designated property per the
LCP designation. Specific LCP overlay zones do not apply. The provision of hotel
or motel rooms in the coastal zone is supported in general terms by the LCP and
Policy 6-5 which cites the need to provide additional visitor-serving rooms into the
area.
2. The proposal is in conformity with the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3
of the Coastal Act in that the project is not located adjacent to the ocean shoreline or
a coastal lagoon. Therefore, the project will not interfere with the public’s right to
physical access to the sea or a lagoon: and the site is not suited for any form of
water-oriented recreational activity.
3. Since this project is also located in the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone,
the findings contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 4678 for CUP 99-03
regarding the Overlay Zone’s required findings are hereby incorporated by
reference. Likewise, the Environmental Finding contained in the Resolution No.
4678 is hereby incorporated by reference. ’
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to building
permit.
1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further condition issuance of all
future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to
compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No
vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of
this Coastal Development Permit.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the CDP 99-06 documents, as necessary to make them internally
consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall
occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development
different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
PC PESO NO. 4679 -2- m
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.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
ordinances in effect ,at the time of building permit issuance.
If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project
are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section
66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid
unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with
all requirements of law.
The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and
hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims
and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising, directly
or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Coastal Development Permit,
(b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-
discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c)
Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby,
including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the
facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of CUP 99-03 and is subject to all
conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 4678 for those other
approvals
The applicant shall apply for and be issued building permits for this project within two
(2) years of approval or this coastal development permit will expire unless extended per
Section 2 1.201.2 10 of the Zoning Ordinance.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exaetions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PC RESO NO. 4679 -3- 40
1
2
3
4
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 of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 17th day of November, 1999, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Segall, Trigas, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
COURTNEY E. HEINEMAN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
PC RESO NO. 4679 -4- 4a
-
The City of Carlsbad Planning Department EXHIBIT 4
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 6 0
Application complete date: October 12, 1999
P.C. AGENDA OF: November 17,1999 Project Planner: Eric Munoz
Project Engineer: Bob Wojcik
SUBJECT: CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06 - INNS OF AMERICA - Request for a Conditional Use
Permit and Coastal Development Permit to develop a business hotel consisting of
98 rooms at the southeast comer of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas, west of
Interstate 5 on property designated as Planned Industrial (PI) on the General Plan,
within the City’s Coastal Zone, Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and the
recently established Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planing Commission Resolutions No. 4677, 4678 and
4679, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration, the Conditional Use
Permit (CUP 99-03) and the Coastal Development Permit (CDP 99-06), respectively, based on
the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The proposed business hotel is located on property zoned P-M (Planned Industrial). The P-M
zone allows certain commercial uses which cater to, and are ancillary to, the allowed uses of the
zone. Therefore, the business hotel is proposed as a use that is designed to cater to the adjacent
industrial office areas. The P-M zoning extends south from the site along both sides of Avenida
Encinas towards Palomar Airport Road. The design and amenities of the hotel are intended to
accommodate business travelers to the city. Aside from compliance with the P-M zone, the
project is subject to the CommercitiWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
A pre-graded pad of 2.7 acres at the southeast comer of Avenida Encinas and Cannon Road is the
proposed location for the business hotel consisting of: 98 units with a combination of suites and
studios ranging in size from 356 to 750 square feet; a swimming pool and spa; an exercise room,
a 24 hour business center with a fax machine, copy machine, two computer terminals, a printer,
work space and overnight mail service; a 500 square foot meeting room for business conferences
with audio-visual capabilities; shuttle van service; on-line capabilities for business applications
within every room; 123 parking spaces, and project landscaping. Project exhibits “A)‘-%” dated
November 17, 1999 depict the project with site, floor, elevation, landscaping and grading plans.
As a business hotel located within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving ,Overlay Zone, the project is
subject to most of the requirements of Chapter 21.208 of the municipal code. The proposed
architectural style is contemporary southwest with mission style barrel rooting, “Navajo white”
CUP 99-03KDP 99-06 - IlWS OF AMERICA
November 17,1999
Page 2
walls and “sand pebble” trim and accent band finishes. A 35 foot high building is proposed with
a tower element that peaks at 45 feet. All applicable development standards and processes of the
underlying P-M zone, and the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone, are complied with.
IV. ANALYSIS
The project is subject to:
1. Conditional Uses of the P-M Zone and Conditional Use Permit Findings
2. Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone
3. Mello II Local Coastal Program
Conditional Uses of the P-M Zone
Pursuant to Section 21.34.030(2), motels and hotels are allowed in the P-M zone through the
approval of a conditional use permit. The business traveler amenities contained in the hotel and
individual rooms qualify this project as a conditionally allowed commercial use designed to cater
to the adjacent and nearby industrial office zoning districts. In addition, all applicable P-M zone
development standards are complied with including a 50 foot building setback from Cannon
Road and Avenida Encinas.
The four standard conditional use permit findings required for all conditional use permits are in
attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 4678 and briefly summarized below.
The proposed business hotel is desirable for the development of the community by providing
lodging for the business visitors and clients of the city’s industrial/office zoning districts. The
site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use and related site design in
compliance with all applicable standards. All setback areas, screen walls, landscaping and other
features that are necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or future permitted uses are
designed into the project and will be conditioned to be maintained over time in keeping with the
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone. The project trip generation of 980 average daily
trips can be serviced by the existing street systems of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas.
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlav Zone
The proposed business hotel use is allowed and regulated by the underlying zoning designation
of P-M (Planned Industrial) via the approval of a conditional use permit. In addition, the
business hotel use is a commercial use, located within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay
Zone (Chapter 21.208), therefore, compliance with the Overlay Zone is necessary. The project
has complied with procedural aspects of the Overlay Zone such, as the pre-filing process and
project site notification. The findings required by the Overlay Zone are contained in the attached
Planning Commission Resolution No. 4678. Compliance with the Overlay Zone’s development
standards are summarized in the table below.
-
CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06 - INNS OF AMERICA
November 17,1999
Paee 3
COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY TABLE
STANDARD
PARKING
.
SIGNS
BUILDING HEIGHT
BUILDING SETBACKS
BLDG. MATERIALWOLORS
ARCHITECTLJRAL STYLE
LANDSCAPING
SEPARATION STANDARDS
OVERLAY ZONE STANDARD PROJECT COMPLIANCE
. 1.2 spaces per unit l 98 units at 1.2 = 117.6 spaces
l Park other uses individually . 500 SF Meeting room at l/100
l Shuttle bus provisions = 5 spaces
l Total required/provided = 123
spaces
l Shuttle bus circulation and
passenger pick-up & drop off designed into project/entrance
l Comer lot allowance based on l Signage allowed = 322 SF
.90 SF of sign per combined l Signage proposed = 178 SF street frontages l Maximum freestanding sign
l Freestanding sign maximum height is 6 feet height is 6 feet
PM zone allows 35 foot high 35 foot high building proposed with
buildings with 10 feet of a 10 foot high architectural tower architectural projection allowed element
l 50 feet off Cannon Road and l 50 foot setback provided for
Avenida Encinas per underlying Cannon Road & Ave. Encinas
P-M zone l 30 foot freeway setback
l 30 foot freeway setback provided with allowed
. 10 foot interior setback improvements proposed
l Certain allowances for back . 10 foot interior setback
portions of building setbacks provided entirely landscaped
. High quality materials . Mission tile barrel roofing
l Primary colors cannot dominate l “Sand Pebble” trim/accent
building bands . “Navajo White” wall color
Village Architecture, Contemporary Proposed architecture is a version of
Southwest or Alternative Style (if the Contemporary Southwest
supported via pre-tiling process) architectural style
l Freestanding sign landscaping l Freestanding sign landscaping
0 Parking lot trees at 1 tree per six complies with Overlay Zone
spaces w/minimum of 50% at l Parking Lot Trees: 21 required;
24 inch box sizes 2 1 provided at 100% 24 inch
l Setback trees at 1 tree per 1000 box sizes
SF of calculated setback area l Setback Trees: 27 required; 38
w/minimum of 50% at 24 inch provided at 76% 24 inch box
box sizes sizes
l Screening of parking spaces, l Screen walls provided to screen
trash enclosures, etc. parked cars along the Cannon
Road frontage; trash enclosure not prominently visible from
adjacent public streets
Only applies to gas stations; and to Does not apply to this project since hotels/motels proposed for the underlying zoning is P-M and a commercially designated properties business hotel is proposed
Mello II Local Coastal Promam
The site is located within the Mello II segment of the City’s Local Coastal Program. Coastal
policies regarding coastal access, shoreline development and/or steep slope criteria are not
4=3--
CUP 99-03KDP 99-06 - INNS OF AMERICA
November 17,1999
applicable. In addition, the regulations of the various coastal overlay zones as contained in the
Mello II LCP segment do not apply to this project. There will be no adverse impacts to coastal
resources or policies from the development of the proposed business hotel. One policy of the
Mello II LCP (Policy 6-5) cites the need to provide visitor serving uses including 200 additional
hotel/motel rooms. Business hotel clients can be considered visitors to the city; and the Mello II
LCP defines visitor serving uses to include hotels and motels. Therefore, the proposed project is
consistent with, and supported by, existing coastal zone/LCP policies.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The business hotel proposed for the pre-graded 2.7 acre project site will not create any
significant, adverse impacts to the environment. With regards to the citywide traffic impact
resulting from the intersection of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real, the project is
conditioned to contribute to mitigation efforts consistent with the current conditioning of
development projects citywide. The applicant has agreed to this condition (Condition #20).
.Accordingly, the Planning Director has issued a Negative Declaration for this project as
published on October 14, 1999. No written comments were received during the public comment
period.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4677 (Neg. Dec.)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4678 (CUP)
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4679 (CDP)
4. Location Map
5. Disclosure Form
6. Background Data Sheet
7. Local Facilities Impact Form
8. Reduced Exhibits “A’‘-“K”, dated November 17, 1999
EM:eh
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all
applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City
Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee.
The following information must be disclosed:
1. APPLICANT
List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the
application.
Herrick DeveloPment, Inc,
755 Raintree drive, Ste. 200
Carlsbad. CA 92009
2. OWNER
List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the
property involved.
Cannon Road, LLC Ray W. Winter- Co-Manager
1745 Rockv Road Barbarja Winter - Co-Manaqer
Fullerton, CA 92831-1233
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership,
list the names and addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares
in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership.
4. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a
trust, list the names and addresses of any person serving as officer or director of
the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the trust.
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad. CA 92009-l 576 - (67 9) 438-11610 FAX (619) 438-0894 v
@
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO:
CASE NAME:
APPLICANT: HERRICK DEVELOPMENT. INC.
CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06
INNS OF AMERICA
REQUEST AND LOCATION: 98 UNIT BUSINESS HOTEL. SE CORNER OF CANNON
ROAD AND AVENIDA ENCINAS
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Portion of Lot H of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda. Man No. 823
APN: 210-090-52 Acres: 3.0 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: 98 hotel rooms
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: Planned Industrial (PI)
Density Allowed: N/A Density Proposed: N/A
Existing Zone: P-M Proposed Zone: P-M
Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use:
Zoning
Site P-M
General Plan Current Land Use
PI VACANT
North Major Arterial Major Arterial Cannon Road
South P-M PI Office Building
East
West
Transportation, Corridor
Secondary Arterial
Transportation Corridor
Secondary Arterial
I-5 Freeway on-ramp
Avenida Encinas
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 58.8 EDU’S
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: N/A
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
w Negative Declaration, issued October 14, 1999
Ll Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated u Other,
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
-
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: INNS OF AMERICA CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 3 GENERAL PLAN: PI
ZONING: P-M
DEVELOPER’S NAME: Henick Develonment. Inc.
ADDRESS: 755 Raintree Drive. Suite 200. Carlsbad. CA 92009
PHONE NO.: 760-438-6661 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 210-090-52
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 65.763 SO. FT
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: 2001
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = N/A
Library: Demand in Square Footage = N/A
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park: Demand in Acreage = N/A
Drainage: Demand in CFS = 7.3 CFS
Identify Drainage Basin = Agua Hedionda
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADT = 980
(Identity Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = 1 or 4
Open Space: Acreage Provided = N/A
Schools: CUSD
(Demands to be determined by staff)
Sewer: Demands in EDU 58.8 EDU’s
Identify Sub Basin = B
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: Demand in GPD = 12.936
The project is N/A units the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
-
ss E, 1 $ Eg % I
-
I I i 2‘ -\., P
36QQB 6Q
860 86006 ee
II A i I a
i
I
G! B 1 e $4
N ii
d
8’
%i
Ie
I
‘I
;i
ii!
II I a%: II / / I1 I I -- L
,,i /
J i
/ ll
,*/ ‘/ i I:/ / / -/ ;’ 9 .;/ i; // , 1 i 1 ,I I / i
I:
I, . .r. \‘i z , s-3 i .c-.e
3-L) 1
-
0
0
8
I&!
i
0
0
ic
$
3
i
II
,; dir
f %
I i3
i
k 3 rid
-lI
t i
1
41 1
s *
1 ,i’ I ‘: c i-
i ;,;
k-
-
I
!’ s>
4b
I n Y 1 II n
I
/ 3 + p / % II-
ij 0 . ,
Q t 2 3 H
a P i 5I u ii fi
I
I I i
!I @
% a.!
I
A- =I:
I
s
3
*,
EXHlBli 5
6. CUP 99-03/CDP 9906 INNS OF AMERICA - Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to develop a business hotel consisting of 98 rooms at the southeast corner of
Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas, west of Interstate 5 on property designated as Planned industrial (PI) on the General Plan, within the City’s Coastal Zone, Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and the
recently established Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
Mr. Wayne stated that Item ##6 on the agenda was a request for a Conditional Use Permit and a Coastal
Development Permit to construct a business hotel that would be located in the CommercialNisitor Serving Overlay Zone. The Commission’s action to the City Council would be advisory in nature.
PLANNING COMMISSION November 17,1999 Page 17
Senior Planner Eric Munoz presented Item #6 as follows: This is the first project to be processed per the
recently established Commercial Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone. This project involves an Inns of America
Business Hotel at the southeast corner of Avenida Encinas and Cannon Road west of the freeway. The
project involves a 98 unit business hotel with amenities that constitute a business hotel, i.e. meeting rooms and in-room facilities. The project was submitted prior to the Overlay Zone being completed. The
applicant designed the project to be complaint with the Overlay Zone.
Mr. Munoz indicated that the project had two major elements for the Commission’s consideration: 1) It is
located on P-M zoned property. For this project to be recommended for approval by the Planning Commission, the finding of a business hotel needs to be made. 2) Are all element of the project in
compliance with the Overlay Zone? The P-M Zone is designed for employees of the adjacent business
park area and is not intended to be used by the general public. Certain limited commercial uses can be located within the P-M Zone, but require a Conditional Use Permit and the specific finding that the
commercial use is intended for the use of the adjacent working population of the P-M Zone. Therefore with this business hotel, several features have been designed into the hotel to specifically make it qualify
for a business hotel. There are not codified standards in the City that constitutes a business hotel. Staff feels that given the amenities that this project has proposed, this business hotel finding can be made.
These amenities include but are not limited to a common meeting room, in-room facilities, business center and mail service.
Mr. Munoz stated the project did go through the preliminary review process in conjunction with its initial
submittal. Project site notification signs have been placed as part of the Overlay Zone. He referred to the
Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone Compliance Summary Table in the staff report, stating that the applicant had complied with the Overlay Zone standards.
Mr. Munoz advised the Commission that their action was not final, but merely a recommendation action to
the City Council. The Commission is being asked to review a Negative Declaration, the Conditional Use
Permit, and the Coastal Development Permit. He noted that there were no coastal impacts, no coastal
resources nor was access to recreational provisions or coastal resources impacted by this project. He stated that the project did carry the standard condition with regards to Palomar Airport Road and El
Camino Real Mitigation impacts and the applicant has agreed to pay that.
Commissioner L’Heureux wanted clarification on the Overlay Zone’s separation standard.
Mr. Munoz stated that the separation standard within the Overlay Zone was 600 feet between a motel and
another motel or a motel and a hotel. It is also 600 feet between any motel and a residential property line.
The one difference in the standard is when one is dealing with a site larger than 6 acres, there can be up
to two hotels located on the same site if they have a separation standard of 200 feet.
Commissioner Segall stated for the record that he was a member of the Board of the Chamber of Commerce and the Board was asked to review the project. He did, however, excuse himself from the
Chamber of Commerce discussion,
Commissioner Welshons asked if the northern portion of the property was an emergency exit or entrance. She also wanted to know if the project would have a freeway pole sign.
Mr. Munoz stated that it was emergency access and that there will be bollards, which would prohibit
standard access. He indicated that the project did not qualify for a freeway pole sign. Any additional signage for the property or relocation of the proposed signage would be an amendment to the permit
approved by the City Council.
Commissioner Welshons referred to finding #4 in Resolution 4678 and requested clarification on the
direction of the traffic and what the timing was of the Cannon Road improvements.
Mr. Wojcik, stated that the traffic report indicates at in the a.m. peak 3 vehicles will be going west on
Cannon Road and in the p.m. peak 4 vehicles going west on Cannon Road. This represents 5% of the volume of traffic. The design plans for Cannon Road improvements are nearing completion, it should be a matter of months before the contract is advertised for the construction.
PLANNING COMMISSION November 17,1999 Page 18
Commissioner Welshons said that the access to the pool for the guest was difficult and suggested a redesign of that aspect of the project. She also mentioned that there was no public restroom indicated in
the plans at the pool area. Ms. Welshons wanted to know if a fence would be placed around the pool. She questioned the circulation and if proper signage was needed to advise the hotel guests of proper
circulation. She submitted an amendment to the Commission regarding the above mentioned items.
Mr. Wojcik stated that the Building Department would handle the issue of the fencing around the pool.
Commission Trigas asked for clarification on the P-M Zone and if there was a codified definition of a
Business Hotel.
Mr. Munoz responded that there was no definition of Business Hotel and corresponding criteria. In the P- M Zone any commercial uses that receive a Conditional Use Permit have to be designed and intended for
use by the adjacent employees and workers of the P-M Zone.
Commission Trigas asked if a definition of a business hotel was established in other areas of the City.
Mr. Munoz indicated that technically there was no zoning definition for a business hotel in the City.
Chairperson Heineman asked if the applicant would like to make a presentation.
Tim OConnor, President of Inns of America, 755 Raintree Drive, Carlsbad, stated his company has been
in the hospitality business for 25 years and is headquartered in Carlsbad. The project has been specifically designed to meet the needs of the businessperson. It is a limited service business hotel. It
does not have restaurant facilities. The marketing plans call for marketing directly to the Palomar
Business and Industrial Park and the surrounding area. He stated that at their southerly property
approximately 15% of business is corporate. This site is slated for 70% or more of the business coming
from corporate business, therefore the following items are being offered: meeting space, business center,
computers and data ports in the rooms.
Mr. O’Connor stated that the company had not received Any complaints at their other properties related to
pool access via the exercise room. He did indicate that there would be interior signage to direct the traffic flow. He stated that a restroom at the pool area was more in keeping with a resort type hotel. Past
experience indicated that the businessperson used the pool and spa as it was intended. Having an external restroom or changing room is not a necessity for the businessperson. He indicated that a
monument sign would be at the entrance.
Commission Compas asked if children would be staying at the hotel and if no bathroom at the pool was a
problem.
Mr. O’Connor stated the 30% or less of the business would be transient or leisure and therefore children would undoubtedly be a factor, but did not feel that the bathroom in the area of the pool was warranted.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if cooking facilities would be in the rooms and if the 750 square foot room
would be a one-bedroom suite type room.
Mr. O’Connor informed the Commission that the rooms would be equipped with microwaves and small
refrigerator units. He indicated that the 750 square foot room suite would be marketed as an additional area to have meetings or interviews. That room is a single-king bedroom.
Commissioner Trigas asked if the marketing would be solely to business communities.
Mr. O’Connor indicated that in order for the business to be a success, their marketing would be geared
toward the business traveler.
Commissioner Compas wanted to know what the room rate would be.
Mr. O’Connor indicated that the room rate range would start at $90 to $100 per night.
13
_-
PLANNING COMMISSION November 17,1999 Page 19
Commissioner Welshons wanted to know if airport transportation would be provided for guest.
Mr. O’Connor stated that transportation to Palomar Airport was part of the shuttle services circulation
route.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Allan Davis, 5051 Avenida Encinas, Carlsbad, questioned the feasibility of the traffic circulation on site and
the lack of stacking. He stated that what was being proposed was a raised median with a left turn pocket.
There appears to be a lack of stacking from the entrance of the common driveway. He referred to the map on the board and indicated that a car exiting the office building would be in direct conflict with a car
attempting to enter the hotel. He offered the following solution: have a longer stacking distance and come
into a T intersection thus accessing the properties via the mutual driveway. He was also concerned about
the access to the tomato field lot.
Mr. Wojcik explained that the traffic generation for the project was 980 vehicles and that the stacking
space required by the City of Carlsbad is 1 stacking space for every 1,000 ADT or fraction thereof. There is approximately 40 feet of stacking space, which would allow up to 2,000 ADT and does meet the
stacking standards. Increasing the stacking distance would eliminate parking spaces, eliminating parking
would mean eliminating rooms, which would call for the redesigning of the hotel. Because of the setback requirements, there is nowhere on the site to shift the parking to.
Chairperson Heineman requested clarification on the conflicts of the left turn pockets.
Mr. Wojcik stated that there was no left turn pocket conflicts. He stated that access to the vacant (tomato
field) property would be addressed when and if the owner developed the site.
Mr. Davis stated that he felt it was inappropriate for the City to propose mutual driveway access. In
addition, he did not see a true left turn intersection at the mutual access driveway.
Mr. Wojcik stated that if the vacant lot developed, staff would ask the owner to approach the existing property owner to work out reciprocal access. If reciprocal access could not be worked out, then the
property would be limited to right- in/right-out access and would have its own separate driveway.
Ron Rouse, 7310 Alta Vista, Carlsbad, attorney for the property owners. He stated that the property has
been in the Winters family since the 1950’s and the family is quite selective in regards to standards of
development and the impact it would have on the area. This project has been in the planning stage for
two and a half years. Inns of America has designed and made modifications to the project to conform to
the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay, which is very stringent. In addition he stated that there are
approximately 50,000 employees in the Carlsbad Airport Industrial and Office corridor and as a business hotel this project does fit in.
Commissioner Nielsen asked if this project was a land lease or would the Winters’ operate the hotel.
Mr. Rouse stated that the Winters’ were the landlords. He indicated that there was a long-term ground
lease with the Inns of America, which has been in existence for 2 years.
Commissioner Nielsen asked about the proposed gas station for that property.
Mr. Rouse advised the Commission that the gas station never had a lease.
Chairperson Heineman asked if there was additional public testimony. As there was none, public testimony was closed.
Commissioner Welshons moved that the Planning Commission adopt an amendment regarding pool and restroom access.
The motion died for lack of a second.
PLANNlNG COMMISSION November 17,1999 Page 20
Commissioner Welshons moved that the Planning Commission adopt an amendment regarding directional
signage.
The motion died for lack of a second.
Commissioner Segall expressed concerns regarding the ingress and the egress of the property and how
the problem could be resolved.
Commissioner Welshons concurred with Commissioner Segall regarding the ingress and egress. In addition she stated that she was not satisfied with the stacking and felt that the numbers regarding the
otfice building should be available and suggested that a T intersection would help eliminate problems.
Commissioner Trigas asked if a T intersection would take away from parking and would redesign of the project be necessary.
Mr. Wojcik indicated that to increase stacking distance and/or put a T intersection in would be cause for major redesigning of the project.
Mr. O’Connor indicated that the southerly property had multiple access points.
Commissioner Trigas wanted to make a Minute Motion to set up criteria of a business hotel.
Chairperson Heineman explained to Ms. Trigas that it was not in order at this time to make a Minute
Motion of that type.
Commissioner Trigas stated that because there were no criteria in place for a business hotel she did feel
somewhat uncomfortable about the project, but felt that in the whole scheme of things the project was an asset to the City.
Commissioner Segall asked how the traffic flow problem would be mitigated.
Mr. Wayne stated that the office building had two access points, which would redistribute the traffic
volume.
Commissioner Welshons asked if the driveway to the business center could be closed if it is determined that there is a dangerous conflict.
Mr. Wayne said that would have to be researched.
MAIN MOTION: Motion by Commissioner Compas, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolutions 4677, 4678, and
4679 recommending approval of the Negative Declaration, the Conditional Use Permit (CUP 99-03) and the Coastal Development
Permit (CDP 99-06), respectively, based on the findings and subject to
the conditions contained therein, and the errata sheet of November 17,
1999.
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
7-o-o Heineman, Compas, L’Heureux, Segall, Trigas, Welshons, Nielsen None
None
Commission Trigas made a Minute Motion requesting that the Planning Commission ask the City Council to direct Staff to develop a policy that would codify standards for a business hotel.
G 5-
PLANNING COMMISSION November 17,1999 Page21 *
Mr. Wayne called for a discussion on this before a second to the minute motion was forthcoming. Commission Trigas was concerned about abuse issues, as related to hotels installing a few fax machines
to circumvent the qualifying standings of the P-M Zone.
Commissioner L’Heureux stated that the approval of the project in itself, put in the records the standards
of a project such as this.
Mr. Wayne stated that was correct and referred to the Courtyard and the Marriott Residence Inn projects. He suggested that staff research these matters further and report back to the Commission.
Commissioner Trigas asked that Staff research the issues of codifying a business hotel and report back to
the Planning Commission.
.
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE c
January 3,200O
Mayor Bud Lewis
Councilmember Matt Hall
Councilmember Ann Kulchin
Councilmember Julie Nygaard
Councilmember Ramona Finnila
AGiiN3A ITEM #I f4
42: Mayer
22y councu
my Manager
w Aaomfw
__ _
cl@ cm& . _ ,..F,“-
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
Please accept this letter in lieu of a personal presentation at the City Council meeting
scheduled for Tuesday, January 4, 2000.
The Board of Directors of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce unanimously supports the development of the Inns of America Hotel at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida
Encinas.
The need for business-oriented hotels is important to the city’s ever-growing- business
community. As the Palomar Airport Industrial Corridor grows, more and more corporate
clients will need hotels with business amenities and easy access to the city’s airport and
freeways. The Inns of America is proposing a 24-hour business center with a fax machine,
copier, computer terminals, on-line capabilities in every room and a conference room.
This project, as designed, fully complies with all requirements of the City-mandated
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone. Corporate travelers are in town during the
workweek and leisure travelers and Legoland vacationers are here on the weekends.
First-year revenues are forecasted to generate about $175,000 in TOT, and upon hotel
operations maturing, revenues would generate about $250,000 in TOT to the City of
Carlsbad.
The owner, developer and operator, Inns of America, is currently a stakeholder in Cqrlsbad
with a 126-room hotel plus the Raintree Restaurant. They are contributors, both
economically and philanthropically, to the community.
The Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce hopes that you will support the Inns of America
project.
Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
0
‘iJ&
n Sobel
Chief Executive Officer
5620 Paseo de1 Norte, Suite 128 l P.O. Box 1605 l Carlsbad, California 92008
(760) 931-8400 l Fax (760) 931-9153
5 190 El Arbol Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
January 3,200O
Eric Munoz
City of Carlsbad Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Dear Mr. Munoz:
I would like to provide comments and recommendations on the issuance of a Conditional Use
Permit and Coastal Development permit to Her-rick Development Inc. to develop of business
hotel consisting of 98 rooms at the southeast comer of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. I am
a resident in nearby Terramar. This project will be visible from the windows and backyard of my
PropertY.
I am not opposed to the issuance of these permits provided several conditions are placed on the
permits to minimize the impacts to the surrounding areas.
1. Landscaping. The interchange of 15 and Cannon Road has been extensively landscaped as a
result of the construction of Legoland. The effort put into this work is commendable and
provides a Carlsbad welcome to people using Legoland, car dealerships or Carlsbad Company
Stores area. The “ambiance” currently is in keeping with the overall tone of Carlsbad with
flowers and trees providing screening between areas. This area is vulnerable to becoming an
eyesore if additional developments turn it into a freeway interchange type setting rather than part
of the community. The efforts that went into landscaping for the interchange should be required
of this permit as well.
2. Lighting. We are particularly concerned about lighting of the new structure and associated
features. We request that the permit be conditioned to require that all lighting be heavily
screened on the west side (where it faces the neighborhood area) including outside balcony
lighting, entryway lighting and parking lot lighting. Signs which would be visible should be
limited, low elevation and low lights on the west facade. We want our neighborhood to stay a
neighborhood. The nearby business park area has down an excellent job of being low key and
fitting in. Lights should be screened or otherwise positioned so that residents of El Arbol Drive
do not see them.
3. Associated businesses. We will be highly opposed to fast food, gas stations or other freeway
interchange types of development occurring on nearby vacant land. We would prefer low key
hotels, business parks or other structures that don’t remove the neighborhood setting of this area.
We feel that the intent of the Carlsbad Ranch overlay is to keep this area in a neighborhood
setting, as much as possible. The presence of the car dealerships and this potential project are
starting to change the nature of this area.
4. Wildlife. This property is located near Cannon Lake. Although it doesn’t abut Cannon Lake,
we are concerned about its proximity to Cannon Lake. Cannon Lake is recognized as a sensitive
area in the City’s Habitat Management Plan (11/5/99 map). Cannon Lake is an important feeding
and breeding area for a variety of waterfowl. ‘We have observed least tern, a federally
endangered species, using Cannon Lake for foraging activities. Many other species of waterfowl
use this lake as a migration stopping point or as a nesting area. We are concerned that guests at
the hotel will use the vacant land separating the hotel property and Cannon Lake for walking
their pets. It is a convenient spot and would be desirable from a pet owners point of view. It has
even been considered for use as a City Dog Park. However, this would be highly undesirable
from a wildlife point of view. Therefore, we request that the eastern side of the lake be fenced
and landscaped to keep pets out of the water and off of the banks of the lake. The city should
place an aesthetically pleasing fence shall be placed along the eastern side of Cannon Lake from
Cannon Road to the beginning of the business park area. It shall be landscaped to provide habitat
enhancing features suitable for a riparian area such as willows.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment on this project and the area surrounding it.
I continued to be pleased to live in the Carlsbad area and commend the planning department for
their efforts to keep the “feel” of our community. It is a place that I am proud to come home to.
Sincerely,
Carol Gorbics, resident
Terramar Community
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2010 & 2011 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident
of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in
the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk
of the printer of
North County Times
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have
been adjudged newspapers of general
circulation by the Superior Court of the County of
San Diego, State of California, for the cities of
Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad, Solana Beach
and San Diego County; 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:
Dec. 23, 1999
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at , California
this
of
2 3rd
Dec. 1999
day
This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
Notice of Public hearing
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
OF AMERICA CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06 - INNS
ESCRIPTION; R uest for a Conditional Use.Pemit and Coastal Develooment Permkt to?evelop a buslness hotel conslstlng of 98 moms.
LOCATION: This project is within the City of Carlsbad's Coastal Zone at the Southeast corner of Cannon Road and Avenida Endnas, west of Interstate 5 on propeny designated as Planned Industrial (PI) on the General Plan, within the City's Coasts( Zone, LWl Facilities Management Zone 3 and the recently established COmmerCialNisitOr Serving Overlay Zone.
APPLICANT Herrick Development, Inc., 755 Raintree Dr., Ste. 200, Carlsbad, CA 92009
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the Carlsbad City Council in the Council Chambers 1200 Carlsbad Villa e Drive, Carlsbad, CalUornia, on January 4, 2000 at 6:OO p.m. Persons are cordially invitJto aiiend the publlc hearlng and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described and a staff recommendath given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision, Copies of the staff report will be available on or after December 30, 1999.
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER: 210-090-52
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Elk Munoz at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 530 pm, Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:OO p.m. at 2075 las Palmas Drive. Carlsbad, California 92009, (760) 4381161, extension 4441.
APPEALS
If you challenge the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit in CWrt, y9L may be limited to raising only those issues rased by you or someqne else at the qubbt hearing described in this notice, or in wrmen correspondence delivered to the Clly 0' Carlsbad Ci Clerk's Office at, or prior to, the public hearing.
1. Appeals to the Cif ,Council: Where the decision is appealable to the Cq Council, a peals must be file in wrltlng wthtn ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the PPanning Commission. 2. Coastal Commission Appealable Project: This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commisdon, appe& must be filed with the Coastal Commission within ten (to) working days after the Coastal Commssion has
received a Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad.
Legal 65881 December23, 1999 1
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
.-.
(Form A)
TO? C1'T.Y CLERK’S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notlde
CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06 - Inns of America
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the iten for the council meeting of First Available Hearing
in January 2000 .
Thank you.
December 7, 1999
Date
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06 - INNS OF AMERICA
DESCRIPTION:
Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit to develop a business
hotel consisting of 98 rooms.
LOCATION:
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone at the southeast corner of Cannon
Road and Avenida Encinas, west of Interstate 5 on property designated as Planned Industrial
(PI) on the General Plan, within the City’s Coastal Zone, Local Facilities Management Zone 3
and the recently established Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER:
2 1 O-090-52
APPLICANT:
Herrick Development Inc.
755 Raintree Dr., Ste. 200
Carlsbad, CA 92009
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the Carlsbad City Council in the
Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on January 4, 2000 at 6:00
p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described and a
staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. Copies of the
staff report will be available on or after December 30, 1999.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Eric Munoz at
the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Friday
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009, (760) 438-l 161, extension 4441.
APPEALS
If you challenge the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit 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.
1. ADDeals to the Citv Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City
Council, appeals must be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after
a decision by the Planning Commission.
2. Coastal Commission Appealable Project: This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the Coastal
Commission within ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a Notice of
Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission of the
date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the Coastal Commission is
located at 3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego, California 92108-1725
PUBLISH: December 23,1999.
.
@
INNS OF AMERICA
CUP 99-031CDP 99-06
-
L . FILE COPY City of Carlsbad
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
COMPLETE DATE: October 12, 1999 ’
DESCRIPTION:
Request for a Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Pernut to develop a
business hotel consisting of 98 rooms.
LOCATION:
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone at the southeast comer of
Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas; west of Interstate 5 on property designated as
Planned Industrial (PI) on the General Plan, within the City’s Coastal Zone, Local
Facilities Management Zone 3 and the recently established Commercial/Visitor-Senying
Overlay Zone.
ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NUMBER:
2 1 O-090-52
APPLICANT:
Her-rick Development Inc.
755 Raintree Dr., Ste. 200
Carlsbad, CA 92009
A public hearing on the above proposed project wilI be held by the Planning Commission in the
Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on November 17, 1999 at
6:00 p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with
any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described
and a staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. .
Copies of the staff report will be available on or after November 12, 1999.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Eric Munoz
at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.,
Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009, (760) 438-
1 16 1. extension 444 1.
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (760) 438-l 161 l FAX (760) 438-0894 a9
.-. . ‘+ $ ‘,C r*. i -1 7 . .: * i ”
* . J
APPEALS
-
If you challenge the Conditional Use Permit and Coastal Development Permit in court, you may
be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described
in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad prior to the public
hearing.
1. Anueals to the Citv Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council,
appeals must be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the
Planning Commission.
7 -. Coastal Commission Appealable Project:
III This site is located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
151 This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the
Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a
Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal
Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the
Coastal Commission is located at 3 111 Camino De1 Rio North, Suite 200, San Diego, California
92108-1725.
CASE FILE: CUP 99-03/CDP 99-06
CASE NAME: INNS OF AMERICA
PUBLISH: NOVEMBER 4,1999
,Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160@
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST CITY OF ENCINITAS
801 PINE AVE 505 S VULCAN AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008 ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NORTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
CITY OF VISTA
PO BOX 1988
VISTA CA 92085
SD COUNTY PLANNING
STE B
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME REGIONAL WATER QUALITY SANDAG
STE 50 STE B STE 800
330 GOLDENSHORE 9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD 401 B STREET
LONG BEACH CA 90802 SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331 SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
I.P.U.A. SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND
URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE CA COASTAL COMMISSION
2730 LOKER AVE WEST STE 200
CARLSBAD CA 92008 3111 CAMINO DEL RIO NO
SAN DIEGO CA 92108
NANCY PATTERSON
HERRICK DEVELOPMENT INC URBAN SOLUTIONS
STE 200 STE 11
755 RAINTREE DR 1049 CAMINO DEL MAR CARLSBAD CA 92009 DEL MAR CA 92014
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNITY
SERVICES
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
ERIC MUNOZ _.
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPT
, CITY OF CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
I5 &a AVERY@’ Address tabets laser 5160@
-
3
POWER I CABRILLO 1000 LOUISIANA ST 5800 HOUSTON TX 77002
KING COMMUNITY 5120 AVENIDA ENCINAS A CARLSBAD CA 92008
WTGRANT PO BOX 979 CARLSBAD CA 92018
MELLOW S & JANET HONEK 5330 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
MICHAEL P MALONEY 438 BARBARA AVE SOLANA BEACH CA 92075
.RONALD E & MARY LITTLE 5149 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
LARRY A HOEHN 5090 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
ALASTAIR W THOMPSON
5196 FRAZEE RD OCEANSIDE CA 92057
-. > THOMAS A DEAN 5190 EL ARBOL DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
JAMES W JESSUP 5230 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
WEST DEVELOPMENT INC
PO BOX 8617
RANCH0 SANTA FE C 92067
PRENTISS PROPERTIES ACQ 3890 W NORTHWEST HWY 40 DALLAS TX 75220
INTER V KILLION 5055 AVENIDA ENCINAS 10
CARLSBAD CA 92008
NANCY E FOLEY 5081 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
JOEL C EBY 5117 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
KEANY 5167 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
ROBERT L & BETTY TODD 5100 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
RUTH L RICHARDSON 5160 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
THOMAS R LOCKHART 5200 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
HERSHMAN 2108 NIBLICK TER OCEANSIDE CA 92056
LLC OFFIPLEX
1340 ENCINITAS BLVD loo
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CARLSBAD COMMERCIAL CEN PO BOX 1111 CARLSBAD CA 92018
KOTOFF 1301 VISTA COLINA DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
BRENT G SCHAFFER 1849 E CASCADE DR GILBERT AZ 85234
PAUL A & LAURA MILLER 5133 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
RUSSELL E ACKROYD 5183 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
'NANCY C MINKUS 15120 EL ARBOL DR kARLSBAD CA 92008 ;
.SAMUEL R FOSTER ~ 5180 EL ARBOL DR ~CARLSBAD CA 92008
~JAMES K THOMPSON PO BOX 1699 !CARLSBAD CA 92018
ERNEST J & INES STARKEY 5280 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
3 3
MICHAEL 5290 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
LIETTE C SHARP 838 OAKWOOD AVE GLENDORA CA 91741
JOHN & MARGARET BONCER 5219 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
MARGARET T PARNELL 5279 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
CHARLES B WESELOH 1520 HUNSAKER ST
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
GLADYS H WOOD 5300 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
TYLER C SCHUMACHER PO BOX 1484 RANCH0 SANTA FE C 92067
THOMAS R SIEKMANN 5239 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
STEVEN D MILLER 5299 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
DUANE A RODRIGUEZ-WINTE 1282 CREST DR ENCINITAS CA 92024
ALEX & TANYA KINCAID 5310 EL ARBOL DR ,CARLSBAD CA 92008
KENNETH F JOSEPH 5201 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
'PATRICK URIELL PO BOX 151 hAMONA CA 92065
FINNEY JAMES B '5445 PASEO DEL NORTE lCARLSBAD CA 92008
*** 44 Printed ***
, 3
OCCUPANT OCCUPANT 5050 AVENIDA ENCINAS 35 5051 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008
*** 2 Printed ***
-
City of Carlsbad
February 8,200O
Herrick Development, Inc.
755 Raintree Drive
Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Re: Inns of America
The Carlsbad City Council, at its meeting of January 4,2000, adopted Resolution No. 2000-08,
approving the Conditional Use Permit CUP 99-03 and Coastal Development Permit CDP 99-06.
As a courtesy, please find a copy of Resolution No. 2000-08 for your files.
f&&)cc/10 PATRICIA HOPKINS
/Pa
Enclosure
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, CA 92008-l 989 * (760) 434-2808 @