HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-06-26; City Council; 16253; Cannon CourtAB# lb453
MTG. &i&o 1
DEPT. PLN
CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
TITLE. -- DEPT. HD.
CANNON COURT 222 ClTYAlTY. ‘
CUP 99-30 CITY MGR ?L
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. WI -,Yy ADOPTING a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and APPROVING CUP 99-30 as recommended for adoption and approval by
the Planning Commission.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On May 16, 2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended
adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of CUP 99-30 for Cannon Court (6-O
Nielsen absent). The project site is located on a vacant lot at the northwest corner of Cannon Road
and Interstate 5, in the C-T-Q Zone and the CommercialNisitor Serving Overlay Zone and in Local
Facilities Management Zone 3. The project is also located in Redevelopment Area II; however,
since a master plan has not been developed for this area and no separate standards have been
established, the project is being processed through standard procedures.
The development proposal would allow for the construction of a 16-pump gas station and mini-mart,
an 86 room hotel, and two restaurants containing 4,800 square feet and 7,770 square feet. The
project is located in the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone and therefore requires approval of
a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) by the City Council. The project also requires approval of a CUP
for the gas station and for an increase in height for the hotel from 35 to 45 feet. The site is classified
as a Freeway Service Facility due to its proximity to the freeway interchange. The C-T
(Commercial-Tourist) zoning allows for development of a gas station in conjunction with a freeway
service facility that contains at least two other freeway uses, such as the proposed hotel and
restaurants. The T-R (Travel-Recreation) General Plan Land Use Designation also supports these
types of uses along the freeway to serve the travel and recreation needs of tourists, residents, and
employees of business and industrial centers. As summarized in the staff report, the project
complies with all applicable development standards of the C-T zone and Commercial/Visitor Serving
Overlay Zone with regard to parking, signage, building height, setbacks, lighting, landscaping, and
standards that apply specifically to gas stations. The project has been designed in the “Village”
architectural style and features high-quality design and detailing consistent with the overlay zone
requirements. The CUP and overlay zone findings for approval of the project can be made and are
outlined in detail in the staff report and resolutions.
The project is located in the Agua Hedionda Segment of the Local Coastal Plan and is required to
Dbtain approval of a coastal development permit from the Coastal Commission. The project also
oroposes a Minor Subdivision and Non-residential Planned Development that would allow the
subdivision of the property into four “postage stamp” lots and one common lot which includes the
orivate street and most of the surface parking and landscaping. The subdivision would allow
ndividual ownership for each building pad and will enable the project to be built with a private street
snd reciprocal parking and access. The Minor Subdivision and Non-residential PUD will be acted
Jpon pending approval of the project by the City Council and Coastal Commission.
4 number of residents from the Terramar community spoke in opposition to the gas station and
Joiced concern about the traffic impacts of the project. More detailed information regarding the
development proposal and public testimony is included in the attached staff report to the Planning
Commission and Planning Commission minutes.
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. \Io,s3
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The proposed project has been reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA). The initial study prepared in conjunction with the project determined that potentially
significant impacts could be created as a result of traffic impacts, agricultural chemical residues, and
noise impacts from l-5 and train operations on the AT&SF railroad. Traffic mitigation measures
include installation of a new traffic signal at the intersection of Avenida Encinas and Cannon Road,
dual west to southbound left-turn lanes on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas, and implementation of
traffic operations measures to coordinate signal timing with the freeway and railroad crossing. In
addition, mitigation measures for soil remediation and noise attenuation will reduce potential impacts
to less than significant levels. In consideration of the foregoing, a Mitigated Negative Declaration
was issued by the Planning Director on February 26, 2001.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed project will have a positive impact in terms of increased property tax, transient
occupancy tax, and additional employment opportunities. The applicant has indicated that
approximately 140 employment opportunities will be created by the project. Based on a 65%
occupancy rate, it is estimated that the hotel will generate approximately $324,000 annually in
transient occupancy tax. The current assessed value of the project site is approximately $4.8 million.
With the new construction, it is estimated that the assessed value will increase to approximately $23
million. The increase in value would result in additional tax increment revenue for the Carlsbad
Redevelopment Agency of an estimated $145,600 per year. Approximately 20% of the tax
increments funds will be allocated to the City’s low-moderate housing fund and the remainder of the
revenue will be used to fund projects within Redevelopment Area II.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT STATUS:
Local Facilities Management Plan 3
Growth Control Point N/A
Net Density N/A
Special Facilities N/A
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. 30 j -1 q4
2. Location Map
3. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4977 and 4978
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated May 16, 2001.
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission minutes, dated May 16, 2001.
a
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 2001-194 **VOID**
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A
STATION, MINI-MART, H
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 3
CASE NAME: CANNON COURT
CASE NO.: CUP 99-30
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad,
WHEREAS, on May 16, 20
Use Permit to allow for the development of
gated Negative Declaration and Conditional
ump gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel,
mission Resolutions No. 4977 and 4978
Negative Declaration be adopted and that
of Carlsbad, on the day of
ed public hearing to consider the
or opposed to the Mitigated Negative
D by the City Council of the City of
That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the adoption of
the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of Conditional Use Permit 99-30 is adopted
and approved and that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission contained in
Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4977 and 4978 on file with the City Clerk and
incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City Council.
3. 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:
. . . . 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
I “NOTICE TO APPLICANT”
“The time within which judicial review of this decision mu
governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6,
made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsb
Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking jud
after the decisi
estimated cost of preparation of such time within which such
petition may be filed in court is extended ot latter than the thirtieth day
following the date on which the reco ither personally delivered or
mailed to the party, or his attorne ecord, if he has one. A written
request for the preparation of t of the proceedings shall be filed
with the City Clerk, City of , 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive,
Carlsbad, California 92008.”
PASSED AND ADOPT
Carlsbad on the
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
, 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
LORRAIF M. WOOD, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-2-
EXHIBIT 2
SITE
@
Nomu
I CANNON COURT
CUP 99-30
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
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4977
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A GAS
STATION, MINI-MART, HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANTS
ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF CANNON ROAD AND
INTERSTATE 5 IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
ZONE 3.
CASE NAME: CANNON COURT
CASE NO.: CUP 99-30
WHEREAS, J. A. Buza Corp, “Developer,” has filed a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by West Development, Inc., “Owner,” described
as
That portion of Lot ‘&H” of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, in the City
of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California,
according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of
the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,1896
(APN 210-010-38)
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction with
said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 16th day of May, 2001, 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, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors
relating to the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission 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
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program according to
Exhibit “ND” dated February 26, 2001, and “PII” dated February 6, 2001,
attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findines:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
A.
B.
C.
D.
Conditions:
It has reviewed, analyzed and considered Mitigated Negative Declaration and
the Cannon Court Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments
thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and
The Mitigated 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
It reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
Based on the EIA Part II and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence
the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
1. Developer shall implement or cause the implementation of the Cannon Court
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
PC RESO NO. 4977 -2-
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 16th day of May 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Heineman,
L’Heureux, and Trigas
Commissioner Nielsen
QQ
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
i $ , \ ’ i ~,‘~i. /) k.‘Li 1. ~~~~,,~:c;T, 1 :
MICHAEL J. HOLZMIE’LER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4977 -3- 8
-
City of Carlsbad
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Project Address/Location: APN 210-010-38
That portion of Lot “I-I” of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to
Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of
San Diego County, November 16,1896.
Project Description: Development proposal for an 86 room hotel, two restaurants, and a
gas station/food mart on a 6.5 1 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, the
initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1)
revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the
proposed negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the
effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment
would occur, and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City
that the project “as revised” may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a
Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this
action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the
Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. 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 Barbara Kennedy in the Planning
Department at (760) 602-4626.
DATED: FEBRUARY 26,200l
CASE NO: SDP 00-09/CUP 99-3OKUP 99-3 l/PUD 00-log/MS 99-16
CASE NAME: CANNON COURT
PUBLISH DATE: FEBRUARY 26,200l
MICHAEL J. HOLmILI@R
Planning Director
1635 Faraday Avenue l Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 l (760) 602-4600 l FAX (760) 602-8559 l www.ci.car1sbad.ca.m
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
CASE NO: SDP 00-09/CUP 99-3O/CUP 99-3 l/PUD 00-109/MS 99-l 6
DATE: February 6,200 1
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: CAN-NON COURT
2. APPLICANT: West DeveloDment. Inc.
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: P. 0. Box 676066 Ranch0 Santa Fe,
CA 92067 (619) 756-5338
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: December 17.1999
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for approval of a site development plan. conditional use
permits, minor subdivision. and no&residential planned development permit to allow madine;
and construction of two restaurants, a hotel, and a gas station/food mart on a 6.51 acre lot
located on the north side of Cannon Road between I-5 and the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way.
JAPN 210-010-38).
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.
0 Land Use and Planning lxl Transportation/Circulation 0 Public Services
0 Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities & Service Systems
0 Geological Problems 0 Energy & Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics
0 Water txl Hazards 0 Cultural Resources
q Air Quality lxl Noise q Recreation
0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96 /O
DETERMINATION.
cl
0
0
[XI
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 adequately 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 Mitigated
Negative 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 (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier Master Environmental
Impact Review (MEIR 93-01) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Master Environmental Impact Review (MEIR 93-Ol),
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
2115 lol
Date ’ I
Planning Direct&! Sig&ure
220 01 I
Date
Rev. 03128196
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.
0 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 ‘Wo 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 aJ 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).
0 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.
0 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.
Rev. 03/28/96 /a
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.
0 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.
4 Rev. 03/28/96 /3
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a)
b)
cl
4
e)
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #l(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-l - 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 - 5.6-18)
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-) b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? (#l :Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6)
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? (#l:Pgs 5.5-l - 5.5-6)
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
4
b)
c)
4
4
f)
g)
4
0
expose people to potential impacts involving: Fault rupture? (#l:Pgs 5.1-l - 5.1-15; #/4, Pgs 4-21)
Seismic ground shaking? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-i; #4, Pgs
4-21)
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? (#l:Pgs
5.1-1 - 5.1.-15; #4, Pgs 4-21)
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? (#l:Pgs 5. l-l -
5.1-15; #I, Pgs 4-21)
Landslides or mudflows? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #4, Pgs 4-2 1)
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? (#l:Pgs
5.1-1 - 5.1-15; ##4, Pgs 4-215) Subsidence of the land?(#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #4, Pgs
4-21)
Expansive soils? (#l:Pgs 5.1-1 - 5.1-15; #4, Pgs 4-21)
Unique geologic or physical features? (#l:Pgs 5. l-l - 5.1-15; #+I, Pgs 4-21)
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2- 11; #5, Pgs l-7)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.,2-l 1)
Potentially
Significanl Impact
q
0
q
q
q
q
q
q
q q
q
q
q
0
q
q q
q
q
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q q
q
q
q
0
q
,u q
q
q
Less Than Significant Impact
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q q
q
q
q
q
q
q q
Ia
q
No
Impact
lxl
Ix]
Ix1
El
Ix1
Ix1
Ix1
lxl
lxl
Ix1
lxl
El
txl
El
lxl
lxl
lxl
q
Ix1
5 Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
cl
4
e>
f)
g>
h)
9
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; #5, Pgs
l-7) 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; #5, Pgs 1-7)
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3-
1 - 5.3-12) b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l
- 5.3-12) c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
d) Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
VI. TR4NSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
4
b)
c>
4
4
f)
g)
proposal result in:
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs
5.7-l - 5.7.22; # 6) 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)
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24; #2, Pg 2)
Potentially
Significant Impact
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
lxl
q
q
q
IXI
q
q
III
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
q
Less Than Significant Impact
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
0
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
No Impact
lzl
Ix1
Lxl
lxl
Ix1
El
Ix1
q
lxl
E.l
Ix1
q
Ix1
El
IXI
lxl
lxl
lxl
El
Rev. 03/28/96 6
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
b)
cl
4
4
VIII.
4
b)
c)
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
(#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24; #2, Pg 2)
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24)
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 & 5.13-1 - 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 7)
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.1-5
& 5.13-1 - 5.13-9)
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a>
b)
4
4
4
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;
#3, Pgs l-3)
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-l - 5.10.1-5; # 2, Pgs l-
10) Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? (#l:Pgs 5.10.1-l - 5.10.1-5)
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-l - 5.9-
15) b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? (#l:Pgs 5.9-
1 - 5.9-15; # 7, Pgs. l-7)
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
4
b)
cl
4
4
upon, or result in a need for new 0; altered govemment
services in any of the following areas:
Fire protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.5-1 - 5.12.5-6)
Police protection? (#l:Pgs 5.12.6-1 - 5.12.6-4)
Schools? (#l:Pgs 5.12.7.1 - 5.12.7-5)
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? (#l,
pgs 5.12.1-1 - 5.12.8-7)
Other governmental services? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-1 -
5.12.8-7)
q
0
q
q
q
q
q
0
0
q
q 0 0 0
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
0
q
IXI
0 0 0 0
q
q
III
q
El
‘El
lxl
q
q
q
0
q 0 q El
q
lxl
Ix]
lzl
lxl
El
lxl
lxl
q
lxl
q
lxl
lxl
Ix]
q
lxl lxl Ix1 IXI
Ix1
7 Rev. 03128196
Potentially
Significant
Impact
q
q
q
0
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation Incorporated q
q
q
q
Less Than
Significant
Impact
q
q
cl
q
No
Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
XIIUTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
a>
b)
cl
4
e>
f)
g)
XIII.
a>
b)
c)
XIV.
a>
b)
cl
4
4
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
Power or natural gas? (#l:Pgs 5.12.1-l - 5.12.1-5 &
5.13-1 - 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 5.12.211 - 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? (#I :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? (#
5.11-1 - 5.11-5)
Have a demonstrated negative aesthetic effect? (#
5.1 l-l - 5.1 l-5)
Create light or glare? (#l:Pgs 5.1 l-l - 5.1 l-5)
1 :Pgs
1 :Pgs
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)
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? (#l:Pgs 5.12.8-1 -
5.12.8-7)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? (#l:Pgs
5.12.8-1 - 5.12.8-7)
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community,
reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
8
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0
q q
0 q q 0
q
q
q
q
q
q q
q
q
0
q
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation Incorporated
0
q q
q q q q
q
q
q
q
q
q 0
q
q
0
0
Less Than
Significant
Impact
q
cl 0
q 0 q cl
q
q
q
q
q
q q
q
0
0
q
No Impact
IXI
(XI
lzl
lxl
El
Ix1
lxl
ixl
l.xl
El
IXI
lxl
El
IXI
IXI
IXI
IXI
IXJ
Rev. 03128196 lI
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially
Significant Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless Mitigation
Less Than No
Significant Impact
Impact
Incomorated
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? cl q q lz
(“Cumulatively considerable” - means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
D q q txl
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
4 Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,“ describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
9 Rev. 03128196 /f
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Environmental Setting/Site Descrintion
The project site is a 6.5 1 acre lot designated T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) by the General
Plan. The rectangular shaped site is generally flat and is bordered by Cannon Road on the south,
the I-5 Freeway to the east, the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way to the west with the Encinas
Power Plant beyond, and the SDG&E storage yard, substation, and high tension power lines to
the north. Eucalyptus trees border the perimeter of the site and the majority of the property is
vacant and undeveloped. About 10% of the property was formerly developed with structures
located near the southwest comer. Concrete foundations and a concrete driveway currently
remain at the southwest comer. The property was used for agricultural purposes until about 1967
and since that time has been used to store equipment and materials for SDG&E. For a short
time, the property was also used to store new automobiles for a local dealership.
Proi ect Descrintion
The development proposal will result in the construction of an 86 room hotel with 105 space
underground parking garage located near the north end of the site, a 7,770 square foot restaurant
located west of the hotel, a 4,800 square foot restaurant located near the center of the site, and a
16 pump gas station and with a 1,500 square foot food mart located at the south end of the site.
The entrance to the project will be via a new signalized intersection at Cannon Road and Avenida
Encinas. The north extension of Avenida Encinas will be constructed as a private road and the
various uses will be accessed by three entrance points off this private street. The project is
proposed as non-residential planned development with individual ownership of the buildings and
joint use and ownership of on-grade and underground parking spaces. Associated landscape
improvements are included as part of the development proposal. Grading for the project will
consist of 28,800 cubic yards of cut, 1,800 cubic yards of fill, and 27,000 cubic yards of export.
The proposed grades are within 0 to 3 feet of the existing grades.
I. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1. Land Use and Planning
The site’s C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist/Qualified Development Overlay) zone designation would
allow the restaurant and hotel uses with approval of a Site Development Plan. The gas station use
requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit. In addition, due to the site’s inclusion in the
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone, approval of a Conditional Use Permit will be
required for the project. The site is located in the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan Area and will
require approval of a Coastal Development Permit by the California Coastal Commission.
2. Population and Housing
The project will not impact or affect population patterns, projections, or affordable housing
provisions.
10 Rev. 03128196
3. Geologic Problems
A preliminary Geotechnical Report was prepared by Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc.
for the project site. This study concluded that the project site is appropriate for the proposed
development, subject to the recommendations included in the study. Since no fault crosses the
subject site, the risk of ground rupture was considered remote. Due to the soils types present, the
potential for liquefaction was found to be low. The site contains no known or suspected
landslides. The site does not contain any unique geologic or physical features.
Grading activities for the proposed project would be subject to the City’s adopted grading
regulations and the Landscape Guidelines Manual, which would include requirements for
implementation for all necessary erosion control methods. In addition, because of the site’s
location within the Coastal Zone, a mitigation measure has been included which will prohibit
grading activities during the winter months (October l”‘- April l”?.
4. Water
The project is located approximately 1,700 feet south of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and 1,800
feet east of the Pacific Ocean. The Geotechnical Report indicated that groundwater was
discovered approximately 16 feet below grade in two locations. Groundwater is not expected to
affect the proposed development if proper drainage controls are implemented and maintained.
The project will result in increased surface runoff due to the addition of impervious surfaces
required for the development of the structures and pavement areas. The fuel dispensing area will
be designed to ensure clean storm water discharge from fuel dispensing areas and will minimize
the potential for gasoline runoff. Development of the site will be required to comply with all
applicable City regulations regarding drainage and runoff, including compliance with NPDES
regulations/requirements and Best Management Practices. The site is not within a flood hazard
area and will not result in exposure to water related hazards.
The site currently receives drainage from the parcel to the north and a 24” RCP drainage outlet
pipe at the CalTrans r.o.w. The flow from the CalTrans pipe is conveyed across the property via
a drainage swale and a shallow steel pipe. The entire site (and off-site contributing) drains to a 5’
x 5’ railroad tie culvert at the AT & SF railroad. The proposed drainage will be connected to the
existing outlet via a series of pipes/inlets. The proposed development will not impact
groundwater flow or quality; or change the flow of surface run-off; or impact public water
supplies.
5. Air Quality
In 1994 the City prepared and certified an EIR which analyzed the impacts which will result
from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concludes that
continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will have
cumulative significant impacts in the form of 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 build-out
as proposed in the updated General Plan will have cumulative significant impacts on the air
quality of the region.
11 Rev. 03128196 a0
To lessen or minimize the impact on air quality associated with General Plan build-out, 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
“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 93-01, 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 projects covered
by the General Plan’s Final Master EIR. This project is within the scope of that MEIR This
document is available at the Planning Department.
6. Transportation/Circulation
A traffic report was submitted for the proposed development. The report addresses two
circulation issues that need to be analyzed. First, the report analyzes the impact of the project
traffic on existing city streets. Additionally, the report analyzes the access requirements of the
45-acre parcel directly north of the project.
When the vacant 45-acre parcel north of the project is developed, it will take access through the
project site. Accordingly, the access road needs to be designed to handle the potential future
traffic. In order to establish the ultimate width of this access road, and since uses are not
currently planned for the 45 acres, two alternative land use assumptions were made. Alternative 1
assumed 15 acres for a high technology power plant plus 30 acres for the utility corporate
headquarters. This alternative results in a traffic generation of 3,450 ADT. Alternative 2 assumed
15 acres for a high technology power plant, 17.5 acres for corporate headquarters, and 12.5 acres
of visitor commercial use. This alternative resulted in a traffic generation of 7,200 ADT. To
accommodate both alternatives, the project proposes to build two lane improvements through the
project, with widening to four lanes at the intersection with Cannon Road. These improvements
would meet the requirements of alternative 1. To meet the requirements of alternative 2,
additional right-of-way would be reserved for the potential widening of the street to a four-lane
road.
The project itself will generate a total of 4,793 ADT; including 308 AM peak-hour trips and 401
PM peak-hour trips. The traffic analysis indicates that the additional traffic generated by the
project does not significantly affect the levels of service of the existing streets. However, the
intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas will need to be signalized once project
occupancy occurs. Additionally, due to the proximity of the I-5 Cannon Road freeway ramps to
the east and the railroad crossing to the west, some traffic operations measures need to be
implemented. The following specific measures will be incorporated in the design of the
intersection:
1. Interconnect the new Cannon RoadAvenida Encinas traffic signal with the existing
12 Rev. 03/28/96 3
freeway ramp signals.
2. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal.
3. Signing and striping with “KEEP CLEAR” notices to assure intersections are not
blocked during railroad signal preemption.
4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal to permit
south to east, west to south, and north to east movements during preemption.
5. Dual west to southbound left turns on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas.
With all the above measures incorporated into the project design, the traffic analysis shows that
the project traffic does not significantly affect the levels of service of the streets or intersections
in the existing, short-term (year 2005) and build-out (year 2020) conditions.
In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would
result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded
that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in
increased traffic volumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate build-out
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 build-out.
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out,
numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include:
1) 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 build-out 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 projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR.
This project is within the scope of that MEIR. This document is available at the Planning
Department.
A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the
filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to
determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was
certified more than five years ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no
substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was
13 Rev. 03128196 a
certified. The only potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport
Rd. and El Camino Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance.
Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have
been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to
review later projects.
7. Biological Resources
The site will not result in an impact to biological resources. The site does not contain any
identified sensitive resources. It contains no designated natural communities or wetland habitat
and does not serve as a migration corridor.
8. Energy and Mineral Resources
The site contains no identified natural resources and will not conflict with any energy
conservation plans. There are no known mineral resources on the site.
9. Hazards
Compliance with the California Health and Safety Code and Rule 20 of the Air Pollution Control
District Rules and Regulations as stated in the required regulatory permits for the construction
and operation of a gasoline dispensing facility will reduce the risk of explosion and release of
hazardous substances to a level of insignificance. Engineering and Fire Department review of
the project will ensure that typical safety features and provisions are designed into the project.
There will be no interference with emergency response or evacuation plans as the site will be
developed in accordance with all applicable City regulations, including placement of the
structures on the site and public/private improvements sidewalks, drainage facilities). Therefore,
the proposed development of the site will not result in the creation of any hazards.
Since the property had previously been used for agricultural uses, a limited Phase II
Environmental Assessment was conducted to evaluate the possibility of agricultural chemical
residue in the soils. The analysis detected the presence of toxaphene, however, it is anticipated
that grading activities (mixing and blending of the soil) will further reduce the levels of
toxaphene to a level of insignificance. Once grading is completed, it was recommended that
additional soil samples be collected an analyzed to determine their concentrations of toxaphene.
If additional actions are required, they can be implemented at that time. Examples of additional
actions would include thicker concrete slabs or the placement of vapor barriers.
10. Noise
The project is subject to the City of Carlsbad adopted interior noise standards of 45 CNEL for the
hotel use and 55 CNEL for the commercial uses which include the restaurants and food mart.
The City does not have exterior noise standards which apply to these uses. The site is subject to
noise impacts from I-5 and the Amtrack, Coaster, and freight train operations on the AT & SF
railroad. An acoustical analysis was submitted for the project which analyzed the impacts from
these noise sources on the proposed development. The report indicates that the building surfaces
of the hotel will be exposed to worst case noise levels of 77.7 CNEL, and will therefore require
at least a 32.7 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise
standard. The recommended mitigation measures include building upgrades for a number of
units within the hotel. The area of most concern is the east end of the building that faces the
freeway. The building upgrades consist of upgraded windows, attachment of an additional layer
14 Rev. 03/28/96 23
of gypsum board to walls of specified units, and baffled attic vents, and mechanical ventilation.
Standard constructions methods will provide adequate noise attenuation for the restaurants and
food mart, with the condition that all buildings are required to have mechanical ventilation in
order to assume that windows can remain closed to achieve the required interior noise
attenuation.
The future development of the site is not anticipated to increase noise levels or expose people to
severe noise levels. When construction is proposed, there will be temporary increases in noise as
building occurs, However, these activities will be regulated by the City’s construction activity
regulations and will be temporary in nature and not severe.
11. Public Services
The eventual development of the subject site will not result in a need for new or altered
government services beyond what was already anticipated by the City’s General plan. The
project will be conditioned to comply with all applicable requirements of the Local Facilities
Management Plan for Zone 3 to ensure that all necessary facilities are provided prior to or
concurrent with development.
12. Utilities and Service Systems
The eventual development of the subject site will not result in a need for new systems or supplies
or substantial alterations. The site is an infill site readily serviced by existing systems. The
project will be conditioned to comply with all applicable requirements of the Local Facilities
Management Plan for Zone 3 to ensure that all necessary facilities/systems are provided prior to
or concurrent with development.
13. Aesthetics
The project site is located within the CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone and is subject to
standards which insure that the development will adhere to a high quality of architectural design.
The project utilizes a “Village” architectural style, and is consistent with the overlay zone
standards. The project observes a 30 foot landscape setback from Cannon Road and the setback
area is landscaped consistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines for Cannon Road. In addition,
the Scenic Corridor Guidelines apply to the railroad corridor, and the project has been designed
with pleasant building facades and landscaping which faces the railroad right-of-way.
The proposed hotel is the tallest building with a height of 45 feet to the.peak of the roof. The
peak elevation will be approximately 28 feet above the elevation of the freeway. The height of
the restaurants are approximately 26 feet to the roof peaks and the highest points of the food mart
and gas station canopy, respectively, are 23.5 feet and 33.5 feet. Since no views of the coastline
are present from the freeway in either a north or southbound direction, the primary aesthetic
concerns are in regard to any negative visual impacts of exposed roof equipment or utility areas.
The roof equipment for the hotel will be ground mounted in an equipment room. The roof
equipment on the restaurants will be located within a mechanical equipment well and screened
with trellis screen panels painted to match the building. The food mart mechanical equipment
will be ground mounted and screened by an enclosure to complement the building. Views of
trash areas will also be screened from view with decorative enclosures and landscaping.
Standard conditions of approval also require submittal of a lighting plan with future submittal of
building plans. The lighting plans will be reviewed to insure that light fixtures are shielded so
15 Rev. 03/28/96 Jlf
that there is no spillover of light or glare onto adjacent properties.
The perimeter of the site is surrounded primarily by Eucalyptus trees, with additional species
including Acacia, Pepper, Myoporum and Palm trees intermixed among the Eucalyptus. The
trees were evaluated by a certified arborist and the majority of the trees were found to be
suffering from either insect borer activity and damaged root systems, or were found to be
hazardous due to prior pruning activities. The majority of the trees will be removed due to the
poor health of the trees or potentially hazardous condition. New landscaping around the
perimeter of the site will consist of a more suitable mixture of trees and shrubs for screening or
enhancing the appearance of the site.
Therefore, no significant negative visual impacts will result from the proposed project.
14. Cultural Resources
No cultural resources (paleontological, archaeological, or historical) have been identified on the
project site. The site also does not serve as a site for religious or sacred uses. Therefore, there
will be no impact to cultural resources.
15. Recreational
The project will not affect existing recreational opportunities, as it does not currently serve as a
recreation site. The project will also be conditioned to comply with the requirements of the
Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 for park and recreation facilities.
16 Rev. 03/28/96
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 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008,
(760) 602-4600.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Final Master Environmental Impact Renort for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update
(MEIR 93-Ol), dated March 1994, City of Carlsbad Planning Department.
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report for proposed Cannon Court Development,
dated June 18, 1998, Converse Consultants.
Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment for proposed Cannon Court Development,
dated December 10, 1999, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc.
Geotechnical Investigation for proposed Cannon Court Development, dated December 10,
1999, Construction Testing & Engineering, Inc.
Hvdroloav and Hydraulic Calculations Cannon Court # 210-010-38, dated December 8,
1999, O’Day Consultants, Inc.
Transportation Analvsis for Cannon Court, dated revised January 4, 2001 Urban Systems
Associates, Inc.
Noise Analysis for Cannon Court, dated February 11,2000, Mestre Greve Associates.
Letter from Jim Thompson, Certified Arborist, dated January 29, 1999, Butlers Mill, Inc.
17 Rev. 03/28/96 26
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
1. Grading activities shall be limited to the “dry season”, April 1 to October 1. The City
Engineer may permit an extension of the grading season until November 15 if all
precautionary measures regarding erosion, consistent with the City’s grading
ordinance, have been put into place by October 1.
2. Prior to completion of grading activities, additional soil samples shall be collected
and analyzed to determine their concentrations of toxaphene. If additional actions are
required, implementation of these mitigation measures shall occur prior to issuance of
a building permit.
3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any structure, the Developer shall submit
a letter from the acoustical engineer attesting that the recommended noise mitigation
measures have been incorporated into the construction documents.
4. Design and build a two-lane street through the project site for access to the property
to the north. Widen the street to four lanes at its intersection with Cannon Road.
5. Reserve additional right-of-way for the potential widening of the street through the
project to a four-lane road.
6. Design and build a traffic signal at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida
Encinas.
7. Interconnect the Cannon Road/Avenida Encinas traffic signal with the existing I-5
freeway ramp signals. Coordinate with Caltrans.
8. Incorporate and coordinate the railroad preemption for the new traffic signal.
9. Incorporate traffic signal phasing, signing and striping measures to assure the free
flow of traffic during signal preemption.
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
See Attached.
18 Rev. 03128196 27
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.
?.&a H, zoo/
Date Signade
19 Rev. 03/28/96 228
.
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 1 of 1
5 E
$ g
8 ‘S
Jz El E ’ E 2 g .- P
E .8 gEs g$jz
is
3 .E
iz m
e ‘C 0
.;i
iz
$ al 9
E g
c
62 E ‘3 kz ‘G .- E .
s”
=B 3 II 3
Eu su
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 1 of 1
MAR-27-0i TUE 4114 PM CALTRAK UFLIC TRANS FAX NO. El9 E 4292
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY GRAY DAVIS. Governor
lo*- -
DISTRICT 11
P.O. BOX 86406, M.S. 50
SAN DIEGO, CA 92186-5406
PHONE: 1619) 688-6954
FAX: (619) 688-4299
March 27,200l
Mr. Scottt Morgan
State Clearinghouse
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
Dear Mr. Morgan:
Draft ND for Cannon Court - SCH 2001021109
Caltrans District 11 comments are as follows:
General Comments
1 l-SD-005 PM 47.8
(K-P. 76.5)
l The Traffic Study should assess the cumulative impacts of all existing and future
projects in the vicinity of the proposed project.
l Caltrans requires Level of Service (LOS) C or better at State owned facilities, including
intersections. If an intersection is currently below LOS C, any increase in delay from
project generated traffic must be analyzed and mitigated.
l If certain traffic mitigation projects are identified as appropriate, then Caltram supports
the concept of “fair share” contributions on the part of the developer.
Swxific Comments
. pane 7-6 Table 7-2, Note 4; Dual right turn lanes WB to NB assumed. Please explain the
basis of this assumption.
l PaRe 8-2 Table 8-l ; LOS for AM and PM Peak Hours differs from Table 7-2. Please
explain.
l Secrion 9 Conclusions and Recommendations; Mitigation measures must be included in the Traffic Study. If the impact is completely mitigated, please describe how.
Our contact person for I-5 is Erwin Gojuangco, Route Manager, at (619) 688-6610.
Sincerely, * MT- A5W . 31 BILL FIGGE, dhief
Dcvelopmcnt Review and Public Transportation Branch
City of Carlsbad
April lo,2001
Caltrans, District 11
Erwin Gojuangco, Route Manager
P. 0. Box 85406, M.S. 50
San Diego, CA 92 186-5406
RE: DRAFI’ ND FOR CANNON COURT - SCH 2001021109
Dear Mr. Gojuangco:
Thank you for your comments regarding the traf& study for Cannon Court - CUP 99-30. I
asked the traffic consultant to address your comments and their response is included as an
attachment to this letter. In addition, David Stilhnan, City of Carlsbad Traffic Engineering
Department, reviewed the response from USA and feels that it adequately responds to your
concerns. Should you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact me at 760-602-
4626.
Sincerely,
Barbara Kennedy, AICP
Associate Planner
BK:cs
Attachment: Response from Urban Systems Associates dated 4/6/01
c: Bill Figge, Chief Development Review and Public Transportation Branch
1635 Faraday Avenue - Carlsbad, CA 92006-7314 l (760) 6024600 l FAX (760) 602-6559 l www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
9 Apr 06 01 02:OOp Urban Systems Assoc. Inc. [656.1560-9734 p.1 -
.
W?UTETbAO~ESM;-n,mr;PlMf~h4WQJU
A77”iv: Barbara Kennedy CI fax: v ,
q
phone : r
COM/?ANYt City of Carlsbad (760) 602-4626 (760) 602-8559
FROM: him Lundquist, Senior Project Mana TOTa PAGE25 : a
DA7E April 6, 2001 l7ME: 156 p TRANSUllTED MA: ht
SWFm CAURANS COMMEN7lE77TR - CANNON COURT
We are sending you the following information for our:
0 use 0 for submittal O as requested 0 approval d review & comment
Barbara:
we have reviewed the Caltrans comment letter and offer the following comments:
1. See Page l-l. The report examines Existing, Short Term and Buildout
scenarios. The SANDAG traffic forecast model was used for the Short Term
and Buildout scenarios which account for all future projects in the vicinity of
the proposed project.
2. See pages 3-8, 5-6, 6-7, 7-1 and 7-6. The City of Carlsbad follows the
procedures outlined in the “SANTEC/lTE Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies
(TX) in the San Diego Region”, dated March 2, 2000. That report, reviewed
by Bill Figge of Caitrans, states: “In general, the region wide goal for an
acceptable level of service (LOS) on all freeways, roadway segments and
intersections is 0”.
The project does not signif;cantly increase the delays at iny intersection
examined.
3. See pages 51,5-7, 5-8, 6-4 and 6-8. The project proposes to install a tr&c
signal at Cannon Road(Avenida Encinas, the widening of Avenida Encinas at
Cannon Road to four lanes, signal inter-connect with Caltrans ramp signal,
railroad preemption, keep clear signing and striping, preemption phasing and
dual west to south bound I& turn lanes on Cannon Road at Avettida Encinas.
If enclosures are not a.5 noted, please noti@ us at once.
#2S98 1 C\WFZCE2XJO~S9%-aps/d~& 3 3
#S4OdcMRNyylLu~~1~ l SUN LUWO, CA 9212~IS73 9 mm .mLA0II - FlW #mCOL cm MI l
Apr 06 01 02:OOp Urban Systems Assoc. ‘Inc. [8561560-9734 P-2
Barbara Kennedy
April 6, 2001 Urban Systems Associates, Inc.
4. See Page 7-6. This improvement is required as traffic volumes approach buildout forecasts. The project adds zero additional trips for this movement.
Without the improvement, the LOS is F with or without the project. The
improvement is planned to be done with development of the SDGErE property
located to the northeast of the ramp signal.
5. See Page 2-2, Section 2-4; Intersection Level of Service Los Procedures. To
determine an intersection peak hour level of service (LOS) as required by the
Civ of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan Guidelines, the Intersection
Capacity Utilization (KU) method was used (summarized in Table 7-2). For
Congestion Management Program evaluation purposes, intersection levels of
service were calculated using the latest Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
computer software methodology (the 1997 update to the 1994 HCM) as
summarized in Table 8-1. The two dW*rent analysis methods vary in
assumptions and do not always yield exactly the same results; acceptable levels
of service are achieved however.
6. See responses to question/comment #3 above. The project does fully mitigate
the significant traffic impacts with these mitigation measures.
Please let us know if you have any questions or need any other information.
cc: John 8uza, J.A. Bura Corporation ..................... (858) 756-2891
Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems ................ (760) 93 l-5744
X2598
If enclosures are not as noted, please notijl us at once.
2 ~\OFFIC~2000\2598-4OSOl~p~d~k
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Edwin F. Lowry, Director
Winston H. Hickox Agency Secretary California Environmental
Protection Agency
5796 Corporate Avenue Cypress, California 90630
March 19,200l
Ms. Barbara Kennedy
City of Carisbad
1635 Faraday Avenue ’
Carisbad, California 92008
NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE CANNON COURT - SDP 00-09/CUP 99-
31/PUD 00-l 09/MS 99-16 - 2001021109
Dear Ms. Kennedy:
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) has received your Negative
Declaration (ND) for the above-mentioned Project.
Based on the review of the document, DTSC’s comments are as follows:
1)
2)
3)
5)
’ The ND needs to identify and determine whether current or historic uses at the
Project site have resulted in any release of hazardous wastes/substances at the
Project area.
The ND needs to identify any known or potentially contaminated site within the
proposed Project area. For all identified sites, the ND needs to evaluate whether
conditions at the site pose a threat to human health or the environment.
The ND should identify the mechanism to initiate any required investigation
and/or remediation for any site that may require remediation, and which
government agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight.
The ND indicates that the property had previously been used for agricultural uses and the Phase II Environmental Assessment conducted at the site detected
the presence of Toxaphene. The ND proposes the grading activities (mixing and blending of the soil), and if needed, additional actions such as thicker concrete
slabs or the placement of vapor barriers. Pursuant to the California Code of
Regulations, Title 22, Section 66268.3, no generator, transporter, handler, or
owner or operator of a treatment, storage, or disposal facility shall in any way
dilute a restricted waste or the residual from treatment of a restricted waste as a
The energy challenge facing Califomia is real. Every Calhbmian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption.
For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, sae our Web-site at wwv.dtsc.ca.gov. 33-
63 Printed on Recycled Paper
Ms. Barbara Kennedy
March 19,200l
Page Two
substitute for adequate treatment to achieve acceptable standards. The
treatment measure proposed at the site, mixing and blending of the soil, is a form
of dilution and that it is not acceptable to DTSC. Therefore, DTSC recommends
further assessment and a removal/remediation of the site. Further remedial
action proposed such as capping or placement of vapor barriers shall be
implemented after a Remedial InvestigationiFeasibility Study, which includes a
Human and Environmental Health Risk Assessment. After the Risk Assessment,
if the proposed remedial measure is feasible, it can be implemented with the
approval of a regulatory agency. Therefore, proper investigation and remedial
actions should be conducted at the site before initiating grading activities.
6) If during construction of the project, soil contamination is suspected, stop
construction in the area and appropriate Health and Safety procedures should be
implemented. If it is determined that contaminated soil exists, the ND should
identify how any required investigation and/or remediation will be conducted, and
which government agency will provide appropriate regulatory oversight.
DTSC provides guidance for the Preliminary Endangerment Assessment (PEA) preparation and cleanup oversight through the Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP). For
additional information on the VCP or to meet/discuss this matter further, please contact
Ms. Rania A. Zabaneh, Project Manager at (714) 484-5479..
#yG&..
Haissam Y. Salloum, P.E.
Unit Chief
Southern California Cleanup Operations Branch
Cypress Office
cc: Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
State Clearinghouse
1400 Tenth Street
Sacramento, California 95814
Mr. Guenther W. Moskat, Chief
Planning and Environmental Analysis Section
CEQA Tracking Center
Department of Toxic Substances Control
P-0. Box 806
Sacramento, California 95812-0806
36
City of Carlsbad
April 19,200l
Department of Toxic Substances Control
Haissam Y. Salloum, P.E.
5796 Corporate Avenue
Cypress, CA 90630
RE: DRAFT ND FOR CANNON COURT - SCH 2001021109
Dear Mr. &$&&:
Thank you for your comments regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration for Cannon Court. I asked
the consultant to address your comments and their response is included as an attachment to this letter.
Regarding comments #3, 5, and 6, the project will be conditioned to submit a detailed soils testing and
analysis report to the City and County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health for review and
approval prior to issuance of a grading permit. The condition will read as follows:
Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a detailed soils testing and analysis report shall be
prepared by a registered soils engineer, and submitted to the City and County Department
of Environmental Health for review and approval. This report shall evaluate the potential
for soil contamination due to historic uses, handling, or storage of agricultural chemicals
restricted by the San Diego County Department of Health Services. The report shall also
identify a range of possible mitigation measures designed to remediate any significant
public health impacts if hazardous chemicals are detected in the soils at concentrations
which would have a significantly adverse effect on human health. The Developer shall
implement one of the mitigation measures identified in the report prior to the issuance of
building permits should mitigation be necessary so as to reduce the impact to below a
level of significance.
The City and County Department of Health Services will provide the appropriate regulatory oversite to
monitor the required soil remediation for the project. Should you have any additional questions, please
feel free to contact me at 760-602-4626.
Sincerely,
~~I’J, :I --?L -j& t ! r/J.
Barbara Kennedy, AICP
Associate Planner
i
BK:cs
Attachment: Responses from Construction Testing and Engineering, Inc. dated 4/12/O 1 and 4/l 8/01.
. 37
1635 Faraday Avenue l Carlsbad, CA 92006-7314 l (760) 6024600 - FAX (760) 602-6559 l www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
“, ,, AJ-SVUL ut.a2m rnwi;rLnnnAm 3T3ltlP (Mb Y&l S744
TO: 6028559 P:2’3 _ __ -
. 04/12 ‘01 17:s .
ID:CTE ESCONDlDO FFlx:7#-746-98c6 PIa 1
' luvm!!~~ l mw,u l mcY,lx * UNCh~&Ch l MCLMENTQCA
499L9fiuweU lwhrlllrhm ulw.lua Ul56IW&R yt)#cQn*ha.
WC1 cduls &kF
~cAml9 wcmn9 0-4~mQ IqcxM# i!ztsNhruw ii!ii&tAw
ENGINEERING, 1NC. zew
H(D) m-ma t9mo16111 (pD))mm WII’IIWIW l9WyIW f9m Jn-1lM ?a1 lmat-lacpr oDn-= 1YII~RI VJN lMW?ms
April 12,200l cm 3ob Na 10-371s
1530 FamdmyAvsru# Suitt 100 a?&b&~92ooa
Subjwt Additianrl-~lKtstadbym3c
m--- clIlicw&wnl8
Rem iuwkwby Strttofw~DcpcrRmrarofToxicsubstrnces~~ lhgativa-firsdIaceIuloDcimrt SDP-OCWKUP ~3liPUC 00409/MS 9946 - 200102lHb9 LhtedibhTclt 19,2001
NIL- .
olrrmponsc:websva~fb6PhwcIEnvtoamGatJsita~~ thissite(couwweCoasutbanb, 1998). B88edonthis~it8ppoantbd
d#rite-usadfix~~fkomm-
s**@$ *~ww h# fo .
2.ThcDTsc~IbtNDn&dstoldandfyauykaowurpodmtirlly
WItdWUdritawithtbepro~pIoject~ Porrtiidediod~~ND mcd6toev8WewMhcfdi~8tthtsite~a~~,bum8nbuwnhasltb thesnviroaanwat”
GEOTECIINICAI. AND CONSTRUCTlON JZNGINEERI~~ TRSllNG AND INSPECTION
38
lJ-,=,&,l k, f : w FKUm: r-l* sY!5EH!zl 760 931 5744 TO: 6028559 P: 3'3 ,,rK-
u'(/ IL VI Ifirm 1LJ;lctt tSUlNU1lJu FRx:760-746+806 PAGE 2
Addititml Infommth Requested by MSC hd
y&=ggF~-D”lelopD-
Appil12,2001 CTE JobNo. lo-3715
clc.nnh up coned citea. Tbe PROS UC *-bawd cunccnmtjons dmived fmmstamdardizdlequadons.comb~~ti’~~ EPA toxicity data. PRCh arc regplakxy guideliacs. ‘Ihe PRG for toxapbone c1~mmtianeinsoif~induebhtsitesis22mglLg. FrcmourpFsvioos WolkRt this rite toxllpilene conmns nmged fknl14.54 to 222 mg/kg However, ow work wIE wndwted colefy far uomcnhg pwpbes. bent& the DTSC hm issued (June 28,2ooo) Rn intea g&lance for~liog of agrwhIr8l8oik WC rummend that a sampling of the site be cam&ted using the newly issuud D’RX
gllidelirses.
4. TheIwI8nowmmeRt4.
5. DTsc(JwqhzwuI)unote:GzRding~apwposedror~ methodology and thil is unmceptable to the DTSC. Ths DTSC Rlso lacommclldedwnductingfiartsa assc8smcn~0fthc site.
ourra5pcnse: cmdidnot rammendgrrdinsasrmun,ofdilutiugtbtsitc mik It 1s our errpcrtsnoe tbt ooiis co&mimed 4th agricuhtsal olm&als as geJml~rcstrictcdtotbcuppcr~tlu6llwfoaoftheaoilcohtma. Duriqthe cofwmtionproceea,~uppcrrai1nrrdtrirtrtrc~ny~(thcy0Rcll contdn topsoiI wbicb is nmcqtmbk in buiiiq -)rrsrdbllUkd~ thesite. Itwrroolt~on~tths~foottothrrs~ofaoikwaorldbc retRoved, cm tea provide Rdditional RSCRSEDlSRSIRqUCStRd~tbCDTsc. Weareounaadyw~withthcrD~on~ilsr~~~in~~ruw.
6, NocmxnmcntbyCTE.
IfyouhrveMyqlreatione~th~~~pJ~donat~tocontrmthie office. Tbe opportrmity to be of scmiw is appmht&
m, RO, REA II MO137
39
v4/ IY Ul 14;33
ENGINEERING, INC.
ILJ:LI~ tSANUIUU FAX : 760-746-9806 “AGE ,L
CONSTRUCIXON "I~BTING& ENGINEEIUNGJNC.
MN DlQxo, C.A l RIVEkSlDE, CA * VENwlU,c4 l TRACY.cA l lASC.4sm~.CA . SACRAblESlU,CA
2416 Wwyrd Au. 4wL.mhda 1645 ?ncmc Aw a4z)ELnmb 421% 10th Y. t YZQ Hdiuvl hr.
SukC 6ulrr 7 SLIII? 105 Far F LdlK SBile 22 EamdidaCA9MP mww, CA 91719 ozlwd. CA 9.w htf, CA 9m l#atcalrr. CA 9w4 h’. Hghl4nlb c4 9wI r74o(O, 7444941 m9l371~16% @@51 J%-u?f 120% 839-m (661 I 7269676 (Qlbt 331.6W 040174b9606 M’ILI l%Q) 371*2166 m MOII 4%.9otc CA). ml u39.2895 CAX Ml\ 7lco246 14x Olbl mbo37 fAh
April 18,2001 CTE Job No. IO-371 5
Mr. ihnis Cunningham Planning Systems 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008
Subject: Response to Mano of Apn’l17,2001 From Dennis Cunningham Prqoscd Cannon Court Development APN 223-051-12 Carlsbad, California
Mr. CllnniJIgham:
To clarify, organic-containing soils are anticipated to be removed, However, based on our observations organiccontaining soils are not present hughout the site. As explained previously, the depth of these soils is variable across the site. Locally, some arms may require only blading off. However, other areas may require IWTKW~.~S of up to three feet. 1 anticipate that an average of six inches of soil needs to removed,
If you have any questions regarding this trzmsmhtal, please do not hesitate to c0a¶tact this offke. The opportunity to be of service is apprezciated,
Rce~lly submitted,
CONSTRUCTiON TESTING & ENGINEERTNG, INC.
%E=hw RG, MA 11 #ml37
GEOTECHNICAI. ANI3 CONS’I’WUCTION ENGINEERIW~ TESTING ANI) MISPECTION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4978
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF CONDITONAL USE PERMIT CUP 99-30 TO
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A GAS STATION, MINI-
MART, HOTEL AND TWO RESTAURANTS ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
CANNON ROAD AND INTERSTATE 5 IN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 3.
CASE NAME: CANNON COURT
CASE NO.: CUP 99-30
WHEREAS, J. A. Buza Corp, LLDeveloper”, has tiled a verified application with
the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by West Development, Inc, “Owner”, described
as
That portion of Lot “H” of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, in the City
of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California,
according to Petition Map thereof No. 823, iiled in the Office of
the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 16,1896
(APN 21 O-01 O-38)
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Conditional Use
Permit as shown on Exhibit(s) “A” - “CC” dated May 16, 2001, on file in the Planning
Department CANNON COURT - CUP 00-30, as provided by Chapter/Sections 21.42,21.50,
21.29.060, and 21.208 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 16th day of May, 2001, 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 persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Conditional Use Permit.
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 CANNON COURT - CUP 99-30, based on
the following findings and subject to the following conditions:
Findinps:
1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in
conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan, based on the facts set forth in
the staff report dated May 16, 2001 and recognizing that the project will provide
needed services for the surrounding residential and business’community, as well as
the traveling public.
2. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 3 and all City public facility policies and
ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or
provide funding to ensure that all facilities and improvements regarding: sewer collection
and treatment; water; drainage; circulation; fire; schools; parks and other recreational
facilities; libraries; government administrative facilities; and open space, related to the
project will be installed to serve new development prior to or concurrent with need.
A. The project has been conditioned to provide proof from the Carlsbad Unified
School District that the project has satisfied its obligation for school facilities.
B. The Public Facility fee is required to be paid by Council Policy No. 17 and will be
collected prior to the issuance of building permit.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - (SECTION 21.42 and 21.50)
3. 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:
A. The requested use is necessary and desirable for the development of the’
community in that the project is considered to be a Freeway Service Facility
due to its proximity to the freeway interchange, and the proposed gas station,
mini-mart, hotel, and restaurant uses are appropriate uses for Freeway
Service Facilities.
B. The project is in harmony with various elements of the General Plan in that
the underlying Travel Recreation (T-R) land use designation ensures that
commercial uses will be available to the surrounding business and residential
community as well as the traveling public.
C. The project is not detrimental to the existing and future uses specifically
permitted in the area in that the street and circulation improvements are
designed to minimize potential traffic circulation conflicts; an access road
has been designed to serve existing and future uses for the parcel north of the
PC PESO NO. 4978 -2- 4%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
project site; visual impacts are reduced through landscaping, building
placement, and screen walls; and the architectural style complies with the
Commercial Visitor Serving Overlay Zone requirements.
4. 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 applicable development standards, including parking, circulation
aisles, and setbacks.
5. 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 all development standards required by the C-T zone
and Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone have been provided, including
special development standards for gas stations, and special conditions for buildings
with heights over 35 feet.
6. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic
generated by the proposed use, in that with the incorporation of the required roadway
and intersection improvements, the additional 4,793 ADT generated by the project
will not significantly reduce the levels of service of the surrounding roadways and
key intersections.
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION (SECTION 21.42.010(7)(A) and (B)
7. That the service station is to be developed as part of a freeway-service facility,
containing a minimum of two freeway oriented uses, in that the site is located at the
apex of a freeway interchange quadrant and contains three freeway-oriented uses
(hotel and two restaurants) in addition to the automobile service station use and that
the required standards of development are either incorporated into the plans or will
be satisfied through the conditions of approval.
COMMERCIALMSITOR SERVING OVERLAY ZONE (SECTION 21.208.110)
8.
9.
10.
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 site design includes
passenger drop-off zones, clear pedestrian pathways between uses, RV and bus
parking, and an NCTD bus stop on Cannon Road.
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 building complies
with the Village Architectural Style and features gabled roof elements, a variety of
roof peaks, interesting building forms, and high quality surface and detail elements.
That the project complies with all development and design criteria of the overlay zone in
that the project complies with the parking requirements, sign allowances, building
height, building setback, architectural style, landscaping, and use separation
requirements of the overlay zone.
. 43 PC RESO NO. 4978 -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
11.
12.
13.
14.
That the additional building height for the proposed hotel, to a maximum height of
45 feet, can be approved per Section 21.29.060 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code since
the building does not contain more than three levels; all required setbacks have
been increased at a ratio of one horizontal foot for every one foot of vertical
construction above 35 feet and the setbacks will be maintained as landscaped open
space; and the building is required to conform to the requirements of Section
18.04.170 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
That the project is consistent with the City’s Landscape Manual (Carlsbad Municipal
Code Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section I B).
That the proposed development is in conformance with the Agua Hedionda Land
Use Plan and all applicable policies in that the project has been reviewed for
consistency with relevant coastal policies including land use, development
standards, grading and drainage, stormwater management, shoreline access polices,
and visual resources. The project has been conditioned to obtain its coastal
development permit from the Coastal Commission.
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.
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to issuance of a
grading permit.
General:
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 Conditional Use Permit.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Conditional Use Permit 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. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local
laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
PC RESO NO. 4978 -4- 44
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.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
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 shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Cannon Court -
CUP 99-30 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
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, corn (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. This obligation
survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City’s
approval is not validated.
The Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24” x 36”,
mylar copy of the Tentative Parcel Map and Site Plan reflecting the conditions
approved by the final decision making body.
The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a
reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24” x 36” blueline drawing
format (including any applicable Coastal Commission approvals).
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the
Director from the Carlsbad Unified School District that this project has satisfied its
obligation to provide school facilities.
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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 and is
subject to all conditions contained in PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 for the Nonresidential
Planned Development Permit and Minor Subdivision.
This approval shall become null and void if the first building permit is not issued for this
project within 18 months from the date of Final Parcel Map approval.
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
PC RESO NO. 4978 -5- &-
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
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 note to this effect
shall be placed on the Final Parcel Map.
14. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the gas station/mini-mart, the
Developer shall obtain and maintain in good standing all licenses, permits, or
approvals required by state law to operate as a gas station and food mart.
Coastal
15. 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
1st 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.
16. Prior to approval of the Final Parcel Map, the Developer shall apply for and obtain
approval of a Coastal Development Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission
or its successor in interest, that substantially conforms to this approval. A signed copy of
the Coastal Development Permit must be submitted to the Planning Director. If the
approval is substantially different, an amendment to CUP 99-30, PUD 00-109, and MS
99-l 6 shall be required.
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlav Zone
17. If, at any time, the City Council, Planning Commission or Planning Director determine
that there has been, or may be, a violation of the findings or conditions of this conditional
use permit, or of the Municipal Code regulations, a public hearing may be held before the
City Council to review this permit. At said hearing, the City Council may add additional
conditions, recommend additional enforcement actions, or revoke the permit entirely, as
necessary to ensure compliance with the Municipal Code and the intent and purposes of
the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone, and to provide for the health, safety and
general welfare of the City.
(Non-Residential) HousinP
18. 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,
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
PC RESO NO. 4978 -6-
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
project will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will
become null and void.
Landscape
19. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape
and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan
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.
20. 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.
Conditional Use Permit
21. 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.
22. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of ten (10) years from May 16,200l
through May 16,201l. 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 (10) 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.
23. Any future proposal for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages shall be subject to
review by the City of Carlsbad Police Department.
24. This approval is granted only for the sale of ready-to-eat food and canned or bottled
beverages within the mini-mart. Food shall be pre-cooked or prepared at another
location and only heated on the site. No stoves or ovens for the cooking or
preparation of food, nor tableware or dishwashing facilities (other than a standard
sink) shall be permitted. This business shall operate as a take-out business only. No
tables or chairs shall be provided for the consumption of food on the premises. Any
future proposal to locate a hot food/fast food vendor(s) within the mini-mart shall be
PC RESO NO. 4978 -7- 47
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
considered an intensification of use and will require an amendment to the
Conditional Use Permit.
25. The Developer shall establish an owner’s association and corresponding covenants,
conditions and restrictions. Said CC&Rs shall be submitted to and approved by the
Planning Director prior to final map approval. The CC&l&s shall adequately address
maintenance of all common landscaped areas, parking areas, and circulation aisles.
Prior to issuance of a building permit the Developer shall provide the Planning
Department with a recorded copy of the official CC&Rs that have been approved by the
Department of Real Estate and the Planning Director. At a minimum, the CC&& shall
contain the following provisions:
A. General Enforcement bv the Citv. The City shall have the right, but not the
obligation, to enforce those Protective Covenants set forth in this Declaration in
favor of, or in which the City has an interest.
B. Notice and Amendment. A copy of any proposed amendment shall be provided to
the City in advance. If the proposed amendment affects the City, City shall have
the right to disapprove. A copy of the final approved amendment shall be
transmitted to City within 30 days for the official record.
C. Failure of Association to Maintain Common Area Lots and Easements. In the
event that the Association fails to maintain the “Common Area Lots and/or the
Association’s Easements” as provided in Article , Section
the City shall have the right, but not the duty, to perform the necessary
maintenance. If the City elects to perform such maintenance, the City shall give
written notice to the Association, with a copy thereof to the Owners in the Project,
setting forth with particularity the maintenance which the City finds to be required
and requesting the same be carried out by the Association within a period of thirty
(30) days from the giving of such notice. In the event that the Association fails to
carry out such maintenance of the Common Area Lots and/or Association’s
Easements within the period specified by the City’s notice, the City shall be
entitled to cause such work to be completed and shall be entitled to
reimbursement with respect thereto from the Owners as provided herein.
D. Special Assessments Levied by the Citv. In the event the City has performed the
necessary maintenance to either Common Area Lots and/or Association’s
Easements, the City shall submit a written invoice to the Association for all costs
incurred by the City to perform such maintenance of the Common Area Lots and
or Association’s Easements. The City shall provide a copy of such invoice to
each Owner in the Project, together with a statement that if the Association fails to
pay such invoice in full within the time specified, the City will pursue collection
against the Owners in the Project pursuant to the provisions of this Section. Said
invoice shall be due and payable by the Association within twenty (20) days of
receipt by the Association. If the Association shall fail to pay such invoice in full
within the period specified, payment shall be deemed delinquent and shall be
subject to a late charge in an amount equal to six percent (6%) of the amount of
the invoice. Thereafter the City may pursue collection from the Association by
PC RESO NO. 4978 -8- 4-u
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
means of any remedies available at law or in equity. Without limiting the
generality of the foregoing, in addition to all other rights and remedies available
to the City, the City may levy a special assessment against the Owners of each Lot
in the Project for an equal prorata share of the invoice, plus the late charge. Such
special assessment shall constitute a charge on the land and shall be a continuing
lien upon each Lot against which the special assessment is levied. Each Owner in
the Project hereby vests the City with the right and power to levy such special
assessment, to impose a lien upon their respective Lot and to bring all legal
actions and/or to pursue lien foreclosure procedures against any Owner and
his/her respective Lot for purposes of collecting such special assessment in
accordance with the procedures set forth in Article _ of this Declaration.
E. Landscape Maintenance Responsibilities. The Owners Association and
individual lot owner landscape maintenance responsibilities shall be as set forth in
Exhibit .
Notice
26. 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.
27. Prior to issuance of the grading permit, 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. 4978 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.
28. Prior to the recordation of the Final Parcel Map or the issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this property
may be subject to noise impacts from the proposed or existing Transportation Corridor, in
a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and City Attorney (see Noise Form
#l on file in the Planning Department).
Onsite Conditions - Specific
29. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a detailed soils testing and analysis report
shall be prepared by a registered soils engineer, and submitted to the City and
County Department of Environmental Health for review and approval. This report
shall evaluate the potential for soil contamination due to historic uses, handling, or
storage of agricultural chemicals restricted by the San Diego County Department of
Health Services. The report shall also identify a range of possible mitigation
measures designed to remediate any significant public health impacts if hazardous
chemicals are detected in the soils at concentrations which would have a
significantly adverse effect on human health. The Developer shall implement one of
PC RESO NO. 4978 -9- 49
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
the mitigation measures identified in the report prior to the issuance of building
permits should mitigation be necessary so as to reduce the impact to below a level of
significance.
30. Prior to recordation of the Final Parcel Map, a joint use parking agreement shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director, City Engineer, and
City Attorney. The agreement shall provide for the following:
A. The sharing in perpetuity of all parking and access aisles/driveways onsite,
including within the underground parking garage, and between all the uses
proposed for the Cannon Court project.
B. The agreement shall not be modified without the prior written approval of
the Planning Director, City Engineer, and City Attorney.
C. A copy of the joint use parking agreement shall be recorded in the Office of
the County Recorder and copies filed with the Planning Director prior to
issuance of building permits for the project.
31. No future development, other than the installation of a portion of the Coastal Rail
Trail and sidewalks and/or other related improvements to serve future development
north of the site (if required), shall be permitted on the landscaped “park” area
located at the southwest corner of the project site.
32. Prior to occupancy of the first building, 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.
33. 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 2 1.105. Location of said receptacles shall be approved by the
Planning Director. Enclosure shall be of similar colors and/or materials to the project to
the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
34. The Developer shall submit a solid waste management plan for review and approval
by the City of Carlsbad. The plan shall provide the following:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
The approximate location, type, and number of containers to be used to
collect refuse and recyclables.
Refuse and recyclable collection methods to be used.
A description and site plan for any planned onsite processing facilities or
equipment (balers/compactors).
A description of the types of recycling services to be provided and
contractual relationships with vendors to provide these services.
The estimated quantity of waste generated and estimated quantities of
recyclable materials.
PC F2ESO NO. 4978 -lO- 5-D
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
F. The plan shall also evaluate the feasibility of the following diversion
programs/measures:
9 Source separated green waste collection.
ii) Cardboard recycling.
iii) Programs which provide for the separation of wet (disposable) and
dry (recoverable) materials.
iv) Where feasible, providing compactors for non-recyclables to reduce
the number of trips to disposal facilities.
9 Glass recycling in restaurants.
35. No outdoor storage of materials or display of materials or merchandise shall occur
onsite unless required by the Fire Chief. When so required, 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.
36. 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 homes or property. The maximum height of the light
poles shall not exceed 20 feet. A lighting plan for the gas station canopy shall also be
submitted for approval by the Planning Department.
37. The hotel building shall be designed to comply with Title 18 - Building Codes and
Regulations, Section 1804.170 (Special provisions for buildings between thirty-five
and fifty-five feet in height) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
~ 38. Development shall occur in conformance with the proposed “Construction Phasing
Plan.” The Developer shall construct, install and stripe not less than the required
number of parking spaces for each phase of construction, as shown on Attachment 8 -
Construction Phasing Plan. Landscape and site improvements shown for each
phase of construction shall be completed prior to occupancy of the building in any
given phase. Modifications to the Construction Phasing Plan may be approved by
the Planning Director provided that the required number of parking spaces for each
building are installed and accessible prior to occupancy of any individual building.
39. 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.
40. 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 are not paid, this
approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall become void.
PC RESO NO. 4978 -ll- 51
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
41.
42.
43.
44.
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.
Premise identification (addresses) shall be provided consistent with Carlsbad Municipal
Code Section 18.04.320.
Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance
with the City’s Sign Ordinance and Sign Program for Cannon Court PS 00-67 and
shall require review and approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such
signs.
Engineering
General
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site
within this project, Developer shall apply for and obtain approval from the City Engineer
for the proposed haul route.
Prior to issuance of any building permit, Developer shall comply with the requirements of
the City’s anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is
formally established by the City.
Developer shall provide to the City Engineer an acceptable means, CC&Rs and/or other
recorded document for maintaining the private easements within the project and all the
private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, sewer and storm drain facilities
located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner
among the owners of the properties within the project.
Prior to occupancy, Developer shall install rain gutters to convey roof drainage to an
approved drainage course or street to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Developer shall install sight distance corridors at all street intersections in accordance
with Engineering Standards.
Fees/Apreements
50. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for
recordation the City’s standard form Geologic Failure Hold Harmless Agreement.
51. Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the City Engineer for
recordation the City’s standard form Drainage Hold Harmless Agreement regarding
drainage across the adjacent property.
52. Developer shall cause property owner to execute, record and submit a recorded copy to
PC RESO NO. 4978 -12- 52
-
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
the City Engineer, a deed restriction on the property which relates to the proposed cross
lot drainage as shown on the site plan. The deed restriction document shall be in a form
acceptable to the City Engineer and shall:
A. Clearly delineate the limits of the drainage course;
B. State that the drainage course is to be maintained in perpetuity by the underlying
property owner; and
D. State that all future use of the property along the drainage course will not restrict,
impede, divert or otherwise alter drainage flows in a manner that will result in
damage to the underlying and adjacent properties or the creation of a public
nuisance.
53. Prior to approval of any grading or building permits for this project, Developer shall
cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area
shown within the boundaries of the project into the existing City of Carlsbad Street
Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1, on a form provided by the City Engineer.
54. The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section
20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Grading
55. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first,
Developer shall submit to the City Engineer proof that a Notice of Intention for the start
of work has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board.
56. Upon completion of grading, Developer shall file an “as-graded” geologic plan with the
City Engineer. The plan shall clearly show all the geology as exposed by the grading
operation, all geologic corrective measures as actually constructed and must be based on
a contour map which represents both the pre and post site grading. The plan shall be
signed by both the soils engineer and the engineering geologist, and shall be submitted on
a 24” x 36” mylar or similar drafting film format suitable for a permanent record.
57. This project requires off site grading. No grading for private improvements shall occur
outside the limits of this approval unless Developer obtains, records and submits a
recorded copy to the City Engineer a grading or slope easement or agreement from the
owners of the affected properties. 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 apply for and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans so grading
will not occur outside the project and apply for and obtain a finding of substantial
conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director.
58. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the site
plan, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall apply for and obtain a
grading permit from the City Engineer prior to issuance of a building permit for the
project.
PC RESO NO. 4978 -13- 53
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
Coastal Conditions
59. All grading activities shall comply with all the conditions of the Coastal
Development Permit.
Dedications/Improvements
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City
for the following:
A. An easement for public access and public utility purposes for the
prolongation of Avenida Encinas through the project site as shown on the
site plan.
B. An easement for the construction of a portion of the Coastal Rail Trail
system through the project site adjacent to Cannon Road westerly of the
prolongation of Avenida Encinas, its location to be determined in
coordination with the City.
All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and
without cost.
Developer shall cause adjacent Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to
the City for an easement for public access and public utility purposes over and
across that portion of the parcel westerly of the project site. Said easement shall be
for the purpose of the prolongation of Avenida Encinas, for emergency access from
Cannon Road, and for the construction of a portion of the Coastal Rail Trail system.
All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and encumbrances and
without cost.
Developer shall cause Owner to execute a covenant for easement for reciprocal access
and maintenance over all driveway aisles and parking areas, including the hotel
underground parking, all as shown on the site plan. The obligation to execute and
record the covenant for easement shall be shown and recording information called out on
the site plan. Developer shall provide City Engineer with proof of recordation prior to
issuance of building permit.
Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City
and/or other appropriate entities for all public easements as shown on the site plan and/or
required after final design of the site plan. The offer shall be made by a certificate on
the final parcel map for MS 99-16. All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of
all liens and encumbrances and without cost. Streets that are already public are not
required to be rededicated.
Additional drainage easements may be required. Developer shall dedicate and provide or
install drainage structures, as may be required by the City Engineer, prior to or concurrent
with any grading or building permit.
PC RESO NO. 4978 -14- 54
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
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
Developer shall provide the design of all private streets and drainage systems to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The structural section of all private streets shall conform
to City of Carlsbad Standards based on R-value tests. All private streets and drainage
systems shall be inspected by the City. Developer shall pay the standard improvement
plancheck and inspection fees.
Developer shall execute a City standard Development Improvement Agreement to install
and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public improvements shown on
the site plan and the following improvements including, but not limited to paving, base,
sidewalks, curbs and gutters, medians, grading, clearing and grubbing, undergrounding or
relocation of utilities, sewer, water, storm drain system, fire hydrants, street lights,
signing and striping, retaining walls and reclaimed water, to City Standards to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer.
A. Half street improvements of Cannon Road to major arterial standards along
the project frontage.
B. Traffic signal at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas, with
an interconnect to the existing traffic signal at Cannon Road and the I-5 off
and on-ramps. Work to be coordinated with Caltrans.
C. Improvements to Avenida Encinas southerly of its intersection with Cannon
Road in order to ensure alignment with the proposed onsite street.
Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the
subdivision or development improvement agreement or such other time as provided in
said agreement.
Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall underground all existing overhead
utilities along the project boundary.
Developer shall have the entire drainage system designed, submitted to and approved by
the City Engineer, to ensure that runoff resulting from lo-year frequency storms of 6
hours and 24 hours duration under developed conditions, are equal to or less than the
runoff from a storm of the same frequency and duration under existing developed
conditions. Both 6 hour and 24 hour storm durations shall be analyzed to determine the
detention basin capacities necessary to accomplish the desired results.
Developer shall comply with the City’s requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Developer shall provide improvements constructed
pursuant to 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 submitted to
and subject to the approval of 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.
PC RESO NO. 4978 -15- 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
70.
71.
72.
73.
B.
C.
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, fungicides,
herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet
Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective
containers.
Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants
when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements.
Prior To Occupancy, Developer shall install street lights along all public and private
street frontages abutting and/or within the project site in conformance with City of
Carlsbad Standards.
Prior to occupancy, Developer shall install sidewalks along all public streets abutting the
project site in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
Prior to occupancy, Developer shall install wheelchair ramps at the public street comers
abutting the project site in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards.
Prior to building permit or grading permit issuance, whichever occurs first Developer
shall have design, apply for and obtain approval of the City Engineer, for the structural
section for the access aisles 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 or grading plan review’ whichever occurs first.
Utilities
74.
75.
76.
77.
Prior to approval of improvement plans or final map, Developer shall meet with the Fire
Marshal to determine if fire protection measures (fire flows, fire hydrant locations,
building sprinklers) are required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if proposed, shall be
considered public improvements and shall be served by public water mains to the
satisfaction of the District Engineer.
The Developer shall design and construct public facilities within public right-of-way or
within minimum 20-feet wide easements granted to the District or the City of Carlsbad.
At the discretion of the Deputy City Engineer, wider easements may be required for
adequate maintenance, access and/or joint utility purposes
Prior to issuance of building permits, Developer shall pay all fees, deposits, and charges
for connection to public facilities. Developer shall pay the San Dieno Countv Water
Authority capacity charge(s) prior to issuance of Building Permits.
The Developer shall prepare a colored recycled water use map and submit it to the
Planning Department for processing and approval by the Deputy City Engineer.
PC RESO NO. 4978 -16- 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
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
. . .
The Developer shall design landscape and irrigation plans utilizing recycled water as a
source. Said plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Engineer -
Utilities.
The Developer shall install potable water and recycled water services and meters at a
location approved by the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. The locations of said services
shall be reflected on public improvement plans.
The Developer shall install sewer laterals and clean-outs at a location approved by the
Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. The locations of sewer laterals shall be reflected on
public improvement plans.
The Developer shall design and construct public water, sewer, and recycled water
facilities substantially as shown on the site plan to the satisfaction of the Deputy City
Engineer - Utilities. Proposed public facilities shall be reflected on public improvement
plans.
This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be
issued for the development of the subject property, unless the Deputy City Engineer has
determined that adequate water and sewer facilities are available at the time of
occupancy.
Prior to Final Map approval or issuance of building permits, whichever is first, the entire
potable water, recycled water, and sewer system shall be evaluated in detail to ensure that
adequate capacity, pressure, and flow demands can be met to the satisfaction of the
Deputy City Engineer.
The Developer shall submit a detailed sewer study, prepared by a Registered
Engineer, that identifies the peak flows of the project, required pipe sizes, depth of
flow in pipe, velocity in the main lines, and the capacity of the existing
infrastructure. Said study shall be submitted concurrently with the improvement
plans for the project and the study shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the
District Engineer.
The Developer shall submit a detailed potable water study, prepared by a
Registered Engineer that identifies the peak demands of the project (including fire
flow demands). The study shall identify velocity in the main lines, pressure zones,
and the required pipe sizes. Said study shall be submitted concurrently with the
improvement plans for the project and the study shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the District Engineer.
The Developer shall submit a detailed recycled water study, prepared by a
Registered Engineer that identifies the peak demands of the project. The study shall
identify velocity in the main lines and the required pipe sizes. Said study shall be
submitted concurrently with the improvement plans for the project and the study
shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the District Engineer.
PC RESO NO. 4978 -17- 5-7
87. Four additional on-site fire hydrants must be provided. Consult with the Fire
3 Department to determine precise locations.
4 88. Fire flow requirement is 3000 gallons per minute and may be delivered from 2 fire
5 hydrant sources.
6
II
Code Reminders
7 The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to
8 the following:
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Engineering:
89. 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 Carlsbad Municipal Code (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
90. Some improvements shown on the site plan and/or required by these conditions are
located offsite on property which neither the City nor the owner has sufficient title or
interest to permit the improvements to be made without acquisition of title or interest.
The Developer shall immediately initiate negotiations to acquire such property. The
Developer shall use its best efforts to effectuate negotiated acquisition. If unsuccessful,
Developer shall apply and obtain an amendment of this approval or modify the plans
so improvements will not occur outside the project and obtain a finding of
substantial conformance from both the City Engineer and Planning Director.
Fire Department
91. The hotel and restaurant B must be protected by automatic fire sprinkler systems per
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 17.04.030.
92. The sprinkler system protecting the hotel must be a combination type which provides 2
and one-half inch gated hose outlets at all stair landings and at appropriate locations in
the basement parking areas per Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 17.04.010.
93. AutomatOc fire sprinkler protection of restaurant A will be required if its area exceeds
5000 square feet per Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 17.04.010.
NOTICE
27 II
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
28 “fees/exactions.”
PC RESO NO. 4978
You have 90 days from date of 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.
9
II PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning I
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 16th day of May 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Baker, Compas, Heineman,
L’Heureux, and Trigas
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Nielsen
ABSTAIN:
JEFW SEGALL, &&&son
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
23 ATTEST:
26
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILiER
Planning Director
59
xhe City of Carlsbad Planning Department EXHIBIT 4
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION d&@+
i
Item No. 1
P.C. AGENDA OF: May 16,200l 1
Application complete date: January 3,200O
Project Engineer: Frank Jimeno
SUBJECT: CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT - Request for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use
Permit to develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on
a 6.5 1 acre site located on the northwest comer of Cannon Road and Interstate 5,
in the C-T-Q zone, the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local
Facilities Management Zone 3.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4977 and 4978,
RECOMMENDING ADOPTION of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of Conditional Use
Permit CUP 99-30, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The proposal consists of the development of a 16-pump gas station and mini-mart, an 86 room
hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on the northwest comer of Cannon Road
and Interstate 5 in the C-T-Q zone. The project requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit
for: 1) the gas station, 2) to allow a building height of 45 feet for the hotel, and 3) because the
project site is located in the City’s Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. The City Council
has the final authority to approve projects which are located in the Commercial/Visitor Serving
Overlay Zone. Therefore, the Planning Commission is being asked to make a recommendation
of approval for the project.
The property is located within the Agua Hedionda Segment of the Local Coastal Program, an
area of deferred certification. The applicant will be conditioned to obtain approval of a Coastal
Development Permit from the California Coastal Commission. The project also includes a minor
subdivision (MS 99-16), Nonresidential Planned Development Permit (PUD 00-l 09), and Sign
Program (PS 00-67) to be acted upon by the Planning Director and City Engineer following final
action by the City Council. The project will not have a significant impact on the environment
with the incorporation of the mitigation measures included in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been issued for the project. The
project conforms to all applicable development standards, there are no unresolved project issues,
and findings can be made for approval of the project.
CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT
May 16,200l
Page 2
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The vacant 6.51 acre site is located on the northwest comer of Cannon Road and Interstate 5.
The AT&SF Railroad r.o.w. is located west of the site with the Encinas Power Plant beyond. A
60 foot wide road easement is located adjacent to the west property line and provides access to
the SDG&E storage yard, substation, and high tension power lines to the north. South of the site,
a new Inns of America hotel is currently under construction on the southeast comer of Avenida
Encinas and Cannon Road. The project site is relatively flat and currently drains to a 5’ x 5’
railroad tie culvert in the AT&SF Railroad r.o.w. The pad area is devoid of any significant
vegetation. Mature Eucalyptus trees along with other varieties of trees and shrubs surround the
property either on-site or within the adjacent CalTrans r.o.w. The majority of this vegetation is
in poor condition and most of the on-site trees and shrubs will be removed and replaced with new
landscaping.
The site is zoned C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist-Qualified Development Overlay Zone) with a
General Plan Land Use Designation of T-R (Travel-Recreation/Commercial). The development
proposal consists of the phased construction of a 16-pump gas station with a 1,500 square foot
mini-mart; a three-story 86 room hotel (53,651 square feet) with a subterranean parking garage; a
7,700 square foot restaurant (Restaurant “B”) located west of the hotel; and, a 4,800 square foot
restaurant (Restaurant “A”) located near the center of the site. Access to the site is via a private
road which will tie into a new signalized intersection at Avenida Encinas and Cannon Road. The
road will also provide access for existing and future uses north of the project site. The roadway
has been designed to allow for future widening, if necessary, depending on future development
proposals for the property north of the site. Three driveway entrances provide access to the
development area from the private road. Continuous circulation is provided between the shared
parking areas so that it is not necessary to exit and re-enter the site to access the various parking
areas. The circulation system has also been designed to provide adequate turning radius for trash
service vehicles, delivery trucks and fueling delivery vehicles.
A secondary emergency egress road is located within the adjacent 60 foot wide strip of property
owned by SDG&E (See Attachment 7). The property owner (West Development) has obtained
an easement from SDG&E for the right to grade and construct improvements over the 60 foot
wide easement in exchange for giving SDG&E access rights on the new private road. SDG&E’s
use of this property will be abandoned when the new private road is installed. Staff is supportive
of the joint use of the new road and abandonment of the access road within the 60 foot SDG&E
property. The new road configuration will allow for signalized access into the site for the
Cannon Court project and for current and future uses on the SDG&E property. It also eliminates
the potential for a second vehicular access point on Cannon road (within the 60 foot easement)
which would be undesirable because of its close proximity to the railroad crossing.
The private agreement also allows for transfer of ownership of the 60 foot wide easement to
West Development. Transfer of ownership is not required as a condition of approval since West
Development has ‘an exclusive use easement over the property. The proposed use of the
easement as a landscaped “park” area and emergency egress road will not create any
inconsistencies with the current zoning or general plan land use designations. Furthermore, the
project is conditioned so that no future development will occur within the “park” area.
However, because the property has a General Plan and zoning designation of P-U (Public
Utility), if transfer of ownership is proposed in the future, it would need to occur in conjunction
CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT
May 16,200l
Page 3
with a boundary adjustment, Zone Change, General Plan Amendment, and Specific Plan
Amendment to SP 144 (SDG&E Encina Power Plant). These actions are necessary to ensure that
the property will have consistent zoning and General Plan land use designations if it is
consolidated (by boundary adjustment) with the Cannon Court project. The 60 foot easement
would also need to be de-annexed from the boundaries of SP 144. An application for a
comprehensive amendment to SP 144 is in process with the City now, and these actions could
take place in conjunction with that review.
The site is relatively level and grading for the project will consist primarily of excavation for the
underground parking structure and finish grading for the building pads and parking areas. The
proposed building pads are within 0 to 3 feet of natural grade and the grading of the site is
necessary to provide positive drainage for the site. The estimated project grading quantities will
consist of 28,000 cubic yards of cut, 1,800 cubic yards of fill, and 27,000 cubic yards of export.
Because the project site is located within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone it is
subject to standards which ensure that the development will adhere to a high quality of
architectural design. The project features a “Village” architectural style, and is consistent with
the overlay zone standards. The architectural design features buildings with steeply pitched
shake single roofs (7: 12); accent elements such as dormers, cupolas, and Porte cocheres; shingle
siding above a stacked stone base element; multi-paned windows; and white wood tim and
ornamentation elements. Since the project will be visible from I-5 and the railroad r.o.w. as well
as from Cannon Road, special attention has been given to ensure high quality design and
detailing on all sides of the structures. The three-story hotel is the tallest building with a height
of 45 feet to the peak of the roof. The peak elevation will be approximately 28 feet above the
elevation of the freeway. The height of the single-story restaurants are approximately 26 feet to
the roof peaks and the highest points of the mini-mart and gas station canopy, respectively, are
23.5 feet and 29 feet. Since no views of the coastline are present from the freeway in either a
north or southbound direction, the primary aesthetic concerns are in regard to any negative visual
impacts of exposed mechanical equipment or utility areas. The mechanical equipment for the
hotel will be ground mounted and screened. The roof equipment for the restaurants will be
located within a mechanical equipment well and will be screened with horizontal panels painted
to match the roof. Mechanical equipment for the mini-mart will be ground-mounted and
screened by an enclosure to complement the building. Views of trash areas will also be screened
from view with decorative enclosures and landscaping.
The project observes a 30 foot landscape setback from Cannon Road and the setback area is
landscaped consistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines for Cannon Road. Additionally, the
project has been designed so that the mini-mart is located between Cannon Road and the gas
station pump islands so that views of the pumps are obscured by the building mass as well as the
low walls, berms and landscaping. New landscaping around the perimeter of the site includes a
combination of trees and shrubs for screening and enhancing the appearance of the site. The
interior landscaping theme complements the building design with informal groupings of pines,
deciduous trees, and evergreen trees. Shrub masses are used as foundation plantings and to
screen vehicles. Swaths of turf are used as accents along the roadways. The landscaped area at
the southwest comer of the site will be developed as a park-like amenity to accentuate the
entrance of the site. The park will include a variety of seating opportunities for guests,
customers, and employees. An NCTD bus stop will also be located adjacent to the park for bus
service on Cannon Road.
CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT
May 16,200l
Pane 4
The applicant is proposing a phased construction of the site as shown on Attachment 8. Phase I
includes grading (except underground parking), infrastructure improvements (including the
Cannon Road traffic signal), and perimeter fencing and landscaping (including the “park” site);
Phase II includes construction of the gas station and mini-mart; Phases III and IV will result in
development of Restaurant “A” and the surrounding parking and landscape areas; Phase V
includes construction of the hotel, 105 space subterranean parking garage, and remaining surface
parking spaces and landscaping except for around the pad area of Restaurant “B”. Restaurant
“B’ and associated landscape would be included in the final Phase VI construction. Each phase
has been evaluated to ensure that adequate parking and circulation can be provided for the
proposed uses.
The proposed project is subject to the following regulations and requirements:
A. General Plan - T-R (Travel-Recreation)
B. CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone/C-T-Q Zone (Commercial-Tourist Zone-Qualified
Development Overlay) (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapters 21.208,2 1.29, and 2 1.06)
C. Conditional Uses (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 2 1.42)
D. Nonresidential Planned Developments (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 2 1.47)
E. Local Coastal Program Compliance; and
F. Growth Management (Local Facilities Management Zone 3)
IV. ANALYSIS
The recommendation of approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project’s
consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis
section discusses compliance with each of the regulations/policies utilizing both text and tables.
A. General Plan
The following Table 1 identifies General Plan goals and objectives relevant to the proposed
project and indicates the compliance of the proposal.
TABLE 1 - GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE
ELEMENT 1 USE, CLASSIFICATION, 1 PROPOSED USES & 1 COMPLIANCE
Land Use
GOAL, OBJECTIVE, OR
PROGRAM
Provide for commercial uses
which serve the travel and
recreation needs of tourists, residents, and employees of
business centers and industrial centers.
IMPROVEMENTS
The gas station/mini mart,
hotel and restaurants will
provide needed services for the surrounding residential
and business community and the traveling public.
Yes
13
CUP 99-30 - CAN-NON CWRT
May 16,200l
Pane 5
ELEMENT
Circulation
Housing
Noise
Open Space &
Conservation
Public Safety
USE, CLASSIFICATION,
GOAL, OBJECTIVE, OR
PROGRAM
Provide safe, adequately and
attractively landscaped parking
areas.
Provide an adequate circulation
infrastructure concurrent with or
prior to the actual demand for such facilities
Achieve a balance between jobs
and cost of housing relative to
wages.
Review all development
proposals for consistency with
the policies of this element.
Utilize Best Management
Practices for control of storm
water and to protect water
guality.
The project has been
conditioned to construct all
road improvements needed
to serve the proposed development and to install a
traffic signal at the
intersection of Cannon
Road and Avenida En&as.
Project is conditioned to
pay non-residential housing
imnact fee. if adonted.
Sound attenuation meas-
ures will be incorporated
for the hotel to ensure that
the interior noise levels do
not exceed the 45 dBA
CNEL noise standard.
The project will conform to
all NPDES requirements
and Best Management
Practices.
Design all structures in The project will be
accordance with the seismic designed in conformance
design standards of the UBC and with all seismic design
State building requirements. standards.
PROPOSED USES &
IMPROVEMENTS
Parking areas meet the code
requirements for parking,
circulation, and landscape.
B. Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone / C-T-Q Zone
COMPLIANCE
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
The project site is located in the C-T-Q (Commercial Tourist Zone with a Qualified Development
Overlay) and the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. The Commercial/Visitor Serving
Overlay Zone development standards are more restrictive than the C-T development standards
and parking regulations. The project has been evaluated using the most restrictive standards.
Compliance with these standards is summarized in the table below.
CUP 99-30 - CAN-NON COURT
May 16,200l
Page 6
TABLE 2 - COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY TABLE
STANDARD
PARKING
REQUIRED PROJECT COMPLIANCE
l Hotels: 103 spaces
(1.2 spaces per unit plus dining/
kitchen area @ 1 space/loo)
l Gas Station/Mini-Mart: 8 spaces
(1 space/300 s.f. plus 3 l Required to enter into a joint
additional employee spaces) parking and joint access
l Restaurant A: 76 spaces agreements
l Restaurant B: 136 spaces l Surface parking: 228 spaces
(20 spaces, plus 1 /50 s.f. in l Subterranean parking: 105
excess of 2,000 s.f. ) spaces
SIGNS
PS 00-67
BUILDING HEIGHT
BUILDING SETBACKS
l Total spaces required: 332 l Total spaces provided: 333
. 1 s.f. of signage per lineal foot l Hotel: 76 s.f. of wall sign area
of building frontage l Restaurant A: 55 s.f. wall sign
l Restaurant B: 70 s.f. wall sign . .9 s.f. of signage per lineal foot l Mini-mart: 74 s.f. wall sign of frontage for buildings with area two or more frontages . 100 s.f. maximum freestanding l Aggregate area of freestanding monument signs signs is 100 s.f. maximum . 16 s.f. additional pricing signs . 16 s.f. fuel pricing sign for service stations proposed.
l Freestanding sign: 6’ max. ht. l Freestanding sign: 4’ max.
ht.
l Max. 35 foot building height l Hotel: 45’
. May be increased to 45 feet l Gas Station Canopy: 22’6”
with City Council approval of (29’ at top of cupolas)
SDP. l Mini-mart: 23’6”
l Restaurant A: 25’-9”
l Restaurant B: 25’-11”
l 30’ foot public street setback l 30’ setback to mini-mart from Cannon Road
. 10’ side and rear setback l Greater than 10’ to all
structures from side and rear property lines; all setbacks are
. 20’ side and rear setback landscaped.
required for hotel due to l Greater than 20’ side and rear
increased building height setback to hotel, 20’ setback is completely landscaped
CUP 99-30 - CANNON CWJRT
May 16,200l
Pane 7
STANDARD
BLDG. MATERIALS/COLORS
REQUIRED PROJECT COMPLIANCE
l High quality materials l Gray simulated shake shingle roof, simulated cedar shingle
siding, stack stone wainscot at
base of building, painted wood
trim, multi-paned windows.
l Primary colors cannot dominate l Building colors are gray
building roofing, natural color cedar siding, multi-colored brown
stack stone, and white trim
elements. The colors are
compatible with the Village
Architectural Style.
ARCHITECTUML STYLE . Village Architectural Style . All building have a similar
architectural style and include
elements such as steeply pitched roofs; a variety of roof
forms including dormers,
LANDSCAPING
gables and hip roof elements;
high-quality surface and detail ornamentation, and a variety
of building forms. . Freestanding sign landscaping l Landscaping around entry signs on Cannon Road is
designed to comply with the Overlay Zone
l Parking lot trees at 1 tree per 6 l All parking lot trees are 24
spaces w/minimum of 50% at inch box sizes (min.) (not
24 inch box sizes. required for subterranean
parking spaces) (required: 42; proposed: 299).
l Provide landscaped islands . Landscaped planting islands
between rows of cars comply with landscape
guidelines manual
. Setback trees at 1 tree per 1000 l All setback trees are 24 ” box
SF of calculated setback area (required: 4 1; proposed: 125)
w/minimum of 50% at 24 inch box sizes
l Screening of parking spaces,
trash enclosures, loading/
delivery spaces, and
maintenance of landscape
l Parking areas are screened by
low walls or landscaping; trash areas are screened by
decorative walls; loading/delivery areas are located to minimize visibility;
maintenance of landscaped
areas is required as a condition of approval.
CUP 99-30 - CANNON CUJRT
May 16,200l
Pane 8
STANDARD REQUIRED PROJECT COMPLIANCE
USE SEPARATION STANDARDS l Permitted only on intersections l Cannon Road is a major FOR GAS STATIONS or “T’s” where streets are arterial and Avenida Encinas
classified as prime, major, or is classified as secondary secondary arterial
l Site may not adjoin any l Site does not adjoin any
residentially zoned property residential property
l Only one station permitted at a l One station proposed at the “T’ intersection. “T” intersection
l Minimum lot size or area l Area for Lot 1 is 29,185 s.f. designated for the use must be
15,000 square feet minimum
l Street frontage along the non- @ Frontage along private street is
arterial roadway shall be at least over 200 feet. 150 feet
l No access permitted on a prime l No access proposed or
or major arterial permitted on Cannon Road
l No driveway access permitted l Driveway access is located
within 100 feet of the approximately 200 feet from
intersection the intersection.
l Fuel delivery circulation system l Fuel delivery circulation
must be reviewed on a case-by- system has been reviewed by
case basis Engineering and Fire
Departments
USE SEPARATION STANDARDS l Hotel uses shall maintain a . Inns of America is located in FOR HOTELS minimum 600 foot separation, the P-M Zone therefore the
except that hotels in the P-M separation requirements are zone are not subject to the not applicable. However, the
separation standard hotels are located over 600 feet apart.
The applicant is also requesting a height of 45 feet for the hotel building. The C-T zone allows a
maximum building height of 35 feet, however, additional building height up to 45 feet can be
approved by the City Council under certain conditions. The building and site design have been
designed to comply with the provisions necessary to approve the requested height increase.
These provisions include: 1) the building does not contain more than three stories, 2) all required
setbacks have been increased at a ratio of one horizontal foot for each vertical foot of
construction beyond 35 feet and the additional setbacks are maintained as landscaped open space,
3) the building conforms to Section 18.04.170 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (requires high-
rise provisions such as fire sprinklers, and smoke detection, smoke control, and fire alarm
systems), and; 4) the allowed height protrusions do not exceed 45 feet. Additional features
which do not function to provide usable floor space (such as flagpoles and steeples) may be
permitted up to 55 feet under certain conditions, however, no protrusions above 45 feet are
proposed.
C. Conditional Uses
A service station is permitted in the C-T-Q zone with approval of a conditional use permit. City
Council approval of a conditional use permit is also required for commercial projects located
within the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone. Although a site development plan is
typically required for projects within the Qualified Development Overlay Zone, the Commercial/ 67
CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT
May 16,200l
Page 9
Visitor Serving Overlay Zone allows the application for and approval of the conditional use
permit to satisfy all requirements for a site development plan. The “Q” Overlay does not contain
any specific development standards but does allow the Planning Commission to increase any
standards or impose special conditions that may be deemed necessary. The required findings for
approval of a conditional use permit with justification for each are summarized below.
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.
Automobile service stations are permitted in the C-T zone if developed as part of a freeway
service facility containing a minimum of two freeway uses such as a hotel or restaurant. The
project is consistent with the General Plan designation in that the Travel Recreation land use
designation ensures that commercial service uses will serve the travel and recreational needs of
tourists and residents, as well as employees of surrounding business and industrial centers. The
project will not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area in that
the site and street improvements are designed to minimize potential traffic circulation system
conflicts; an access road servicing the parcel north of the site is provided; visual impacts are
reduced through landscaping, building placement, and screen walls; and, the architectural style
complies with the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone requirements.
2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use.
The 6.51 acre site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed uses in that the site
circulation plan allows for on-site access between parking areas, adequate fuel delivery
circulation, and a secondary emergency egress point. Shared parking spaces are conveniently
provided in close proximity to the uses they serve, and all required landscaped setbacks,
circulation aisles, and parking spaces have been provided. The primary access point for the gas
station is located over 200 feet from the intersection of Avenida Encinas and Cannon Road and
provides a safe point of ingress and egress in accordance with City standards.
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.
The gas station is located behind the mini-mart so that additional screening for the station is
provided. The additional building height for the hotel, allowing an increase from 35 to 45 feet,
can be approved since the building contains no more than three stories, the required setbacks
have been increased at a ratio of 1 horizontal foot for every vertical foot of height above 35 feet,
the increased setbacks have been designated as landscaped areas, and the building will be
required to conform to Section 18.04.170 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Separation standard
requirements betwten hotel uses do not apply to the project since the nearest hotel is located in
the PM zone. However, the proposed hotel is located over 620 feet from the nearest hotel (Inns
of America) and the project complies with all of the development standards and parking
requirements of the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone and C-T zone.
CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT
May 16,200l
Pape 10
4. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all
traffic generated by the proposed use.
The project will generate a total of 4,793 ADT and the traffic analysis indicates that the
additional traffic generated by the project does not significantly reduce the levels of service of
the existing streets. The project will be required to construct a traffic signal and dual west to
southbound left turn lanes at the intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas. Traffic
operations measures are also required in order to coordinate the signal timing with the freeway
ramp signals and railroad crossing. The private road has been designed to accommodate existing
traffic to the north of the site and easements will be dedicated so that the road .can be widened if
warranted by future development.
In addition to the four conditional use permit findings above, the following additional findings
are required for projects located in the CommerciaWisitor Serving Overlay Zone:
5. The 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.
The project has been designed to incorporate passenger drop-off zones and clear pedestrian
pathways between the hotel and surrounding restaurants. Adequate parking has been provided
for all uses on the site, including several oversize parking spaces for RV’s or buses. In addition, a
bus stop required by NCTD will be located on Cannon Road.
6. That the building forms, building colors and building materials combine to provide au
architectural style of development that will add to the objective of high quality
architecture and building design within the overlay zone.
The building design complies with the Village Architectural Style allowed in the
CommerciaWisitor Serving Overlay Zone and features gabled roof elements, a variety of roof
peaks, interesting building forms, and high quality surface and detail elements.
7. That the project complies with all development and design criteria of the overlay zone.
As noted above in Table 2, the project complies with all development standards and design
criteria of the overlay zone, including parking requirements, sign allowances, building height,
building setback, architectural style, landscaping, and use separation requirements of the overlay
zone.
Along with the required findings, specific development standards required by Chapter 21.42
(Conditional Uses) apply specifically to service stations. Compliance with these standards is
summarized in the following table.
CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT
May 16,200l
Page 11
TABLE 3 - SERVICE STATION STANDARDS COMPLIANCE
STANDARD
Developed as part of a freeway-service facility
Architecture harmonizes with the neighborhood
COMPLIANCE
Yes
Complies with Commercial/Visitor Serving
Overlay Zone standards and is compatible
with the other nronosed buildings.
Minimum 6-foot perimeter planters and planters
adjacent to structure
Yes
6-inch concrete curb bounding planters Yes
Combination of flowers. shrubs and trees Yes
Sprinkler system which covers all landscaped areas Required with Landscape Plan submittal.
Delineate maintenance schedule and responsibility Required with Landscape Plan submittal.
for landscape areas
6 foot masonry wall separating residentially zoned Not applicable
property
Shielded Lighting Lighting Plan required
No Outdoor Storage
Min 6 foot high trash enclosure
Signage Conforms to Sign Ordinance Standards
Conditioned to prohibit outdoor storage
Yes
Sign Program complies with Commercial/
Visitor Serving Overlay Zone
Public improvements as required for public
convenience and necessitv
Yes
D. Non-Residential Planned Development Regulations
The proposal includes subdivision of the property into four “postage stamp” lots and one
common lot which contains the private driveway, and much of the parking and landscape area.
The subdivision and associated nonresidential planned development permit will enable the
project to be developed with a private street, will allow for reciprocal parking and access
between properties, and will allow each building pad area to be owned separately. The
Nonresidential Planned Development (PUD 00- 109) will be processed concurrently with a minor
subdivision application (MS 99-16) per Section 66426 (c) and (f) of the Subdivision Map Act.
These applications will be acted upon by the Planning Director and City Engineer pending
approval of the Conditional Use Permit by the Planning Commission and City Council.
Approval of PUD 00-l 09 and MS 99-16 will be subject to all conditions of approval contained in
the resolution for CUP 99-30. The findings required for the Planning Director to approve the
Nonresidential Planned Unit Development are as follows:
1. That the granting of this permit will allow the subdivision of a commercial development
on one parcel into four postage stamp lots and one remainder lot to enable separate
ownership of each building and will not adversely affect and will be consistent with the
Municipal Code, the General Plan, applicable specific plans, master plans, and all
adopted plans of the City and other governmental agencies, in that the subdivision of the
project is consistent with the T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) General Plan land use
designation and the C-T-Q (Commercial-Tourist-Qualified Development Overlay Zone)
zone regulations.
E. Local Coastal Program Compliance
The project is located within the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan which is an area of deferred
certification. The project will receive its coastal development permit from the California Coastal
Commission. The project has been reviewed for consistency with the relevant coastal act polices
as follows:
Policy 1.1 The proposed use consisting of a gas station and mini-mart, restaurants, and hotel
is consistent with the TS (Travel Services) land use designation shown on the
Land Use Map (Exhibit C of the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan).
Policy 1.9 The maximum building height in the coastal zone is 35 feet, as measured to the
mid-point of the roof. The hotel, which is the tallest structure, complies with the
maximum building height requirement. All other structures are less than 35 feet
high.
Policy 2.1 The project site is not used as an agricultural site and does not require conversion
to develop the property. The development of the site would not conflict with the
agricultural economy.
Policy 4.1 The project will be conditioned to comply with the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance
and provisions of the Master Drainage Plan.
Policy 4.2 Grading activities for the site will be restricted during the winter season (October
1 st - April 1st) and all grading operations will be subject to the City’s adopted
grading regulations and the Landscape Guidelines Manual which includes
requirements for erosion control.
CUP 99-30 - CANNON CWRT
May 16,200l
Page 12
2. That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary and desirable to provide a
service or facility which will contribute to the general long-term well-being of the
neighborhood and community, in that the project consists of a gas station and mini mart,
hotel, and two restaurants which will provide services for the surrounding residential and
business communities, as well as the traveling public.
3. That such project will not be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of
persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in
the vicinity, in that the site plan includes all necessary features to adjust the development
to the surrounding neighborhood, including setbacks, enhanced architecture, and
landscaping.
4. That the proposed nonresidential planned development meets all of the minimum
development standards of the underlying zone except for the lot area, in that no standards
variances have been requested or required.
5. That the proposed Construction Phasing Plan has been reviewed and conditions are
imposed to ensure that adequate parking, circulation, and improvements will be provided
as phased construction of the project occurs.
CUP 99-30 - CAN-NON COURT
May 16,200l
Pane 13
Policy 4.3
Policy 5.1
Policy 5.2
Policy 7.1
Policy 8.4
The fuel dispensing area has been designed to ensure clean storm water discharge
from fuel dispensing areas and development of the site will be required to comply
with all applicable City regulations regarding drainage and runoff, including
compliance with NPDES regulations/requirements and Best Management
Practices. The project will not impact groundwater flow or quality, change the
flow of surface run-off or impact public water supplies.
Utilities serving the site will be placed underground.
The project complies with all parking standards of the Carlsbad Zoning
Ordinance.
A bike route currently exists along Cannon Road and additional amenities such as
bike racks and benches are included in the development proposal.
Cannon Road and Interstate 5, areas are designated as Community Scenic
Corridors and have been designed to comply with the Streetscape Themes
designated by the Landscape Guidelines Manual.
F. Growth Management
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 3 in the northwest
quadrant of the City. Since no residential uses are proposed within the project, many of the
facilities regulated by the Growth Management Ordinance are not applicable. The impacts on
public facilities created by the project, and its compliance with the adopted performance
standards, are summarized in Table 4 below.
[ STANDARD
TABLE 4 - GROWTH MANAGEMENT
1 IMPACTS 1 COMPLIANCE? 1 City Administration
Library
Waste Water Treatment
Parks
Drainage
Circulation
Fire
Open Space
Schools
Sewer Collection System
Water
Not Applicable
Not Applicable
154 EDU
Not Applicable
Agua Hedionda
4793 ADT
Station No. 1 and 4
Not Applicable
CUSD
154 EDU
33,880 GPD
N/A
N/A
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT
May 16,200l
Page 14
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Staff has conducted an environmental impact assessment to determine if the project could have a
potentially significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA guidelines and the
Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The General
Plan land use designation and zoning remain the same. The project falls within the scope of the
City’s MEIR for the City of Carlsbad General Plan update (EIR 93-01) certified in September,
1994, in which a Statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for cumulative impacts to
air quality and traffic. MEIR’s may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than
five years prior to the filing of an application for a later project except under certain
circumstances. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to determine whether it is still
adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was certified more than five years
ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no substantial changes have
occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was certified. The only
potential changed circumstance, the intersection failure at Palomar Airport Rd. and El Camino
Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance. Additionally, there is
no new available information, which was not known and could not have been known at the time
the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to review later projects. All
feasible mitigation measures identified by the MEIR which are appropriate to this project have
been incorporated into the project.
An additional 4,793 ADT would be generated by the project, including 308 AM peak-hour tips
and 401 PM peak-hour trips. The traffic analysis indicates that the additional traffic generated by
the project does not significantly affect the levels of service of the existing streets. However, the
intersection of Cannon Road and Avenida Encinas will need to be signalized once project
occupancy occurs. Additionally, due to the proximity of the I-S/Cannon Road freeway ramps to
the east and the railroad crossing to the west, some traffic operations measures need to be
implemented. These specific mitigation measures are included in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program for the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project.
Compliance with the California Health and Safety Code and Rule 20 of the Air Pollution Control
District Rules and Regulations as stated in the required regulatory permits for the construction
and operation of a gasoline dispensing facility will reduce the risk of explosion and release of
hazardous substances to a level of insignificance. Engineering and Fire Department review of
the project will ensure that typical safety features and provisions are designed into the project.
The site was used at one time for agricultural uses and a limited Phase II Environmental
Assessment was conducted to evaluate the possibility of agricultural chemical residue in the soil.
A presence of toxaphene was detected, however, it is anticipated that grading activities (mixing
and blending of soil) will reduce the chemical residues to a level of insignificance. Additional
soil samples will be collected and analyzed once grading is completed, and if additional actions
are required, they can be implemented at that time.
An acoustical analysis was submitted for the project which analyzed the impacts from I-5 and the
Amtrack, Coaster and freight train operations on the AT&SF railroad on the proposed
development. The project is subject to the adopted interior noise standards of 45 CNEL for the
hotel use and 55 CNEL for the commercial uses. In order to mitigate the noise impacts to a level
73
CUP 99-30 - CANNON CWRT
May 16,200l
Pane 15
of insignificance, building upgrades will be required for a number of units within the hotel,
particularly on the east end of the hotel facing the freeway.
In consideration of the foregoing, on February 26,2001, the Planning Director issued a Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the proposed project. The environmental document was noticed in the
newspaper. Comments were received from CalTrans and the Department of Toxic Substances
Control. The response to comments is included as an attachment to the EIA Part II.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4977 (Mitigated Neg. Dec.)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4978 (CUP)
3. Location Map
4. Disclosure Form
5. Background Data Sheet
6. Local Facilities Impact Form
7. Circulation Plan
8. Construction Phasing Plan
9. Reduced Exhibits
10. Full Size Exhibits “A” - “CC”, dated May 16,200l
BK:cs:mh
74
f , .a
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Appl~canr’s statement or disclosure of cenain ownership interests on aJJ appiications \vhich \viJJ require
discretionar\* action on the pan of the City Council or any appointed Board. Commission or Comminee.
The follcwing information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. j’our prqject canno1
bc re\,ie\ved until this information is completed. Please print.
Person is defined as “Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association. social club. fralcmai
organisation. corporation. esrate. trust, receiver, syndicatr. in this ant *any other c,ounv. tin. and count.. tit! municipalir>,. district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit.”
Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and enriy of the applicant and prop:- owner must be
provided belo\\.
I. .QPLICAST @or the applicant‘s asent)
Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of .4LL persons having a finat\ciaI
intcrcn in the application. If the applkant includes a cornoration or nannership. include the
names. title. addresses of all indi\*iduaJs o\vnity more than 10% of the shares. IF NO
INDJ\‘JDL’XLS 0ii.K MORE TH4K 10% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE ISDICATE NON-
APPLIC.4BLE (N’.r\) I?.’ THE SPACE BELO\{: If a nuhiicl\+wned corno:ation. include the
names. titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page ma! be attached if
necessay . j
.
Person Corp.‘Pan 3.A. Buza COW.
Title Title
Iddress .4ddress76085 San Dieauito Rd. #E7
Ranch0 Santa Fe, CA 92067 9 -. OM’h’ER fi:ol rhe o\\ner’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresws of u persons hayin; any ownershi;,
interest in tht propen>* inwIved. ,415o. yro*tldc the G:CC of IhC kgal -*~v~~u=l*l~ :;A.
partnership. tenants in common. non-profit. corporation. etc.). If the ownership includes a
cornoration or partnership. include the names, titk. addresses of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDJVJDUPILS OUW MORE THAN JO% OF THE SHARES.
PLEASE INDICPITE NON-APPLICABLE (N/.4) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publick-
cnvned cormration. include the names. titles. and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate
page may be attached if necessaq.)
Person CorplPanBst- no1701 nm0nt DC _
Title Title
Address Address P.O.
Ranch0 Santa Fe, CA 92067
2. NO+PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST
If an>’ person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonnrofit orranitation or a trust. list the
names and addresses of AsI person sekng as an officer or director of the non-profir
oryanization or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
bon ProfitTrust I\;on Profit/Trust
Title Title
Address Address
4. Have you had more than 5250 worth of business transacted with any member of Cit? staff.
Boards. Commissions. Committees and/or Council within the past rwelve (12) monrhs?
il \I’es I3 IGO If yes. please indicate person(s):
KOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessap. ,:.
I ceni@ that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
Sifr-Liture of 0wner:date
Print or type name ofo\vner
Sib&ture of applicant’date
John Buza
Print or type name of applicant
Sigature of o~~necapplicant+s agent if applicable/date
Print or type name 0fowner;applicant's 2scrlt
.
- .
CERTIFICATION OF SECRETARY
OF J.A. BUZA CORPORATION
I, Patricia C. Buza, duly elected, qualified and acting Secretary of J.A. Buza
Corporation, a California corporation, (the “Corporation), do hcrcby certify that the
following arc the shareholders of the Corporation:
John A. Buza
Patricia C. Buza . . .
Dated this 3rd day of February 2000.
. . -4$fhe& C .
Patricia C. Buza, Secretary
:i t1. 3, ;[l(l(/ j j : yJ,L,/~ EXKSON SEDEESTROM - No. 2643 P. %i?
CERTIFICATION OF SECRETARY
OF WEST DEVELOPMENT, INC.
I, May E. West, duly clcctcd, qualified and acting Sccrctary of West Developmcnt, Inc., a Nebraska
corporation, (the “Corporation”), do hcrcby certify that the following arc the sharcholdcrs of the Corporation:
Gary West Mary E. West
Dstcd this 2nd day of February 2000.
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: CUP 99-30 (PUD 00-log/MS 99-16)
CASE NAME: Cannon Court
APPLICANT: J. A. Buza, Corp.
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for annroval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow
grading and construction of two restaurants, a hotel, and a gas station/mini-mart on a 6.51 acre lot
located on the north side of Cannon Road between I-5 and the AT & SF Railroad right-of-way.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of Lot “H” of Ranch0 Aqua Hedionda, in the Citv of
Carlsbad, Countv of San Diego, State of California, accordinp to Petition Mar, thereof No. 823, tiled
in the Office of the Countv Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896
APN: 210-010-38 Acres: 6.51 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: N/A
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial)
Density Allowed: N/A Density Proposed: N/A
Existing Zone: C-T-O - Commercial-Tourist/Qualified Development Overlay Zone Proposed Zone: N/A
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad’s Zoning
Requirements)
Zoning General Plan Current Land Use
Site C-T-Q T-R Vacant
North P-U U SDGE Storage
Yard/High Tension
Lines/Vacant
South P-M PI Vacant/Agriculture
East TC TC Interstate 5
West TC & P-U TC8zU AT & SF Railroad r.o.w.
& SDGE Power Plant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): 154 EDU
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
q Mitigated Negative Declaration, issued Februarv 26,200 1
0 Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
q Other, ’
79
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: Cannon Court - CUP 99-30 (PUD 00-109MS 99-16)
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 3 GENERAL PLAN: T-R
ZONING: C-T-O
DEVELOPER’S NAME: J. A. Buza Corn..
ADDRESS: 16085 San Dieguito Rd, # E7 Ranch0 Santa Fe, CA 92067
PHONE NO.: 619-756-5338 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 210-010-38
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 6Slacres
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
Is.
City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = Not Applicable
Library: Demand in Square Footage = Not Applicable
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) 154 EDU
Park: Demand in Acreage = Not Applicable
Drainage: Demand in CFS = 20 cfs
Identify Drainage Basin = B
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADT = 4,793 ADT
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = Station 1 & 4
Open Space: Acreage Provided = Not Applicable
Schools: CUSD
Sewer: Demands in EDU 154 EDU
Identify Sub Basin = Not Applicable
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: Demand in GPD = 33,880 GPD
80
ClRCUiAl-/ON PLAN ma Mckdye-Archit- 6965ElcadmRd #los-472 lrGsawina.9zwJ 7lilwwm CANNON COURT
8
-.-.-- p.-WW
J- Cyy0;4D __ --- #i --b-
I --x /-
DEVELOPMENT PHASE PLAN
h4dKkA$sociRtes~ 6965 El Cmdo Real *IO5472 laccsqcsbni9am!3 7fe43l.m CANNON COURT 82
m J.A. BUZA CORP.
Construction l Development
March 28,200l
Barbara Kennedy
City of Carlsbad - Planning Department
1635 Faraday Ave
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: CUP 99-30 / Cannon Court “Phasing”
Dear Barbara,
Per your March 22, 2001 memo to Dennis Cunningham, here is the phasing information you requested:
Phase 1 - Infrastructure
1. Preparation of the parcel map, grading plans, and improvement plans.
2. Rough grading for the entire project, except for the underground parking garage of the hotel.
This earthwork and the necessary export will be done as part of the building permit for Phase 5.
3. Cannon Road: traffic signal, interconnect, and utility tie-ins for water, sewer, storm drain, and
dry utilities.
4. Private street: both surface and underground improvements, from Cannon Road to the
northerly subdivision boundary.
5. Onsite utilities: public sewer, public water, public fire, and public storm drain. Private utility
stubs for future tie-ins will be constructed. Maintenance roads to access utilities will also be
constructed.
6. Fencing: perimeter fencing, entry monuments, 42” high screen wall at south and east of gas
station with landscaping.
7. Erosion control.
8. Landscape complete between private road and railroad right of way, along Cannon Road, to
north end of 42” high screen wall at east end of gas station.
Phase 2 - Gas Station and Countrv Store:
1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, storm drain) to serve the gas station.
2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2.
3. Construction of Gas Station and Country Store.
4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2.
Phase 3 - Restaurant A Infrastructure
1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, storm drain) to serve Restaurant A.
2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3.
3. Grading for pad (to be hydro-seeded with native, non-irrigated mix).
4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3.
Phase 4 - Restaurant A
1. Construction of Restaurant A
Page 1 of 2
Phone: 858.756.5338 l Fax: 858.756.2891 P.O. Box 8617 l 16085 San Dieguito Rd., #E7 *Ranch0 Santa Fe, CA 92067 83
Phase 5 - Hotel
1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer storm drain) to serve Hotel.
2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 5.
3. Construction of Hotel and underground parking garage.
4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 5.
Phase 6 - Restaurant B
1. Construction of Restaurant B
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
John A. Buza
Page 2 of 2
-_ !j ;:y ..:i ::it % -.- --iz s 2;’ . ..I . ..-
VlN’dW ‘UVKI~
lNlO3 NONNV’3
vlN~~‘avuslm fid :&
lllnO3 NONNV3 SlSi I! 3 , 9 cr)
&lll i :zz t iQS 1 -a
I 8
I
i : : 1 I 1 I
3
5 3 E
4 i;f; ..i
P
.-__ I : i i : I( 1 ,c; ::I
VlN’dm ‘(IVUSl‘avs
MO3 NONNV’3
VlN%ONW3 ‘CVElM
MO3 NONNV’3
I
P B i ~ 4 *j / 1 !I
I 1
I’ c I
+’
20 w arL *xi 0 f-J
1 1 1 1 1 1
y -O-. q 7
“.R.P J-3 “23-f s-3 “.0-X .a-.t n.o-*r
3
I
9 i i. 0 =::
89
VlNXOXlV3 ‘ClVU9W
MO3 NONNV3
t-7 LJ
/ \I/ ‘--7h
‘z
1 L
I
‘5 i i 0 =r:
p ;fi;
!
,,‘I: : .:i
g ;pi zri
.0-S
1 .wr 5-n 1
VlNW4lV3 tlV~!ilW
LtlnO3 NONNV’3
* I .z I -7
I I
I
/
.a-ST
.wr 5:R
91 .a-.6
VlNIONV3 ‘ClV&iRh’I
HnO3 NONNV3
t .c-*SF r t .wr E-$2 +
1 .0/r I I-.21 1, 1, t .0-J 1
92
VlNYONlV3 ‘ClVU~w3
HInO3 NONNV3
2
L- , t d P * i !I - __l_ll Q-1
; $0
q
,! a&Y!5 / zd------
i
I : 1 ; !
i! i! : ; b’ lo
I I i 1 n., a‘ *4 nrr I
93
VlNllOclllk3 tlWlSlW
lNlO3 NONNV3
,
al.* A..
1
I arm ncr
N
2::
VlNIO4W3 ‘OV%lw3
IllnO3 NONNV’3
!I!~ $;1 :
$11 .‘B’!, 1 i2 :EEz 1 F
aiaA nP& f
CANNON COURT CARISMD. CAl.lfORNlA
1 z-m. .y:; --:; :::;
% z-i! -_ II s 2:; ..F _..-
1 at *cc I 21 - .“-,I ,; u
VINWl-lVJ ‘ClVllSlw3
lWlO3 NONNV’3
VlNIKHI1V3 tlVKMV3
MO3 NONNV3
I 4 0 -?I- ‘1g 1‘ xxti f
VlN8ONlV3 ‘CJV9Sl~
MO3 NONNV3
- ]
-L-7 ]
-I-
PI %I
+
I
L s-3
A-
99
vlMKHllv3’arBrmy3
HInO NONNV3
!I$ If/$ i ; ; f IjS;. &!j I 1 1 I ~ i fZ f *
altllfli:i i,ii% I
._-_^
4 ;==: --:_
1
:fr: i:‘i ““55
$ ;:j.
::i
t .0-S
I-
blt+cmm ‘avanm
lllnO3 NONNV3
.Wl b-.52 i i .Wl r-,51 ‘i’l Al-.6 : I
.O-.6 I-
VlNWdlKI ‘tlVKMb9
lW’lO3 NONNV’3
f
.0-S
.Wl 6-sr
.t/~ r-3 it
1 :
P.6
+
VlN~m’avam
18nO3 NONNV3
L i
,o-*t1 J-.c¶- .0-m
0.
uITIIIII:r
, i P! al
VlNllONlKI ‘CWKIW
MO3 NONNVI)
.wr I,-sz t 1-S .Wl 5-J I--
4 I
/
VlNW4lV3 ‘CrVll’a-l~
lllnO3 NONNV3
.0/r ts-.rr 1 a/rr-.s:
Q..
/‘-- \.--
1
vlralam ‘clvem
MO3 NONNV’3
/as
VlNM4lV3 ‘~!ilW
lWO3 NONNV3
t 3 r-1 r--' I r-7 r-7 L-J L-d LA I I , I.--,
I c-+-
x’ ,, ,’ ‘8,
j
@
B
/ j &
‘\ I’ Y ‘p- -$’
I---‘1 I I r-7 I I I I L--J L--J I
:--’ r--7 0 I I I , L--d L--J
f is r-1 8 L-J Lr--: ; ;--; ;--; L-J L-l LA *- - 0 8’ \, ‘\ ,, ,: ’ e B j k ‘\ , /’ ‘, ‘\, ,,’ 3 \ ? - -
r---i :-: r---l L-1 l9 ::I11 r-1 LA
b
‘c :
: 3
bib 1 81 1 t I I
!I I I
II
i
ll b
I I
I’
VlNlKMlO ‘Ob’KMVJ
HnO3 NONNV’3
, Q !‘f; :
I 1 4 I !!,,Q I k-0
Mfl : ,-a2 1 ,I fg55 1
& I
B
3 I ,I c I
i 0
i
% f
H
r6 P II 1 I 12 B n:
j::: :. 1.. “T : :: : ,$ &bg !j ‘.’ h I
4
s.Ls BU1iM
e::
-. ii::. : :.
t$ ii
‘1
~~~~~~~~~~~
9
td gqz*:
I -*-a-.
++a$? i
b!E 9
* / j : 11” I ? . L h
. .
I
1 4 6 I
-.;
E -e
!
i
;
ii
-I
fi
II t 4 fl
Planning Commission Minutes
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING
May 16,200l Page 28 DRAFT *t$lr
Chairperson Segall asked Planning Director, Michael Holzmiller, to introduce the Item No. 11.
11. CUP 99-30 - CANNON COURT - Request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration,
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Permit to develop a
gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located on
the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, in the C-T-Q zone, the
Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3.
Mr. Holzmiller introduced Associate Planner Barbara Kennedy from the Planning Department to make the
presentation and Frank Jimeno from the Engineering Department.
Chairperson Segall opened the public hearing and asked the applicant if he or she would like to proceed
based on the fact that there are only six out of seven Commissioners.
The applicant wished to proceed
Ms. Kennedy said the applicant is requesting the approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the
development of a 16-pump gas station, a mini-mart, two restaurants and a hotel on a vacant 6.5 acre site
located on the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5. She pointed out the site on an aerial
photo, showing l-5 along east side, Cannon Road on the south and the railroad on the west. Cabrillo and
SDG&E own the properties north of the site and there is a 60 foot road easement along the railroad right-
of-way which is currently used to provide access to the properties. She stated that the site is zoned C-T-Q
and it has a general plan designation of travel recreation and is located in the commercial visitor serving
overlay zone and the Agua Hedionda segment of the local coastal program. Ms. Kennedy said the
development proposal is for a freeway serving facility which includes a 16-pump gas station and mini-mart
at the south end of the site, an 86-room hotel with an underground parking garage at the north end of the
site and two restaurants. She stated access to the site will be at a new signalized intersection at Avenida
Encinas and Cannon Road and there are three points of access to the development from the new private
road and the new private road will also provide access to the property north of the site.
Ms. Kennedy shared that the project proposes joint use of the driveways and parking spaces and the site
circulation pattern has been designed so there is on-site access between the parking areas. She said that
a secondary emergency egress road is also provided adjacent to the railroad right-of-way and new
landscaping will be provided around the perimeter of the site and within the parking areas and around the
buildings. She stated that the visual impact of the gas station has been reduced with landscaping and
screen walls and also by locating the mini-mart parallel to Cannon Road so that the building will obscure
views towards the pump stations. Ms. Kennedy stated that a small park is located on the southwest corner
of the site and it will contain picnic benches and bike racks plus a bus stop will also be located on Cannon
Road by the park area. She also said it was recently brought to her attention by the Engineering
Department that they may want to locate a portion of the Coastal Rail Trail within the park instead of in the
railroad right-of-way in this area, and as shown on the errata sheet that was handed out, the conditions
have been modified so that the City can obtain an easement for construction of this trail and the developer
has been notified of the change and is in agreement with the modification.
Ms. Kennedy added that the buildings have been designed with the village architectural style which is
consistent with the commercial visitor serving overlay zone requirements. The architectural design
features steeply pitched shake shingle roofs and accent elements such as dormers, cupolas and porte-
cocheres, the building walls have shingle siding above a stacked-stone base element and the windows
are all multi-paned with white trim. She said that since the project is visible from almost every direction, a
high level of detailing is being provided on all sides of the buildings. Ms. Kennedy said the 53,000 square
foot hotel is a three story building with 86 rooms and it has a height of 45 feet. Restaurant A will be a high-
end dinner house, contains 4,800 square feet and has a height of just under 26 feet and Restaurant B will
be a higher volume restaurant which is a 7,770 square foot building and also has a height of about 26 feet.
The mini-mart contains 1,500 square feet and is 23.5 feet tall. Ms. Kennedy showed the perspective
rendering of the gas station and the mini-mart. The gas station canopy is about 22.5 feet high to the top of
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 29
the canopy and then the cupola elements extend up another six to seven feet above that. She stated that
the project requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit for an increase in building height for the hotel,
the gas station, the commercial visitor serving overlay zone, and because the project has a Q-overlay
Zone. She said that the requested height increase for the hotel can be supported since the hotel does not
contain more than three stories and the building setbacks have been increased as required and the
project is also conditioned to comply with the high rise provisions of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. She
stated that because the site is located right next to the freeway interchange, it is classified as a freeway
service facility and the C-T Zone allows for development of a gas station if it is part of a freeway service
facility which contains at least two freeway uses such as the proposed hotel and restaurants. Ms.
Kennedy said the project has been designed to accommodate visitors and tourists and the project exhibits
a high quality architectural design and complies with all of the development and design criteria of the
Overlay Zone and the commercial visitor serving overlay findings can be made and has been aligned for
compatibility of the use to the site to the surrounding area and with the street system and the findings
required for the approval of a Conditional Use Permit can be made and are outlined in detail in the staff
report and resolutions. She stated that the project has also been analyzed for consistency with applicable
policies and regulations and is consistent with the various elements of the general plan as outlined in
Table One of the staff report. It has been designed to comply with the development standards for the CT
Zone and the commercial visitor serving overlay zone with regard to parking, signs, building height,
setbacks, architecture, lighting, landscaping and standards that apply specifically to gas stations. She said
the project requires approval of a minor subdivision and a non-residential planned development permit to
subdivide the property into four postage stamp lots and one common lot that contains the private road and
most of the parking and landscaping. She stated that the subdivision will allow individual ownership for
each building pad and will enable the project to be developed with a private street and reciprocal parking
and access. Ms. Kennedy stated that the project complies with the requirements for the subdivision and
non-residential PUD and these applications will be acted upon by the City Engineer and Planning Director
pending approval of the project by the City Council and Coastal Commission. She said that the project has
been reviewed for consistency with the Agua Hedionda Land Use Segment of the Local Coastal Program
and the project is conditioned to obtain a coastal permit from the California Coastal Commission and is
also subject to the growth management requirements of Zone 3 with regard to the eleven public facility
performance standards and it is in compliance with the applicable standards. Ms. Kennedy stated that a
mitigated declaration was prepared for the project and was routed to the State Clearing House and
distributed to interested agencies and two comment letters were received and responded to. These are
attached to the Mitigated Negative Declaration in the staff report. She said the Mitigation, Monitoring and
Reporting Program has been incorporated into the project approval. Ms. Kennedy stated that because the
project meets all of the findings for approval, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission adopt
the attached resolutions recommending adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
recommending approval of CUP 99-30 with the changes included in the errata sheet.
Mr. Holzmiller stated that this action is not final by the Planning Commission and it will automatically go to
the City Council because it is in the overlay zone around Legoland, and Carlsbad.
Commissioner Compas asked to have Ms. Kennedy describe the kind of restaurants and hotel.
Ms. Kennedy stated she received a letter from the developer and their plan is perhaps to be a Hampton
Inn and Suites which is a Hilton Hotel product and it would be an extended stay type of hotel and the
Restaurant A, they say, is best suited for a high-end dinner house and some of the names of the
restaurants such as Tamarindo, Prime Ten, Azules or Bucca de Beppo are examples of restaurants they
might find there and Restaurant B which is the larger restaurant would be similar to Chevies, Fresh Mex,
the Briggantine, Cedar Creek Inn, Trophies or PF Chang’s, something on that order.
Commissioner Compas asked if they are not asking for any variances at all?
Ms. Kennedy replied that no, they are not asking for any variances, they are asking for a height increase
for the hotel, but that can be approved as part of the Conditional Use Permit.
Commissioner L’Heureux asked if they anticipate any trouble with Coastal?
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 30
Ms. Kennedy said they have met with Coastal Commission informally previous to this and they have had
positive responses.
Chairperson Segall asked if Ms. Kennedy could address the non-residential PUD in the fact that each pad
is going to be separate and a separate builder for each pad?
Ms. Kennedy stated that is not the way they are planning on developing it, but are planning on developing
the whole project as a phased construction, however for example, the restaurant would be able to own
their own building and pad, but then everything else would be commonly maintained.
Chairperson Segall asked in terms of construction, the plan is one company will do everything so
everything is going to be compatible and we are assured that it is compatible?
Ms. Kennedy said that is the plan at this point, but if they were to come in for some modifications for the
buildings, and if they did not substantially conform to what you see on the exhibits, they would have to
come back to the Planning Commission.
Chairperson Segall asked to hear from the applicant.
John Buza, 3119 Circa De Tierra, Encinitas, CA. stated they have been working with staff for almost two
years on the project. He pointed out that it has been a team effort with Ms. Kennedy and Mr. Jimeno with a
lot of input and ideas on the project to move buildings, rearrange the road, and doing the site plan almost
30 times over the two years to get to this point.
Commissioner Baker asked if they anticipate since it is somewhat industrial with the power plant, will it
cause any problems with tenants that might be interested in the property?
Mr. Buza stated that they see no indication of that yet as they have letters of interest from almost 70
restaurants and probably 15 on the hotel. He said they bought the property in September of ‘98 and they
get inquiries every week though no one has signed, but they are sending lease agreements in the mail.
Commissioner Compas asked him to share his forecast of the timing of the various phases in terms of
how many months after approval, and when would the road be done and the timetable for having the hotel
ready?
Mr. Buza stated once they get their approvals the first thing they would do is get in the road, the
intersection and the gas station because they would be building in that direction. He said they plan on
starting as soon as they get approval. He thought the road would probably take three to four months and
concurrently they would be building the gas station and the second phase would be the hotel and the
underground parking as they want the hotel operable, and it looks like it is going to be Hampton Inn and
Suites and they want to work with Hilton to help them to work with the correct restaurants for they are
fortunate to not be in a development situation to have to go out and grab a restaurant. He stated that they
would like to have the hotel ready as fast as they are allowed, but there is also the grading restriction in
the Coastal Zone.
Commissioner Compas asked if they were to get approval of the hotel in a couple months?
Mr. Buza replied that they are doing the working drawings on the gas station and will start the working
drawings on the hotel next and have it going as soon as the City will allow.
Commissioner Compas asked what would be the earliest they would be completely finished?
Mr. Buza said discounting the grading restrictions he thought they could build it within two years and have
the hotel up.
Commissioner Compas asked with the approvals from the Commission and Council, what would be the
two biggest worries about this project?
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 31
Mr. Buza asked if he could get back to him in a minute regarding this.
Chairperson opened Public Testimony.
Jeff Woolson, 5345 Los Robles, Carlsbad stated he is the president of the Terramar Home Owners
Association. He explained that Terramar is a community of about 250 families that is a virtual residential
island, bordered on the north by the power plant, to the east with industrial facilities and to the south by
vacant land. It was built back in the 1950s before Car Country Carlsbad, the power plant and even
Legoland and there is no community in this entire City that is impacted more by Legoland and the
development around it and they appreciated the City Council doing the overlay zone that they did. He
shared two questions: 1) what was the purpose and the intent of the development overlay zone that was
done, 2) how has this project been impacted and how will it be impacted in the future. He stated the
neighborhood is not anti-development for they know things are going to go in around the area and they are
subject and vulnerable to that, but they would like changes to the plan and they will express their opinions
tonight.
Bob Melendez, 5520 El Arbol Drive, Carlsbad stated basically they are not opposed to growth and
development for they know it is coming and have had their share of it in that area, but his concern is
basically the gas station and the traffic that it is going to impose right there on Cannon. He said right now
Cannon is just a zoo to get out of any time of the day and he invited any of the Commission to come by
there at 4:00 p.m. or 6:00 a.m. to see the congestion as it is difficult to get out to go west onto Cannon in
the afternoon and difficult to go east in the morning for traffic is horrendous. He stated that right now
between Carlsbad Village Drive and Palomar Airport Road there are 13 gas station and he is opposed to
the gas station going in with this development - the restaurants and hotel are fine. He does not think it is
needed as there is more than they know what to do with. His one concern is when they had a meeting with
the developers and Terramar and other developments in the community and the question put to Mr. Buza
was “would he want this project to go through without the gas station?” and his answer was “no.”
Commissioner Baker asked, considering the gas station is going to be on the corner by the freeway and a
stop light there, how do you feel that the gas station and the traffic it will generate will impact Terramar?
Mr. Melendez stated it is going to impact Terramar because of the traffic coming off the freeway, the
normal work traffic, just adding more congestion in that intersection regardless of a signal and there is a
railroad crossing. He stated this plan would work beautifully on the east side of the freeway away from the
residential where most of the business’ draw the traffic. He said it would be compounded with the signal
and the traffic from the freeway to the beach with even another hotel going in just across the street.
Catherine Miller, 5299 El Arbol, Carlsbad stated they met as a community with the developer. She stated
that many residents object to the negative impacts of another hotel, two restaurants and a gas station
which will bring to their family community, namely more congestion, traffic and an overwhelming
commercial field to a scenic, coastal area as they are situated in a very unique position between l-5 and
Highway 101 where each day they feel more effects of the building being done around North County and
San Diego. She stated that Cannon Road is a major get-off point for motorists looking for relief when l-5 is
backed up with traffic, which seems like all the time, coming off Cannon going toward the beach with no
where to go and their neighborhood is becoming a major cut-through area coming from the coast as well
as Cannon, with traffic backing up to the railroad at times again with no way out. The rates of speed are
alarming, which is a great concern right now as there are many children and pedestrians in the area. Ms.
Miller also stated if the gas station/mini-mart is a 24”hour operation it has the potential to invite crime into
their neighborhood due to the proximity of the l-5 freeway, which makes them an easy target.
Jonnie Johnson, 5400 El Arbol Drive, Carlsbad stated that the Cannon Road and l-5 intersection is one of
the most beautiful in Carlsbad, a result of good planning. A few years ago Frank Mannen came to address
them regarding the overlay zone and explained it was created to control growth and specifically to keep
out the Anaheim overkill with a mini-mart and gas station at every corner with all the lights and signs with
it, but already they have seen three 30 year old Eucalyptus tree cut down and there is a 24-hour mini-mart
on the next intersection .5 miles away, and they have seven gas stations with another one presently in
construction within a mile. She asked why do they need another gas station in this area? Is this just the
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 32
beginning of what she calls “Carheim?” She urged the City to limit the signs, light, height and to keep the
promise to the City to keep the Anaheim impact out and keep Carlsbad beautiful.
Roger Williams, 5118 Shore Drive, Carlsbad stated he has lived there for 25 years and Cannon Road then
had two lanes and no signals and Carlsbad Blvd then was two lanes and is still two lanes with Cannon
Road now has four lanes with two bottlenecks, one southbound on Carlsbad Blvd and now from Cannon
westbound. He cannot get out of his residence on the north side of Shore Drive so he goes down on the
south end and cuts in and gets back in line with all the traffic that is going north on Carlsbad Blvd. It is an
every day event. He explained various uses of the area previously and pointed out traffic and businesses
presently that will be more impacted with the new signal. He shared he read an article concerning the bike
trail over the railroad area. He asked the Commission to give the remarkably ugly traffic problem some
thought.
Carol Gorbics, 5190 El Arbol Drive, Carlsbad shared her concerns about increased traffic as others have
also done and is concerned about Agua Hedionda Lagoon for potential water run off from the gas station
etc. She hope the Commission will choose low impact to protect the lagoon. She stated her concern about
the complexity of the development as too much for that neighborhood
Kerry Siekmann, 5239 El Arbol Drive, Carlsbad, also is concerned about the traffic situation stating on first
spring break when Legoland first opened it took her one hour to drive from her place to Legoland, less
than two miles. She pointed out 16 pumps, two restaurants and a hotel in addition to all the stores being
built in the Carlsbad Outlet Mall and expressed that there is so much more traffic it is unbelievable and
shared she was nearly hit in driving to the Commission meeting today because of the traffic. She shared
her concerns about the trash that may end up at the beach as a result of the mini mart and if they will sell
beer from there a lot of it will go to the beach with after hour drinking and drinking and driving which is not
wanted in Carlsbad and she has no problem with restaurants, but not fast food.
Sam Shafran, 5335 Los Robles Drive, Carlsbad. His main concern is traffic as he used to work close to
the area of concern and saw how things are changing, but we have to be smart and for the long term to
grow. He pointed out on the map his area of concern and explained the difficulties possibly in the future
that will not be able to change once it is there.
Rudy Gonzalez, 5325 Los Robles Drive shared a concern that they the citizens know (in advance) which
restaurants will go in. He gave an example of someone building three houses and then someone came in
with money and they built curbs without permits that were going to be pulled out and they are still there.
He wanted to be able to trust and see everything in place first that was to be there after approval.
Debra Melendez, 5520 El Arbol Drive, Carlsbad stated it took her 20 minutes to get to this meeting and
she felt traffic studies need to be done as the traffic already blocks them from turning west. She felt
another gas station was not necessary but it could be relocated in the strawberry field where it would be
more convenient. She asked the Planning Commission to consider her requests.
Chairperson Segall noted it was near IO:00 p.m. and was concerned if they should hear the next item
since those concerned were still in the audience all this time and have been unable to speak. He asked,
after much discussion as to what the Commission should do, to move this last item, Item No. 12 to the first
item of June 6th meeting and it was agreed.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Trigas and duly seconded, to continue ZCA OO-04/LCPA
00-07 - Comprehensive Sign Ordinance Amendment, to the meeting of June 6,
2001.
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
6-O-O
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux, Heineman, Baker,
Trigas
None
None
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 33
Chairperson Segall then returned to Item No. 11 with the final public testimony.
Al Gilbart, 5485 El Arbol Drive, Carlsbad summarized his main concern to be traffic as well and stated he
had come in the middle of the AT&T Cell Site and appreciated the Commission’s consideration and stated
they would all appreciate the same consideration of all their expressed concerns.
Chairperson Segall seeing no one else wishing to speak, closed Public Testimony and asked for the
applicant’s response.
Ronald Rouse pointed out that the nearest resident is across the railroad track, 650 feet away, but he was
not undermining their concerns, but that is the purpose of the commercial overlay zone, and was it the
same for Carlsbad Car Country area? He assured that Mr. Buza who is the owner/operator has a
commitment as he had to come in and show the staff now what is going to happen and there can be no
change without coming back to the City, though there will not be any change for it has been in planning for
two years.
Commissioner Compas asked if there is a possibility that Mr. Buza would consider eliminating the gas
station as Debra Melendez had requested.
Mr. Rouse stated that it is an intimate and integral part of the project and it is not possible to eliminate it.
Commissioner Compas mentioned that there are seven gas stations within a mile.
Mr. Rouse stated that theirs is unique because of the architecture and it will not be drawing traffic into the
residential neighborhood, but only directly into the gas station area.
Commissioner Compas asked if they plan to sell beer at the 24-hour mini-mart?
Mr. Rouse replied that they will be selling beer and wine, and because it is a 24 hour location it will be
cleaner and not a hangout as it will be opened and not closed in that area.
Chairperson Segall asked staff to answer questions raised by the public.
Ms. Kennedy stated there will be adequate parking including bus spaces and RV parking. She stated the
overlay zone requires high-quality design and limits the use of bright primary colors, so that the projects in
the overlay zone won’t have an “Anaheim” appearance. She explained that the overlay zone in this area
allows only one gas station in a T-intersection and the gas station is not opposed in conjunction with the
support of these types of uses. She stated they do not regulate the 24 hour operation unless there is a
conflict. She noted that the coastal rail trail is prdposed to be within the 40 foot alignment and it will bring
people where they can cross the railroad tracks safely. She stated that the drainage and the traffic issues
are overseen by Engineering and the assessments for any chemicals left are in the soils report. She
addressed the sale of alcohol is reviewed by the Police Department. Ms. Kennedy stated that in regards to
the traffic and the residential area that the proposed area is classified as a freeway service area and the
zoning is a tourist zone.
Mr. Schaffley, the project Traffic Engineer, pointed out on the map that the freeway interchange for this
project is made to be a solution to the traffic problem and not a conflict to the traffic problem in this area.
His solution to the left turn problem is to add an additional left lane without impacts, with improvements in
place an additional lane and a permanent traffic signal, they will still be able to go south and CalTrans has
a permit to improve that area.
Commissioner Trigas shared a concern about the traffic easements if they will be dedicated now or down
the road?
Mr. Schaffley assured her that the lane will accommodate not only the project, but future projects as well.
He stated that the peak period will generate about 150 trips in and out with one to two cars per minute and
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 34
at peak it would be one to three cars per minute and this is well within the general plan, for this area can
accommodate about 30,000 cars per day.
Commissioner Compas asked what confidence he has in that statement?
Mr. Schaffley stated that he met with Cal Trans regarding this.
Commissioner Baker asked if there will any problems with traffic backing up because of the metering on
the on ramps on the l-5 both north and south? Do we anticipate any, thinking more south because it is
closer to that intersection?
Mr. Schaffley stated he understand exactly what she is getting at and because of the nature of ramp
meters, there is queuing created and it is all controlled by CalTrans because they set the meter flow rates
or how many cars per minute are allowed to pass through the lanes. They can operate independent of
anything anybody else does, either create queuing and backup, but what we are doing on all projects is
that we are providing the queuing lanes so that that queuing does not block your through-lanes and mess
up your local traffic. He stated that in all projects that they work on, having been involved with other
projects on the east side of the freeway such as westbound Cannon at the northbound on-ramp you will
note that is an AC dyke along there and it is not a permanent curb. The reason is because when they did
the original design as these are phased improvements, thinking way ahead for build out of the general
plan, they projected enough traffic in that area that there is going to be an extra lane added just for that
purpose all the way back in the north side of the street and that is why that is an AC dyke along the
SDG&E parcel. He stated that those improvements of course will come whenever that project comes
forward and you establish the use and you establish the access and there is more work and more analysis
necessary before that project can be finalized, but that is an example.
Commissioner Baker asked if that also will be the case then on the southbound on ramp, is there currently
ability?
Mr. Schaffley stated that with the pavement and restriping they are going to be doing exactly the same
thing so that as you come in with the signal you will be able to come up and you still have to make your
stop if you are northbound at Avenida Encinas but you can make your right turn and flow onto that ramp
and it really becomes a queuing lane.
Chairperson Segall asked as he understands it that these improvements will be made immediately before
any of the other constructions start?
Mr. Schaffley replied yes and that they have even gone to the extent of in this case for this analysis
because of the complicated nature of it and the other jurisdictions, with CalTrans involved, they prepared a
conceptual striping diagram and it is included in the traffic study. That was the reason they went ahead
and did this additional work and as Mr. Buza indicated earlier, they are ready to design those
improvements as soon as they get the approvals.
Commissioner Compas asked if Phase One would include all this?
Mr. Schaffley replied yes.
Commissioner Baker asked that on Cannon Road if it dead ends as there is kind of a funny right at the
beach at Carlsbad Blvd. Does it narrow down almost to a dead end and if that is the case, do we have any
plans to widen that or ease that situation through there?
Mr. Jimeno replied that he believed Cannon Road is of the ultimate width right now at that intersection at
Carlsbad Blvd and all the traffic reports that they have analyzed have much lower traffic from that segment
from Avenida Encinas to Carlsbad Blvd than going east. Most of traffic goes up and down Avendia
Encinas.
Commissioner Baker asked if there are some traffic techniques they can do to discourage people from
driving down El Arbol and the other street?
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 35
Mr. Jimeno suggested they could probably add some signs to make it clear that those are residential
streets and are not through streets. Other than that, he is not really sure what could be done, for when
people get lost they turn their own way and that is a topic to consider.
Commissioner Trigas asked regarding the errata sheet if the developer has seen it and agreed to all of the
terms and conditions?
Ms. Kennedy replied that yes, he has.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Compas stated he was impressed by all the speakers who were so concerned about traffic
and it scares him for they live there and they see all this. He stated he was going to have to put his faith in
the traffic expert who says that this project is going to make this traffic situation better and based on his
presentation he is going to support this project.
Commissioner L’Heureux stated that she is also going to support the project and thanked them for an
excellent presentation.
Commissioner Heineman agreed as well and stated it was an excellent presentation and it changed his
mind regarding traffic. He stated he is also in favor of the project.
Commissioner Baker stated that she would be in favor of the project also, but she stated that she would
also like to ask that the Planning Commission explore some measures with the neighborhood that they
could discourage people from driving down those streets. She said that overall she thinks this is a great
project, for that is an unattractive corner and this will improve it dramatically. Tourist serving businesses
are good for our community in a sense that people come and they spend money in our community, they
are not going to school here, for the most part they are not using our parks, they are not using the library
and they provide for citizens a lot of good benefits, but she stated she is sympathetic to the traffic problem
as she also lives on a busy street and would like to do what can be done whether it is signs, bumps etc. to
help them out with their situation.
Commissioner Trigas stated that she really likes the project’s look and she thinks it is going to be a very
strong asset to the community, unlike a previous comment that utilitarian buildings must be ugly buildings,
but this is certainly in a utilitarian sense as it serves the community, it serves our tourist needs etc. and
she thinks it is a wonderful design. She compliments the staff as she is sure they demanded a lot of the
developer which of course made the development a wonderful project, much better than you could have
possibly done without our staffs demands. She agreed with the concern about traffic but feels comfortable
with the input that this will resolve some of our traffic problem. She stated that she will definitely be voting
yes.
Chairperson Segall stated he also supports the project and is very concerned about the traffic but thinks
the mitigation efforts and the improvements that go along will help the traffic. He commended the
architectural design and the applicant’s vision on this because for one of the first times he thinks they have
something that is not Spanish style or Mediterranean style in Carlsbad. It is a unique design and no one
has gone this way that he has seen in the past, so he stated he really likes it from the architectural
integrity and design in all of the additional efforts that went in because it is in the overlay zone. In terms of
the striping or the pavement stamping where the gas pumps will be and the vegetation that will surround
and hide a lot of the portions of the gas station and the convenience store. He stated that he does have a
concern that he has raised at other hearings about selling of alcoholic beverages in these mini-marts, but
that is something we cannot control and that will be reviewed by the Police Department. He knows just up
the street from this location they denied a permit, so they are sensitive from that issue from the drinking
and driving standpoint and it is in their hands. He stated with that he also supports the project.
MOTION
/al
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 36
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Trigas and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 4977 and 4978, recommending adoption of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program,
and recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit CUP 99-30, based
upon the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, and also in
addition the errata sheet received dated May 15th.
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
6-O-O
Chairperson Segall, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux, Heineman, Baker,
Trigas
None
None
Chairperson Segall closed the Public Hearing on this item.
CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
By proper motion, the Regular meeting of the Planning Commission of May 2, 2001 was adjourned at
lo:42 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
GARY WAYNE
Assistant Planning Director
Judy Kirsch
Minutes Clerk
MINUTES ARE ALSO TAPED AND KEPT ON FILE UNTIL THE WRll-l-EN MINUTES ARE APPROVED.
MEMORANDUM Hand Delivered
June 26,200l
To: Barbara Kennedy, Carlsbad Planning Depar &!/e~~W=+is& nem #&, --.___
From: Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems
RE: Cannon Court Project Phasing Condition
c: John Buza, J.A. Buza Corporation
Please review the wording that the Cannon Court project team proposes as it
relates to the phasing of the project. We believe that the wording meets both
the City’s objectives as well as the Developer’s objective. Please call with any
questions.
1530 FARADAY AVENUE l SUIT-E 100 l CARLSBAD, CA 92008 l (760) 931-0780 l FAX (760) 931.5744 l planningsystems@nctimes.net
CannonCourti.samultiusemasterpianned cammerciai hcility, whcih necerrsvily will be built
in phases, as it encompasses multipie visitor lErVi.Q commerciaJ uses (gas station/mini-mart, two
rcstauraats and hatcl) an a single site. The CUP requirements are satisfied by the integrated plan,
common infbrudure aud in~pravements. While the first phase of am&uction inchdes Ute gas
station/mini-mart, Lha b&bone master ph inhslnrclurc is commiti and COI1StfUCiCd,
inchding
1. FullwichhconstnrctonaffheCaxmcmBoadlAvenicla~~snd
sigdiion, whicfi is much mart than neccss~~ty to simply serve the service station.
2. Full perimeter laudscrpins hr the entire site along Catxum aud 1-S.
3. On site, the ultimate impmvmeu~ts far the eutire site are committed a8 designed and
shown ou the u.Mma.k buildout piano
4. umiesaIesizedands&fb~tathc- artdbareltitesbpennit~
construction when tbc spccilic apcr8toris selecbed.
Cannon Court is ibe first high qnditycommaci8I pfpject ia the immaliatc poser plant
vicinity, and rcpracnts 8 significant upgrade of that immediate are& In order to attract the
higbat quality rwtaurM andhoaluscrs,we~tha~~,qu~tygass&tioninplagaswell
asthc-turraridlandsc8pin&inordabd- tbc visiou and quaiity ofthe tile.
Aswith8ny~t~p~cammetcial~~eotlyg~~theEt~ood&evelopthe
markrdemandforthelateruses. TwoneerbycxampksinehrdeCarCountryandCatisW
Company Stons; both wen projects built in multiple phases.
The iiaowhg ahditiou81 conclifirJn will aswrt the city au usa Bat inq.llauenkd:
“Bu~pcrmits~thegas~~~shannotbt~~lthe~rsite
inbtntcture, including intcrscctim imjmvcm~~ sigualization and cT.amm Rd/i-5
landacapiIIgisundec~andcompktionb~ OccupufIcypcxmhforc2le~
statiotdnini-m shiil not be issued until such improvetncslts 8m subatamti8lly completed. The
app~cantshallmakem~reporrstotht~gI)inctarof~~~~spccifit
restaurant and hotel operators and priced ex@tiously to compkte devehpment of the en&
site as soon as CommaciatIy possible.”
The master developer of Cannon Court is a local businessman alldwiUbetheoperatorofthegas
sttdicmhnini-mart. As a reauls he is fikctly inlcrcstai in the success of tht entire completed
project. He will be financiaNy motivated to present lhe site tow andhuteloper8torsi.D
the best possiile turner. Thcearinsitcwillbeimprovedandmaintainedinaco~qndity
mannersothatthe~usersandtheCitybarc5t~theapprovedm~dcsign.
Qkdity tdmii time lo auract, particuhxiy whcrrc a project is shst8ntially khpgtdng 11l1
industrial use m
Ray Patchett - Cannon Court _ Page 1
From:
To:
Date:
Subject:
Barbara Kennedy
Michael Holzmiller; Ray Patchett; Ron Ball
6/26/01 1:49PM
Cannon Court
For the Inf~on of thei
clTYcouN~
AssLCLC~d
DatGL&ity
I talked with Michael regarding the discussion yesterday about phasing the construction for the Cannon
Court project. The Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone allows the project to be approved under a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The CUP takes the place of a site development plan (SDP) which would
normally be required for the CT-Q zoning of the site. We agreed that the “Q” overlay allows the Planning
Commission or City Council to impose special conditions including establishing a “time period within
which the project or any phases of the project shall be completed.”
In order to ensure that the project complies with the CUP finding: “that it (the gas station) is developed as
part of a freeway-service facility containing a minimum of two freeway oriented uses”, staff has drafted the following condition for consideration by the Council:
1 .The gas station/mini-mart shall be constructed subsequent to or concurrently with at least one other use on the site. Building permits for the gas station/mini-mart shall not be issued until building permits for at
least one other use have been issued. Occupancy for the gas station/mini-mart shall not be issued until
occupancy for at least one other use has been issued.
This condition would supplement condition # 38 of PC Reso. 4978 which addresses the construction
phasing plan to insure that adequate parking is provided for each phase and that landscaping and site
improvements are completed for each phase of development.
The developer has also drafted an alternative condition for consideration. I will bring it by this afternoon.
Please let me know if you need me to prepare anything else.
Thank you.
BK
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
This space is for the County Clerks Filing Stamp
@- b--/9-0/
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
the annexed-is a printed copy (set in type nc
smaller than nonpareil), has been published
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have
i
each regular and entire issue of said newspapc
been adjudged newspapers of general
and not in any supplement thereof on th
circulation by the Superior Court of the County of
following dates, to-wit:
San Diego, State of California, for the cities of Escondido Oceanside, Carlsbad, Solana Beach and San diego County; that the notice of which/[ NQTI438 OF. HnARiRa
Proof of Publication of
Notice of Public Hearing
NOTICE IS HERESY GIVEN that the &y Council of the City of Carlsbad will ho@ a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad,, California, at 6x10 ,p.m. on Tuesday, June 26’ 2001 to cdflsider a request .for a Mitigated ti3egativd Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting *Program and Conditional Us@ Permit to develop a gas-station mint-mart 66’room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site Jo&d on the ‘krthwest comer of Cannon fload.%.and Interstate 5: ti the C-T-Q Z&e, the Commercial/Visitor, Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and m&e particularly described as: June 9, 2001
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury th
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at San Marcos , California
this 11th da!
June, 2001 of
That POrtiOn of Lot .*H* of R-0 Ague Hedfonda, in the city -of Carlsbad, County. of San Diego, State @ C~tffornia. according to Petition Map thereof No. 623, filed in the &i@e of the C.ouqb Recorder of San Diego Cmtr, Noymber 16,. lpg,@ivy 2~910-36) . . .
CASEFILE:CUPW3@ ’
ZASE NAME: CANNtiN COURT
NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising
City of Carlsbad
Records Management Department
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a
public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 26, 2001 to consider a request for a Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional
Use Permit to develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a
6.51 acre site located on the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, in the
C-T-Q Zone, the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities
Management Zone 3 and more particularly described as:
That portion of Lot “H” of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, in
the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of
California, according to Petition Map thereof No. 823,
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, November 16, 1896 (APN 2 1 O-01 O-38)
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the
public hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after June 22, 2001.
If you have any questions, please call Barbara Kennedy in the Planning Department at
(760) 602-4626.
If you challenge the Conditional Use 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 at or prior to the public
hearing.
CASE FILE: CUP 99-30
CASE NAME: CANNON COURT
PUBLISH: JUNE 9,200l
City of Carlsbad
Janice Breitenfeld,
Deputy City Clerk
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive - Carlsbad, CA 92008-l 989 * (760) 434-2808 a9
City
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a
public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at
6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 16, 2001, to consider a request for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Permit to
develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located
on the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, in the C-T-Q zone, the
Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and more
particularly described as:
That portion of Lot “H” of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, -in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to
Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896 (APN 21 O-
01 O-38)
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after May 10, 2001. If you have any
questions, please call Barbara Kennedy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4626.
If you challenge the Conditional Use 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 at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: CUP 99-30
CASE NAME: CANNON COURT
PUBLISH: MAY 3,200l
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1635 Faraday Avenue l Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 l (760) 602-4600 l FAX (760) 602-8559 l www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us @
SITE
CANNON COURT
CUP 99-30
Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160@
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST
801 PINE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
4949 VIEWRIDGE AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CATHERINE MILLER
C/O TERRAMAR HOA
5299 ARBOL CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/COMMUNITY
SERVICES
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
BARBARAKENNEDY
m&&d l!l--J I
(J&J.&?4 (g-w
5/30/2001
n ,A AVERY@ Address La bets
U.S. FISH &WILDLIFE
2730 LOKER AVE WEST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331
CALTRANS - VAN HURST
2829 JUAN ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92110
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPT
JABUZA
STE E 7
16085 SAN DIEGUITO RD
RANCH0 SANTA FE CA 92067
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
STE 103
7575 METROPOLITAN DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
SANDAG
STE 800
401 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
SD COUNTY PLANNING
STE B
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
I.P.U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND
URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
laser 5160@
w109zs WWl s=JPPW CBAU3AV
CABRILLO POWER
SUITE #SE00
1000 LOUISIANA ST HOUSTON TX 77002
NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT 810 MISSION AVE
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
CANNON ROAD LLC
1745 ROCKY RD
FULLERTON CA 92831
INNS OF AMERICA
SUITE #200
755 RAINTREE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a
public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at
6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 16, 2001, to consider a request for a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Conditional Use Permit to
develop a gas station, mini-mart, 86 room hotel, and two restaurants on a 6.51 acre site located
on the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5, in the C-T-Q zone, the
Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3 and more particularly described as:
That portion of Lot “H” of Ranch0 Agua Hedionda, -in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to
Petition Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896 (APN 210-
01 O-38)
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after May 10,200l. If you have any questions, please call Barbara Kennedy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4626.
If you challenge the Conditional Use 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 at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: CUP 99-30
CASE NAME: CANNON COURT
PUBLISH: MAY 3,200l
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1635 Faraday Avenue l Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 l (760) 602-4600 l FAX (760) 602-8559 l www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
1)
’ ,_ * 9%
0 0 I
SITE
CANNON COURT
CUP 99-30
0th Feed SheetsTM
.
iBRILL0 POWER
SUITE #5800
1000 LOUISIANA ST
HOUSTON TX 77002
NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT 810 MISSION AVE
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
0 CANNON ROAD LLC
1745 ROCKY RD
FULLERTON CA 92$31
Use template for 5 ItiP 0 INNS OF AMERICA
SUITE #200 755 RAINTREE DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
.P
_I
.&
:c .*
* $2
H notice has been mailed to
all property owners/occupants
listed herein.
Date: gL3-V ,
(Form A)
TO: CITY CLERK’S OFFICE.
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice
CUP 99-30 CANNON COURT
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of FIRST AVAILABLE HEARING
.
Thank you.
,
Assistant City Man
MAY 30, 2001
Date
Major Issues of Concern Regarding the Cannon CT. Project
A. Alcohol Sales - Beer and Wine
B. Increased Traffic
C. Increased Crime resulting from 24 hour business - Gas Station & Mini-Mart
D. Other Issues
A. Alcohol Sales
1. Page 7 of PC Reso #4978, #23 states, “Any tinme proposal for the retail sale of alcoholic
beverages should be subject to review by the City of Carl&ad Police Dept.” From my infbrmal
discussion with the police, it seems that they feel the same way that I (and others in Terramar) 8x1
about the sale of alcohol so close to our homes, Cannon Park, and the beach. We feel it is
important to address this issue now before any application tbr a license is even initiated. We are
concerned with drinking 8t driving, drinking at the beach, and all issues that evolve tiom this type
of sale including the trash issues.
2. Page 7 of PC Reso #4978, #24 states, ‘No tables or chairs shall be provided for the consumption
of food on the premises.” Shouldn’t the words “or beverages” be included a&r the word “food”?
3. There are already three gas station/mini-marts at Palomar Airport Rd & the I-5 that sell liquor,
plus another one at Tamarack & the I-5 that sells liquor, plus another one at Carl&ad Village Dr.
62 the I-5 that sells liquor.
B. Increased Traffic
1. We have seen an incredible &ease in traffic in our area (Please note the attached photos ;6rom
Cerezo and Carl&ad Blvd. Traffic like this is occunin g firequently.) With that in mind in the
Transportation/Circulation information on p. 13 it states, “even w/implementation of roadway
improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the City’s Adopted Growth
Management Pertbrmance Standards at build out.” In addition, it states, “12 full & 2 partial
intersections will be severely impacted by regional through traffic over which the City has no
I
2. There are already three gas stations at Palomar Airport Rd & the I-5 plus three more at Tamarack
jurisdictional control. These geneally include all freeway interchange areas and major
intersections along Carl&ad Blvd” In addition to those fbcts, when I spoke to Mr. Stillman in
Traffic, he told me that the traf?ic report does nd take into account accidents at the I-S, which
seem to occur several times a week. The addition of a 16 pump (or bay, whichever is the proper
terminology) gas station at Cannon and I-5, especially if it is a high vohune type of station, causes
me (and others in Terramar) great concern. We are already experiencing cut through traffic during
high traffic times as shown in the attached photos, and difficulty in exiting both East and West
onto Cannon Rd. from Los Robles and El Arbol.
& the 1-5. ‘Ihere are also additiomxl stations available in these areas not fhr from the freeway.
C. Increased Crime resulting f?om 24 hour business - Gas Station & Mini-Mart
1. Since the gas statiar/mini-mart is a f&way service facility and the freeway runs 24 hrs. /day, it is
my understanding that this tacility could be open 24 hours a day. I am very concerned, as are my
neighbors, that this will invite a new element of crime into our neighborhood, Cannon Park, and
the beach. We feel we are aheady expexieming incxased crime and much of it has occurred at
night with car break-ins, thefts, and even the new stairway to the beach at Cerezo and Carl&ad
Blvd. has been covered with graffiti.
D. Other issues
1. Zoning - On page 30 of the planning commissiacl notes, Mr. Buza stated that he wanted to first
put in the road and intkstructure. This is to be followed by the gas station/mini-mart but “the C-T
zoning allows for development of a gas station in conjunction with a fkway service facility that
contains at least two other f&way uses, such as the proposed hotel 8t restaumn ts” per the Agenda
Bill Item Explanation. The zoning states that Mr. Buza should 6rst put in the prqmsed ~~~&~urants
and/or hotel to comply with its requirements.
Also, Cannon Ct. is being developed as a PUD and due to some of the signals that the
economy is showing, it is important to focus on a possible “worst case scenario”. Since it is a
2
2.
PUB, Mr. Buza could separate the parcels and sell them off. If the market then goes into a
downturn the hotel and restaurants may not be developed and we are let? with a gas station/mini-
mart and no other uses (which were originally required by the zoning). I feel that since this is a
PUD, the zoning should be strictly enforced.
In addition, on the Agenda Bill under “Item Explanatiut” it states, “‘Ihe subdivision
would allow individual ownership for each building pad.” Chairman &gall of the Planning
Commission addressed the issue about each pad being “separate & a separate builda fix each
pad”. Ms. Kennedy replied, “that is not the way they are planning on developing it, but are
planning on developing the whole project as a phased construction.” Please note that in the letter
dated March 28 addressed to Ms. Kennedy, Mr. Buza shows the hotel as the phase ofthe project
after the r estawant A. Then at the planning commission meeting he changed his orda and the
restaurants were last. In the planning meeting he stated that “the first thing they would do is get in
the road, the intersection and the gas station because they would be building in that dire&cm.”
But then he continued to say, “the second phase wouId be the hotel and the underground parking
as they want the hotel to be opmxble” but the hotel is at the back of the property.
?he pattern of changing the order of phasing for the hotel 12 r estawants but never the gas
station/ mini-mart (which is always first, after the road & infrastructure) concerns me. The fact
that there are no contracts signed for the hotel and restaurants adds to my concern. Mr. Buza told
me that he is planning to run the gas station/mini-mart personally, which may be why he wants to
build that tirst, but per zoning requirements, shouldn’t that be last?
MEIR - On page 13 under Transportation/Circulation, it states, “a MEIR may not be used to
review projects if it WBs certified more than five years prior to the filing of an appiication for a
later project”. The city’s MEIR was certified in 1994. Though it is being reviewed and some may
feel that things have not significantly changed except for Palomar Airport Rd & El Camino Real, I
feel we may have some impact changes due to the increased usage of the Encina Power Station
and more specifically the “peaker” unit. Added to the increased pollution from so many cars using
the sixteen pump (or bay) gas station, it may be something to consider.
3
3. Redevelopment Area II- Since the project is located in the Redevelopment Area II, why is it be&g
approved befbre the master plan is developed for the area?
4. Page 5 of PC Reso #978, #6 states nothing about holding the City of Carlsbad harmless if there is
a spill or leak kom the undeqwnd tanks, the piping, or tank rtieling at the gas station. It is my
understanding that this area drains to the lagoon and Cannon Lake, both areas of environmental
impact and concern.
I must compliment Barbara Kennedy on the great work she has done on this project and I look fbvard
to eating at one of the nice restaurants. Also, I would like to offer many thanks to the staff at the Faraday
office. Everyone was very help&I and t?iendly every time I needed help in researching this project.
Many of us have said before that we are not opposed to the entire pro& just the gas station/mini-mart.
We appreciate the time and consideration you are giving us and hope that you can help to resolve this issue
for us.
Thank YM1,
5239 El Arbol Dr., Carlsbad Ca. 92008
760-438-5611
Attachments
4
1 project will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project nil1
2 become null and void.
3 Landscane
10
16
17
18
19
20
21
22 Kc-f3 ’ 24
25 c---y f!! 26 ,
27
19. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape
and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan
and the City’s Landscape Manual. The Developer shall construct and install all
landscaping 9 shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a
healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris.
20. 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.
Conditional Use Permit
-- I- __-- . . - ~._ -_ -- -._
,.,w:.’ This Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Director on a-yearly basis
to determine if all conditions of this petmit have been met and that the use doe&t have
a substantial negative effect on surrounding properties or the public health and wel$re. If
7’ L-LL the Planning Director determines that the use has such substantial negative effects, the
y”’ Planning Director shall recommend that the Planning Commission, after providing the
k permittee the opportunity to be heard, add additional conditions to reduce or eliminate the R--F3L.3 substantial negative effects. -- . . . --.- ~_ -. .__- -----
22. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of ten (10) years from May 16,ZOOl
through May 16,201l. 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
petmit may be extended for a reasonable period of time not to exceed ten (10) 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.
Any future proposal for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages shall be subject to
review by the City of Carlsbad Police Department.
24. This approval is granted only for the sale of ready-to-eat food and canned or bottled
beverages within the mini-mart. Food shall be pre-cooked or prepared at another
location and only heated on the site. No stoves or ovens for the cooking or
preparation of food, nor tableware or dishwashing facilities (other than a standard_
sink) shall be permitted. This business shall operate as a take-out business onloo
.J P --~~- .- c ,
28 bq- +ables oi-clGiir%h5ll%e provided for the-c.onsump_t&%i offo1oco.n t.ne premises. by _
“St
_- --- - ~-- _ ..__ -- -.-- future proposal to locate a hot food/fast food vendor(s) within the mini-mart shall be
II PC RESO NO. 4978 -7- 47 I
freeway ramp signals.
7 a. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal.
3. Si_ting and striping with “KEEP CLEAR” notices to assure intersections are not
blocked during railroad signal preemption.
4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal to permit
south to east. west to south, and north to east movements during preemption.
5. Dual west to southbound left turns on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas.
With all the above measures incorporated into the project design, the traffic analysis shows that
the project traffic does not si-tificantly affect the levels of service of the streets or intersections
in the existing, short-term (year 2005) and build-out (year 2020) conditions.
In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would
result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded
that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in
increased traffic .&unes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accomrn-odate build-z
2
12 full and 2 partial mtefSections will be severely impacted by regiona/
I L, , which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generally_include aid
areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. , Even -with thb,
’
improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the
performance standards at build-out. _ ..-_ ._ ___-------
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out,
numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include:
1) 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 build-out 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 projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR.
This project is within the scope of that MEIR This document is available at the Planning -_ Department.
,’ .; \ - J I’
3;
A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the
filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to - I determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was
certified more than five years ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no
‘, substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was
13 Rev. 03128196 2 2
Issues (and Suppomng Information Sources).
cl
4
e)
0
g)
h)
9
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; #5, Pgs
l-7) 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 quannty of ground wafers, 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 direcnon or rate of flow of groundwater?
(#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.-2-l 1)
Impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-
11; #5, Pgs l-7) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwIse available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11)
04 \’ : ‘-* 1’. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3- - _ 1 - 5.3-12)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l
- 5.3-12)
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
d) Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
T
VI. TR4NSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
proposal result in:
Would the
a) Increased vehicle nips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs
5.7-l - 5.7.22; # 6)
b) 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)
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
e) Hazards or barriers for pedesnians or bicyclists?
(#I :Pgs 5.7- 1 - 5.7.22)
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportanon (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
g) Rail. waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#I :Pgs 5.7- 1 -
5.7.22)
VILBIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24; #2, Pg 2)
h
Potennaily
Signifkanl Impact
0
Cl
cl
cl
q
q
q
w
q
q
q
El
cl
cl
q
cl
q
cl
cl
Potennaily Significant
Unless Mitlgatlon Incorporated
u
cl
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
El
q
q
q
q
0
q
q
Less Than
Slpificam Impact
III
cl
cl
q
q
q
q
q
q
q
Cl
h;O Impact
El
El
lxl
[XI
w
lxl
El
q
IXI
lzl
ixl
cl q
cl El
q Ix1
q El
q I23
q El
q IXI
cl ‘W
Rev. 03/28/96
J.A. BUZA CORP.
ConstructIon l Deveiopment
,/ D I \ “e
March 28,200l
Barbara Kennedy
City of Carlsbad - Planning Department
1635 Faraday Ave Cartsbad, CA 92008
Re: CUP 99-30 / Cannon Court “Phasing”
Dear Barbara,
Per your March 22.2001 memo to Dennis Cunningham, here is the phasing information you requested:
Phase 1 - Infrastructure
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Preparation of the parcel map, grading plans, and improvement plans.
Rough grading for the entire project, except for the underground parking garage of the hotel. This earthwork and the necessary export will be done as part of the building permit for Phase 5.
Cannon Road: traffic signal, interconnect, and utility tie-ins for water, sewer, storm drain, and
dry utilities. Private street: both surface and underground improvements, from Cannon Road to the northerly subdivision boundary. Onsite utilities: public sewer, public water, public fire, and public storm drain. Private utility stubs for future tie-ins will be constnrcted. Maintenance roads to access utilities will also be
constructed. Fencing: perimeter fencing, entry monuments, 42” high screen wall at south and east of gas
station with landscaping.
Erosion control. Landscape complete between private road and railroad right of way, along Cannon Road, to
north end of 42” high screen wall at east end of gas station.
Phase 2 - Gas Station and Countrv Store:
1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, storm drain) to serve the gas station. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2.
3. Construction of Gas Station and Country Store.
4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2.
Phase 3 - Restaurant A Infrastructure
1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, storm drain) to serve Restaurant A. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3. 3. Grading for pad (to be hydro-seeded with native, non-irrigated mix). 4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3.
Phase 4 - Restaurant A
1. Construction of Restaurant A
Page 1 of 2
Phone: 858.756.5338 l Fax: 858.756.2891 li
nn 0,.. 0~17 a 1LnQc C-ln n;nn,litn Rrl tiF7 l Ranrhn Cant2 Fe. CA 92067 8 d
- I’ - _ 81 ’ 4 * t/4
01 1 \. . . p 2 2 Y z 0
CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
AB# TITLE: DEPT. HD.
MTG. CANNON COURT CITY All-Y.
DEPT. PLN CUP 99-30 I CITY MGR
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. ADOPTING a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and APPROVING CUP 99-30 as recommended for adoption and approval by
the Planning Commission.
I ITEM EXPLANATION:
On May 16, 2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended
adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of CUP 99-30 for Cannon Court (6-O
Nielsen absent). The project site is-Located on a vacant lot at the northwestcorner-of-Cannon Road
and InterstaB-,lin the C-T-Q Zone and the CommercialNisitor Serving Ove&ty Zone and in Local; -- Faanaaement Zone 3.1-e project is also located WRedevelopment Area II; however,
since a master plan has not been developed for this area and no separate standards have been
project is located in the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone and therefore requires approval of
complies with all applicable development standards of the C-T zone and Commercial/Visitor Serving
Overlay Zone with regard to parking, signage, building height, setbacks, lighting, landscaping, and
standards that apply specifically to gas stations. The project has been designed in the “Village” architectural style and features high-quality design and detailing consistent with the overlay zone
requirements. The CUP and overlay zone findings for approval of the project can be made and are
outlined in detail in the staff report and resolutions.
The project is located in the Agua Hedionda Segment of the Local Coastal Plan and is required to
obtain approval of a coastal development permit from the Coastal Commission. The project also proposes a Minor Subdivision and Non-residential Planned Development that would allow the
subdivision of the property into four “postage stamp” lots and one
private street and most of the surface parking and landscaping. .-ZI- r Individual ownersh~fo7-each-buildiiiIci 3. ad~dEill%nibG theprojec
aifrecrprocal parking and access. The Minor Subdivision and Non-residential PUD will be acted
upon pending approval of the project by the City Council and Coastal Commission.
A number of residents from the Terramar community spoke in opposition to the gas station and
voiced concern about the traffic impacts of the project. More detailed information regarding the
development proposal and public testimony is included in the attached staff report to the Planning
Commission and Planning Commission minutes.
Planning Commission Minutes May 16,200l Page 30
a$
Ms. Kennedy said they have met with Coastal Commission informally previous to this and they have had
positive responses. _-
Chairperson Segall asked if Ms. Kennedy could address the non-residential PUD in the fact that each pad
is going to be separate and a separate builder for each pad?
Ms. Kennedy stated that is not the way they are planning on developing it, but are planning on developing the whole project as a phased construction, however for example, the restaurant would be able to own
their own building and pad, but then everything else would be commonly maintained.
br arrperson Segall asked in terms of construction, the plan is one company will do everything so
everything is going to be compatible and we are assured that it is compatible?
Ms. Kennedy said that is the plan at this point, but if they were to come in for some modifications for the
buildings, and if they did not substantially conform to what you see on the exhibits, they would have to
come back to the Planning Commission.
Chairperson Segall asked to hear from the applicant.
4 fi John Buza. 3119 Circa De Tierra, Encinitas, CA. stated they have been working with staff for almost two
c years on the project. He pointed out that it has been a team effort with Ms. Kennedy and Mr. Jimeno with a 2 lot of input and ideas on the project to move buildings, rearrange the road, and doing the site plan almost
times over the two years to get to this point.
’ Commissioner Baker asked if they anticipate since it is somewhat industrial with the power plant, will it
cause any problems with tenants that might be interested in the property?
Mr. Buza stated that they see no indication of that yet as they have letters of interest from almost 70
restaurants and probably 15 on the hotel. He said they bought the property in September of ‘98 and they
get inquiries every week though no one has signed, but they are sending lease agreements in the mail.
Commissioner Compas asked him to share his forecast of the timing of the various phases in terms of
how many months after approval, and when would the road be done and the timetable for having the hotel
Buza stated once-tbeyget$heir approvals the first thing they would do is get in the road, the
and the gas station because they would be building in that direction. He said they plan on sm soon as they get-&$oval. He thought the road would probably take three to four months and
they would be building the gas station and the second phase would be the hotel and the parking as they want the hotel operable, and it looks like it is going to be Hampton Inn and
and they want to work with Hilton to help them to work with the correct restaurants for they are
fortunate to not be in a development situation to have to go out and grab a restaurant. He stated that they
would like to have the hotel ready as fast as they are allowed, but there is also the grading restriction in
the Coastal Zone.
.;’ -’ Commissioner Compas asked if they were to get approval of the hotel in a couple months?
Mr. Buza replied that they are doing the working drawings on the gas station and will start the working
drawings on the hotel next and have it going as soon as the City will allow.
Commissioner Compas asked what would be the earliest they would be completely finished?
Mr. Buza said discounting the grading restrictions he thought they could build it within two years and have
the hotel up.
Commissioner Compas asked with the approvals from the Commission and Council, what would be the
two biggest worries about this project?
J/6
freeway ramp signals.
2. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal.
3. Signing and striping with “KEEP CLEAR” notices to assure intersections are not
blocked during railroad signal preemption.
4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal to permit
south to east, west to south, and north to east movements during preemption,
5. Dual west to southbound left turns on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas.
With all the above measures incorporated into the project design, the traffic analysis shows that
the project traffic does not significantly affect the levels of service of the streets or intersections
in the existing, short-term (year 2005) and build-out (year 2020) conditions.
In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would
result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded
that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in
increased traffic plumes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate b uild-out
12 full and 2 partial InteffeElions WIII be severely impacted by region
which the City has no jurisdictional control. These generamclude a
freeway jnterchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard..i’ Even %i.h ----A_ improvements, a number of %itersectlona-are projected to fail the I- City’s adopted Growth Management performancest~da$ at build-out. - -- --- __-
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out,
numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include:
1) 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 fi-om 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 build-out 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
Oveniding Considerations” applies to all projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR.
This project is within the scope of that MEIR This document is available at the Planning
G
Department.
\
i;-
A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the
filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to .._ 1
4 determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was
\, certified more than five years ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no
\ substantial changes have occuned with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was
---.. cs 13 Rev. 03/28/96 A
-i
: 2 ‘1, \ jc\~ 1 certified. The only potential changed circumstance. the intersection failure at Palomar Airpon
_A Rd. and El Camino Real. is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance.
Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have
been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore. the MEIR remains adequate to
review later projects.
7. Biological Resources
The site will not result in an impact to biological resources. The site does not contain any
identified sensitive resources. It contains no designated natural communities or wetland habitat
and does not serve as a migration corridor.
8. Energy and Mineral Resources
The site contains no identified natural resources and will not conflict with any energy
conservation plans. There are no known mineral resources on the site.
9. Hazards
Compliance with the California Health and Safety Code and Rule 20 of the Air Pollution Control
District Rules and Regulations as stated in the required regulatory permits for the construction
and operation of a gasoline dispensing facility will reduce the risk of explosion and release of
hazardous substances to a level of insignificance. Engineering and Fire Department review of
the project will ensure that typical safety features and provisions are designed into the project.
There will be no interference with emergency response or evacuation plans as the site will be
developed in accordance with all applicable City regulations, including placement of the
structures on the site and public/private improvements sidewalks, drainage facilities). Therefore,
the proposed development of the site will not result in the creation of any hazards.
Since the property had previously been used for agricultural uses, a limited Phase II
Environmental Assessment was conducted to evaluate the possibility of agricultural chemical
residue in the soils. The analysis detected the presence of toxaphene, however, it is anticipated
that grading activities (mixing and blending of the soil) will further reduce the levels of
toxaphene to a level of insignificance. Once grading is completed, it was recommended that
additional soil samples be collected an analyzed to determine their concentrations of toxaphene.
If additional actions are required, they can be implemented at that time. Examples of additional
actions would include thicker concrete slabs or the placement of vapor barriers.
10. Noise
The project is subject to the City of Carlsbad adopted interior noise standards of 45 CNEL for the
hotel use and 55 CNEL for the commercial uses which include the restaurants and food mart.
The City does not have exterior noise standards which apply to these uses. The site is subject to
noise impacts from I-5 and the Amtrack, Coaster, and freight train operations on the AT & SF
railroad. An acoustical analysis was submitted for the project which analyzed the impacts from
these noise sources on the proposed development. The report indicates that the building surfaces
of the hotel will be exposed to worst case noise levels of 77.7 CNEL, and will therefore require
at least a 32.7 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise
standard. The recommended mitigation measures include building upgrades for a number of
units within the hotel. The area of most concern is the east end of the building that faces the
freeway. The building upgrades consist of upgraded windows, attachment of an additional layer
14 Rev. 03/28/96 23
Issues (and Supportmg information Sources). Porentlalt~ sr~gnIricanI
Impact
Pocentrailv
Si~gnrticant
Unless iMitigation lncomorared
Cl
Less Than
Slgnuicannr
I mpacl
Pi0 I mpsct
w
w
Is1
lxl
w
El
El
cl cl cl
4
e)
f)
9)
h)
i)
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; $5, Pgs
1-7)
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 quanttty 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..2-1 I)
Impacts to poundwater quality? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-
11; #5, Pgs 1-7)
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs
5.2-l - 5..2-11)
q
cl
q
q
q
@
cl
cl
cl
q
q
q
cl
q
q
q
q
q
AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air qualiry standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3-
1 - 5.3-12)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l
- 5.3-12)
c) Alter air movemenf moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
d) Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3712)
w q cl cl
q
q
q
q
q
q El
q Ix1
q El q
TR4NSPORTA-I’ION/CIRCULARON. Would the
proposai result in: Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs
5.7-l - 5.7.22; # 6)
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- 1 -
5.7.22)
4
b)
c)
4
e)
0
8)
w El
q q
q
q
q q
q q
q cl
q q
q
q
q
q
cl q cl
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? (#l:Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24; #2, Pg 2)
cl cl Ix]
Rev. 03f28f96
cl
6
1 .!A . ,D Y t \ J ’ l(
c
“r
11
AT+; ;: .i A
1:
1L
1:
1t
Ii
18
19
2a
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the pavyrnent
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 shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Cannon Court -
CUP 99-30 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
6. 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 W Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby,
including without limitation, any and ail liabilities arising from the emission by the
facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation
survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City’s
approval is not validated.
The Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24” x 36”,
mylar copy of the Tentative Parcel Map and Site Plan reflecting the conditions
approved by the final decision making body.
The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a
reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24” x 36” blueline drawing
format (including any applicable Coastal Commission approvals).
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the
Director from the Carlsbad Unified School District that this project has satisfied its
obligation to provide school facilities;
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
PC RESO NO. 4978
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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 and is
subject to all conditions contained in PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 for the Nonresidential
Planned Development Permit and Minor Subdivision.
This approval shall become null and void if the first building permit is not issued for this
project within 18 months from the date of Final Parcel Map approval.
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 I/ ,- -5- 4a
21.42.010
in rhis chapter does not include chain. automatic or
/Coin-operated washrack. or automobile sales.
(A) Permits for automobile service stations shall
‘. be granted only in the event one or more of the
:yY \ following factual situations is found to exist: 7 (i) That it is to be developed as part of a I\ ‘, ; .d \ - master-pianned recreation area, industrial park,
regional -3 r or community shopping center.
(ii) That it is to be developed as part of a
freeway-service facility, containing a minimum of
,two freeway oriented uses,
(iii) That it is to be developed as part of a com-
mercial facility that is an integral part of a planned
community development,
;: ?
L\’ - (B) In the event a permit is granted for an auto-
‘\’ mobile service station, the following standan& of ” development thenfor shall be required as conditions
of such granting:
(i) Land use planning office approval of architec-
tural elevations to insure that the use wiil harmonize
with the neighborhood
(ii) Approval of the land use planning office of
landscape plans consisting of at least the following:
(I) Perimeter planter areas of a minimum of six
feet in width and pianter are@ adjacent to the struc-
NIe
(II) Six-inch concrete curb bounding ail planter
areas
(IIIJ Landscaping including a combination of
flowers. shrubs. and trees
(IV) A sprinkler system providing total and ef-
fective coverage to all Iandscaped areas
(V) A statement delineating a maintenance sched-
ule and responsibility for maintenance of landscaped
amls
(iii) A six-foot high masonry wall shall be con-
svucted on all sides of the subject property which
adjoins residential or professional zoned property
(iv) All exterior lighting shall be shielded or ori-
ented in such way so as not to glare on adjacent
properties
(v) All displays and storage shall be contained
within the main suucture
(vi) Trash containers shall be contained within a
six-foot high enclosure
(vii) All si_ens shall be in conformance with the
city’s sign ordinance
(viii) Full public improvements 3s may be re-
quired for ’ *’ ’
in this cha
(8) R-3 cd- (A) Ra < . , six person! hti met:
(i) The
approval 0
official ilnt
division 2
(ii) The facility shall comply with all the rules.
regulations and standards required by the State
Department of Social Services
(iii) Off-street parking as required in Section
21.44.130
(iv) The planning commission or the city council
on appeal may modify any of the above standa&,
if it is found that such modificafions will not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the residents:
(B) Professional care facilities:
(9) Recreational vehicle (RV) storage may be
permitted by conditional use permit in the following
zones only: R-3, R-P, RD-M. CL-R. C-2. C-M, M
and P-M.
(A) A conditional use permit for recretionai
vehicle storage may be granted provided that the
following requirements are met:
(i) Only recreational vehicles as defmed in Sec-
tion 2 1.04.298 may be stored within any recreational
vehicle stonge area, all stored vehicles must be in
an operable condition and, if required. currently
licensed
(ii) Permitted recreational vehicle storage shall
not be utilized as a sales yard. or as storage for a
sales yard. An occasional sale by an individual may
be permitted
689 KhlsM 8-W)
I. i \ 1. ;,. 1,-. IT 4 ‘I I -. ! ;tr --I ‘\ ;: J ’ f../ _ g
4
I:, ..T? ;..fp; I - I I a.., \ ‘$! 1 y ; : ‘\ I ‘I It, f, I / I 1 I I i I’ I I i ‘4 , ,. ,; ; : 8;;’ ,’
$$; (-ii ,. “4 ) I ‘I +g
I EXPANSION
URCUL477ON PLAN
CAMVON COURT
81
Hofman Planning
Associates
L-ad-m fm 1&G-J ws-
Planning Project Management Fiscal Analysis
June 26,200l
Mayor Buddy Lewis and Councilmembers
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
SUBJECT: CUP 99-30 Cannon Court
Dear Mayor Lewis and City Councilmembers:
As representatives of Cabrillo Power 1 LLC, the current owner of the Encina Power
Plant, we would like to address the potential future land uses that could occur on the
adjacent parcel to the north of the Cannon Court property. We have been under
discussions with city staff regarding the potential construction of a new power plant on
the property east of the railroad tracks, directly north and adjacent to the Cannon Court
property, that would eventually replace the existing power plant. As part of the new
power plant project, a switching yard and other energy related infrastructure may be
located immediately adjacent to the Cannon Court property. Also, we do not foresee the
existing powerlines that adjoin the Cannon Court site ever being relocated. If the power
plant is relocated to this site, then maintenance vehicles associated with the operation of a
power plant will be required to take access through the Cannon Court property.
Cabrillo Power I LLC is not opposed to this application, however, it is important that the
future potential uses of the power plant property to the north be disclosed so that the
City Council can make a completely informed decision. We would recommend that a
condition of approval be added that would require the applicant to disclose the
potential of the future construction of a power plant to the north to all future
landowners or tenants of Cannon Court. This will ensure that these landowners are
aware of these potential future uses and future negotiations with the city and Cabrillo
Power I LLC is not jeopardized.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Cc: Ernest Soczka
5900 Pasteur Court l Suite 150 l Carlsbad l CA 92008 l (760) 438-1465 l Fax: (760) 438-2443
/ Rav Patchett - Cannon Court Pane 1 I
From: To:
Date:
Subject:
Barbara Kennedy
Michael Holzmiller; Ray Patchett; Ron Ball
6/26/01 1:49PM
Cannon Court
~~theIaformationofti
clTYcouNcIL
AsaCLW~d
DatG-A&iQ
I talked with Michael regarding the discussion yesterday about phasing the construction for the Cannon
Court project. The Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone allows the project to be approved under a
Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The CUP takes the place of a site development plan (SDP) which would normally be required for the CT-Q zoning of the site. We agreed that the “Q” overlay allows the Planning
Commission or City Council to impose special conditions including establishing a “time period within
which the project or any phases of the project shall be completed.”
In order to ensure that the project complies with the CUP finding: “that it (the gas station) is developed as
part of a freeway-service facility containing a minimum of two freeway oriented uses”, staff has drafted
the following condition for consideration by the Council:
1 .The gas station/mini-mart shall be constructed subsequent to or concurrently with at least one other use on the site. Building permits for the gas station/mini-mart shall not be issued until building permits for at
least one other use have been issued. Occupancy for the gas station/mini-mart shall not be issued until
occupancy for at least one other use has been issued.
This condition would supplement condition # 38 of PC Reso. 4978 which addresses the construction
phasing plan to insure that adequate parking is provided for each phase and that landscaping and site
improvements are completed for each phase of development.
The developer has also drafted an alternative condition for consideration. I will bring it by this afternoon.
Please let me know if you need me to prepare anything else.
Thank you.
BK
MEMORANDUM Hand Delivered
June 26,200l
To: Barbara Kennedy, Carlsbad Planning Depar ~e*~~=4Wfl~a &%#I #$& ---_ ___
From: Dennis Cunningham, Planning Systems
RE: Cannon Court Project Phasing Condition
c: John Buza, J.A. Buza Corporation
Please review the wording that the Cannon Court project team proposes as it
relates to the phasing of the project. We believe that the wording meets both
the City’s objectives as well as the Developer’s objective. Please call with any
questions.
1530 FARADAY AVENUE l SUITE 100 l CARLSBAD, CA 92008 l (760) 931-0780 l FAX (760) 931-5744 l planningsystems@nctimes.net
.-
Cannon Court is a multi use m&es planned commercial facility, wbcih necessarily wiil be built
in phaes, as it encompaax6 multipIe visitor aervbg commercial we8 @as stationimini-mzat, two
restaurants and hotel) cm a single site. The CUP rcqr6ranarts arc satisfied by the iutepatal plan,
commoninfnrseuctureaudhprovement6. WhilceIbe~of-dwiIlc~udes~~
station/mini-mart, Lhe backbone muter plan ixhstrwb is cum&d and cmmtmd,
including:
1. Fullwi&hconsttwicmoffkbnanWAveuirlaI?ucka~and
signaliion, which is much man than nccesmryto simply SCIVC~IIC sewice station,
2. FullperimeWhui6caping~rthcclltirr9ikalongcazlnanandI-5,
3. On site, the ultimate impm~ement6 far the entire site are committed as desigaed and
shown onthe--pk
4. utiliiiesate6izedand6hrbbedtot)se- arldhotefsitestopamitinmediate
construction whtm the spcciiic operator is selected
CannonCo~is~c~tqQ13aIitycommcrciaI~jsctintheimmsdiateporvcrpIant
vicinity, and repnacnts a significant IQ&C of that immediate area. In order to steract the higbest~ualityrestaurantandhotcluserS,wC~tho#uly,qpality~statiOninplacc,aSwcll
astbebfbtructureaab~ing,inanfabd- file vi!doII and quality of-fhc sac.
Aswithsnymast0rpkmed COMKSCidproj~t4tlypheEerSCtthtSt~Md~~~
markerdemandfbrthelatcruses. TwouwrbyexampleaiucludeCarCcmntryandCari6~
Company Stow, both were pmjects built in multiple phases.
Yhildiqpemitsfbrthega66tatid~6lmllnotbei66ued~thema6tersite
‘infrastruchue, iacluding i&ascction impnwclncntat signaketjcm and Cuntxm M-5
latld6capiugi6~con6fluoti!uaaudoompldion~ occupxncypermi&fbrchc~
station/mini-mariBhallnotbti~~sach~~~~Bllbetaoti~cosrple5ed. The
eppticant~i~em~repwtsto~eftarmingi)inctarof~grolpgswithspccifit
rcstarrantandhotclop~andprocccdexpeditioasytocompldedevdopmaatoftheentln
site as soon as comtneaialIy pos6Me.”
Themastadeveloptrof~Canttisalacalbuein~~~~llbatirsopssatarofthe~
sfti~-xnart. Asa~~hcisdiffcflymtacsSedintbt~ofthtattirccampldad
project. He will be fmahally motivated to present the site to T 8ndhcnelopelatax6il3
the best possittc lnmmu. The entire site will be improved and nuiimid in a consisrwd quality
mannetso~~~usarsandtheCityb~t~thcappmvcdmastadesign
Quality takes time to attract, parficuhuty whuc a pmja% is substantially upgrading an
industri8l use area.
4-L
j
@ . ‘a
i
; g $i
d!
7% . . m $?I A 6
:d 2
,-.
.
Major Issues of Concern Regarding the Cannon CT. Project
A. Akohoi Sales - Beer and Wine
B. Increased Traffic
C. lnuessed Crime redting hm 24 hour business - Gas Station & Mini-Mart
D. other Issues
A. Alcohol Sales
1. Page 7 of PC Reso #4978, #23 states, “Any titure proposal for the retail sale of alcoholic
beverages should be subject to review by the City of Carl&ad Police Dept.” From my infbrmal
discussion with the police, it seems that they feei the same way that I (and others in Terramar) fix1
ahout the sale of alcohol so close to our homes, Cannon Park, and the beach. We fix1 it is
important to address this issue now befe any application fbr a license is even initiated. We are
concerned with drinking Bi driving, drinking at the beach, and all issues that evolve ktm this type
of sale including the trash issues.
2. Page 7 of PC Reso #4978, #24 states, “No tables or chairs shall be provided for the amsumptioo
of food on the premises.” Shouldn’t the words “or beverages” be included after the word “f&xi”?
3. ‘lkre are already three gas statio&nini-marts at Palomar Airport Rd. & the I-5 that sell liquor,
plm another one at Tamarack & the I-5 that sells liquor, plus another me at Carl&ad Village Dr.
8s. the I-5 that sells liquor.
B. Increased Traffic
I. We have seen an incredible increase in traffic in our area. (Please note the attached photos from
Cerezo and Carl&ad Blvd. Traffic like this is cxxming fkquently.) With that in mind, in the
Transportation/Circulation Information on p. 13 it states, “even w/implementation of roadway
improvements, a number of intersections are projected to f$il the City’s Adopted Growth
Management Perfbrmance Standards at build out.” In addition, it states, “12 firI & 2 partial
in§ions will be severely impacted by regional through traffic over which the City has no
2. There are already three gas stations at Palomar Airport Rd & the I-5 plus three more at Tamarack
jurisdictional control. These gutgaliy include all t&way interchange Arab and major
intersections along Carl&ad Blvd.” In addition to those &ta, when I spoke to Mr. Stilhnan in
Traffic, he told me that the tratiic report does not take into iwomt accidents on the 1-5, which
seen to occur several times a week The addition of a 16 pump (ca bay, whichever is the proper
terminology) gas station at Cannon and I-5, especially if it is a high vohune type of station, causes
me (and others in Terramar) great concern. We are already experiencing cut through traffic during
high traffic times as shown in the attached photos, aad difficulty in exiting both East and West
onto Cannon Rd. tiom Los Robles and El Arhol.
& the I-5. Thus are dso additional stations available in these areas not f;a Tom the freeway.
C. Inueased Crime result@ l?om 24 hour husinesa - Gas Station & MiniMart
1. Since the gas statiar/mini-mart is a f&way service facility and the freeway runs 24 hrs. /day, it is
myundastandmgthat~s~litycouldbeopen24hoursaday. Iamveryconcemed,asaremy
neighhors, that this will invite a new element of crime into our neighhorhood, Cannon Park, and
thebeach. Wefixl~are~expaiencingincreasedcrimeandmuchofithasoccurredat
night with car break-ins, thefts, and even the new stairway to the heach at Cerezo and Carl&ad
Btvd. has heen covered with graffiti.
D. otilu Issues
I. Zoning-Onpsge30oftheplarmingcommissionn~~.Buzastatedmathewantedtofirst
put in the road and infrastructure. This is to he followed by the gas station/mini-mart but “the C-T
zoning allows fm development of a gas station in conjunction with a t&way service facility that
contains at least two other heway uses, such as the proposed hotel 8t restaumn ts” pa the Ageah
Bill Item Explanation. The zoning states that Mr. Buza should tlrst put in the prqosed restaurants
and/a hotel to comply with its requirements.
Also, Cannon Ct. is being developed as a PUD and due to some of the signals that the
ecammy is showing, it is important to tbcus on a possible “worst case scenario”. Since it is a
2
PUD, Mr. Buza could separate the parcels and sell them off. If the market then goes into a
downturn, the hotel and r eatammts may not be developed and we are left with a gas staticn/mini-
mart and no other uses (which were originaUy required by the zoning). I feel that since this is a
PUD, the zoning should be strictly enforced
In additiq on the Agenda Bill under “Item Expianatiat” it states, “The subdivision
would allow individual ownership for each building pad.” Chairman SegalI of the Phmning
Commission addressed the issue about each pad being “separate & a separate builder tbr each
pad”. Ms. Kmedy replied, “that is not the way they are planning on developing it, but are
phning on developing the whole project as a phased construction.” Please note that in the letter
dated March 28 addressed to Ms. Kennedy, Mr. Buza shows the hotel as the phase of the project
after the r estaumnt A. Then at the plarming commission meeting he changed his orda and the
restaurants were last In the planning meeting he stated that “the tirst thing they would do is get in
the road, the intersection and the gas station because they would be building in that direction.”
But then he continued to say, “the second phase would be the hotel and the undergmund parking
as they want the hotel to be operable” but the hotel is at the back of the property.
The pattern of changing the order of phasing for the hotel & r ezitammts but never the gas
station/ mini-mart (which is always first, after the road & infrastructure) concerns me. The fix%
that there are no conpacts signed for the hotel and restaurants adds to my concem. Mr. Buzz told
me that he is planning to run the gas station/mini-mart personally, which may be why he wants to
build that first, but per zoning requirements, shouldn’t that be last?
2. MEIR - On page 13 under Transportation/Circulation, it states, “a MEIR may not be used to
review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the filing of an application for a
later project”. The city’s MEIR was certified in 1994. Though it is being reviewed and some may
feel that things have not significantly changed except fix Palomar Airport Rd & EI Camino Real, I
feel we may have some impact changes due to the increased usage of the Encina Power Station
and more specificalIy the “peaker” unit. Added to the increased pollution from so many cars using
the sixteen pump (or bay) gas station, it may be something to consider.
3. Redevelopment Area ii- Since the project is located in the Redevelopment Area i1, why is it being
approved before the master plau is developed for the area?
4. Page 5 of PC Reso #4978, #6 states nothing about holding the City of Carl&ad harmless if there is
a spill or leak fbm the u&rgroud tanks, the piping, or tank relkeliag at the gas station. It is my
understanding that this area drains to the lagoon and Cannon Lake, both areas of envkmm~tal
impact and concem.
I must compliment Barbara Kumedy on the great work she has done on this projed and I look &ward
to eating at one of the nice restaurants Also, I wouId like to offer many thanka to the staff at the Faraday
office. Everyone was very heiptkl and friendly every time I needed help in ding this project.
Many of us have said before that we are not opposed to the entire project, just the gas station/mini-mart.
We appreciate the time and consideration you are giving us and hope that you can help to resolve this issue
for us.
Thank You,
5239 EI Arbol Dr., Car&ad, Ca. 92008
760-438-5611
1
2
l(
lf
17
18
19
20
21
25
26
27
28
project will not be consistent with the Generai Plan and approval for this project ~\4]
become nuil and void.
LandscaDe
19. The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape
and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan
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.
20. The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the
landscape plan check process on file in the Planning Department asid accompanied by the
project’s building, improvement, and grading plans.
Conditional Use Permit -.-d -. -.-. - --
This Conditional Use Pennit shall be reviewed by the Planning Director on &yqrly basis
to determine if all conditions of this permit have been met and that the use does &ot have
a substantial negative effect on surrounding properties or the public health and we&e. If
7 id%\ the Planning Director determines that the use has such substantial negative eff+, the
d*
Planning Director shall recommend that the Planning Commission, after providing the
&A
permittee the opportunity to be heard, add additional conditions to reduce or eliminate the
substantial negative effects. -i-. _. .._. -_ . . ---- - - ..--- -_F.---.-
22. This Conditional Use Permit is granted for a period of ten (10) years from May 16,200l
through May 16,201l. 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 (10) years upon
written application of the pennittee 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 oi the public’s healthand 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.
2 5 Any future proposal for the retail sale of alcoholic beverages shall be subject to
review by the City of Carlsbad Police Department.
24. This approval is granted only for the sale of ready-to-eat food and canned or bottled
beverages within the mini-mart. Food shall be pre-cooked or prepared at another
location and only heated on the site. No stoves or ovens for the cooking or
preparation of food, nor tableware or dishwasbiag facilities (other than a standard_ f ;
3 I- sink) shall be permitted. This business shall operate as a take-out business o ---.._ ._. r -. - .- . .._ +ables o~XiSi$~5Wbe povlded for the ~#w~tiptw~ of fg-ed-qp t_~..e premls 1% -- ------- ._.._. .-. _-_-------
“dt future proposal to locate a hot food/fast food vendor(s) within the mini-mart shall be
PC RESO NO. 4978 -7- 47
freeway ramp signals.
3 -. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas traffic si_gal.
3. Signing and striping with “KEEP CLEAR” notices to assure intersections are not
blocked during railroad signal preemption.
4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal to permit
south to east. west to south, and north to east movements during preemption.
5. Dual west to southbound left turns on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas.
With all the above measures incorporated into the project design, the traffic analysis shows that
the project traffic does not si_tificantly affect the levels of service of the streets or intersections
in the existing, short-term (year 2005) and build-out (year 2020) conditions.
In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which analyzed the impacts which would
result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded
that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will result in
increased traffic .y&rnes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate build-out
.\ IC* howev i --. I -t -I
‘- r””
12 full and 2 partial mtersecrions will be severely impacted by regional
through-traffic over which the City, has no jurisdictional control. These generally include a! -- -._ _ freeway interchange areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. , Even with thh
‘mplementation of roadway improvements, a number of intersections are projected to fail the
-- City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at build-out.. _ __-_ .-,_-------- _..--
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out,
numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include:
1) 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 build-out 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 projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR.
This project is within the scope of that MEIR This document is available at the Planning -. Department.
J . J b (I I
3; - I
- A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the
filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to
determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent. projects. Although the MEIR was
certified more than five years ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no
substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was
13 Rev. 03128196 k2 z
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
cl
4
4
f)
g)
h)
i)
1’. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
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; #5, Pgs
l-7)
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-l 1)
Changes in the quannty of ground waters, either
through direct addirions 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-I 1)
impacts to groundwater quality? (#l:Fgs 5.2-l - 5..2-
11; #5, Pgs I-7)
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs
5.2-I - 5..2-11)
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l :Pgs 5.3-
1 - 5.3-12)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l
- 5.3-12)
c) Alter air movemenf moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
d) Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
4
b)
g)
proposal result in:
Increased vehicle uips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs
5.7-l - 5.7.22; # 6)
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)
lnadequatc emergency access or access to nearby uses?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22) Jnsufficient 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)
Conflick with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
(#I :Pgs 5.7- 1 - 5.7.22)
Rail. waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#l :Pgs 5.7- 1 -
5.7.22)
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plank, fish, inseCts,
mimals, and birds? (#I :Pgs 5.4-l - 5.4-24; #2, Pg 2)
Potentially
Significant
Impact
cl
cl
Cl
cl
q
q
cl
El
q
q
cl
Is]
q
Cl
q
cl
cl
q
cl
Potentlaily
SignificaA
Less Than hi0
Swnificant hnpaa
Unless impacr
Mitigauon
incorporated
cl cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
q
cl
q
q
q
q
‘cl
cl
q
q
q
q
q
q
cl
cl
cl
cl
q
cl
q
cl
cl
cl
q
cl
q
Cl
q
cl
cl
cl
w
w w Ix1
lxl w w
cl
Ml El w
El
lxl
[XI
El
El
lxl
lxl
6 Rev. 03128196 /-
m J.A. BlJZA CORP.
Construction l Development
/ / .‘\ ..d D I
March 28.2001
Barbara Kennedy
City of Carisbad - Planning Department
1635 Faraday Ave
Carfsbad, CA 92008
Re: CUP 99-30 / Cannon Court “Phasing”
Dear Barbara,
Per your March 22.2001 memo to Dennis Cunningham, here is the phasing information you requested:
Phase 1 - Infrastructure
1. Preparation of the parcel map, grading plans, and improvement plans.
2. Rough grading for the entire project, except for the underground parking garage of the hotel.
This earthwork and the necessary export will be done as part of the building permit for Phase 5,
3. Cannon Road: traffic signal, interconnect, and utility tie-ins for water, sewer, storm drain, and dry utilities.
4. Private street: both surface and underground improvements, from Cannon Road to the northerly subdivision boundary. 5. Onsite utilities: public sewer, public water, public fire, and public storm drain. Private utility stubs for future tie-ins will be constructed. Maintenance roads to access utilities will also be
constructed. 6. Fencing: perimeter fencing, entry monuments, 42” high screen wall at south and east of gas
station with landscaping.
7. Erosion control.
8. Landscape complete between private road and railroad right of way, along Cannon Road, to
north end of 42” high screen wall at east end of gas station.
Phase 2 - Gas Station and Countw Store:
1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, storm drain) to serve the gas station. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2. 3. Construction of Gas Station and Country Store.
4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 2.
Phase 3 - Restaurant A Infrastructure
1. Extension of private utilities (water, fire, sewer, storm drain) to serve Restaurant A. 2. Parking areas and drive aisles within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3. 3. Grading for pad (to be hydro-seeded with native, non-irrigated mix). 4. Landscaping within the area delineated on Exhibit A as Phase 3.
Phase 4 - Restaurant A
1. Construction of Restaurant A
Page 1 of 2
Phone: 858.756.5338 aFax: 858.756.2891 l7 3 rim IT,.. OL17 . 1~nt2c cTn n;onlli)r\ Rrl dF7 l Ranrhn Canta Fe. CA 92067 3
- /,’ - - 81 a ( /&
employees of business and industrial centers. As summarized in the staff report, the project
:omplies with all applicable development standards of the C-T zone and Commercial/Visitor Serving
Overlay Zone with regard to parking, signage, building height, setbacks, lighting, landscaping, and
tandards that apply specifically to gas stations. The project has been designed in the “Village”
rchitectural style and features highquality design and detailing consistent with the overlay zone
zquirements. The CUP and overlay zone findings for approval of the project can be made and are
utlined in detail in the staff report and resolutions.
01 * \.
. .
p
z
‘he project is located in the Agua Hedionda Segment of the Local Coastal Plan and is required to
btain approval of a coastal development permit from the Coastal Commission. The project also
roposes a Minor Subdivision and Non-residential Planned Development that would allow the
ubdivision of the property into four “postage stamp” lots and one a&t which includes the
rivate street and most of the surface parking and landscaping. ubdivision WOI.& %%I
ldividual ownersh‘Td.for~a~~biiiIdi~~‘p ad~%illX~blFtte~roje~ uilt wrth a pnvate st
Wrecrprocal parking and access. The Minor Subdivision and Non-residential PUD. will be acted
Don pending approval of the project by the City Council and Coastal Commission.
T
0
P
SI
P’ G
iii
UI
A
z
6 c
5
00 I I
number of residents from the Terramar community spoke in opposition to the gas station and
Iiced concern about the traffic impacts of the project. More detailed information regarding the
svelopment proposal and public testimony is included in the attached staff report to the Planning
ommission and Planning Commission minutes.
CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL
:
AB# TITLE: DEPT. HD.
MTG. CANNON COURT CITY ATIY.
CUP 99-30 DEPT. PLN CITY MGR
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. ADOPTING a Mitigated
Negative Oeclaration and APPROVING CUP 99-30 as recommended for adoption and approval by
the Planning Commission.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
Dn May 16, 2001, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended
adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of CUP 99-30 for Cannon Court (6-O
Nielsen absent). The project site is&@ed on a vacant lot at the northwes.titneroKannon Road
xtd lnterstaE,in the C-T-Q Zone and the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overtay Zone and in.Local; -- ---- -. wanaqement Zone 3.i%e project Kalso located KRedevelopment Area II; however,.
since a master plan has not been developed for this area and no separate standards have been
established, the project is being processed through standard procedu 7-l
The development proposal would allow for the construction of a( tion and mini-mart,
in 86 room hotel, and two restaurants containing 4,800 squar square feet. The
jroject is located in the Commercial/Visitor Serving Overlay Zone and therefore requires approval of
Planning Commission Minutes May 182001 Page 30
#
Ms. Kennedy said they have met with Coastal Commission informally previous to this and they have had
positive responses. _-
Chairperson Segall asked if Ms. Kennedy could address the non-residential PUD in the fact that each pad
is going to be separate and a separate builder for each pad?
Ms. Kennedy stated that is not the way they are planning on developing it, but are planning on developing the whole project as a phased construction, however for example, the restaurant would be able to own
their own building and pad, but then everything else would be commonly maintained. ‘h; airperson Segall asked in terms of construction, the plan is one company will do everything so
everything is going to be compatible and we are assured that it is compatible?
Ms. Kennedy said that is the plan at this point, but if they were to come in for some modifications for the
buildings, and if they did not substantially conform to what you see on the exhibits, they would have to come back to the Planning Commission.
Chairperson Segall asked to hear from the applicant.
c ;t’ John Buza, 3119 Circa De Terra. Encinitas, CA. stated they have been working with staff for almost two
-,
P
years on the project. He pointed out that it has been a team effort with Ms. Kennedy and Mr. Jimeno with a
lot of input and ideas on the project to move buildings, rearrange the road, and doing the site plan almost
’ ‘\ 30 times over the two years to get to this point.
r” Commissioner Baker asked if they anticipate since it is somewhat industrial with the power plant, will it
cause any problems with tenants that might be interested in the property?
Mr. Buza stated that they see no indication of that yet as they have letters of interest from almost 70
restaurants and probably 15 on the hotel. He said they bought the property in September of ‘98 and they
get inquiries every week though no one has signed, but they are sending lease agreements in the mail.
Commissioner Compas asked him to share his forecast of the timing of the various phases in terms of
how many months after approval, and when would the road be done and the timetable for having the hotel
Buza stated once&y.get.$eir approvals the first thing they would do is get in the ,road, the and the gas station hecause they would be building in that direction. He said they plan on
sm soon as they getap$oval. He thought the road would probably take three to four months and
they would be building the gas station and the second phase would be the hotel and the
parking as they want the hotel operable, and it looks like it is going to be Hampton Inn and
-‘.T.- and they want to work with Hilton to help them to work with the correct restaurants for they are fortunate to not be in a development situation to have to go out and grab a restaurant. He stated that they i- ~ ! would like to have the hotel ready as fast as they are allowed, but there is also the grading restriction in
‘;7 the Coastal Zone. _ _
-. Commissioner Compas asked if they were to get approval of the hotel in a couple months?
Mr. Buza replied that they are doing the working drawings on the gas station and will start the working drawings on the hotel next and have it going as soon as the City will allow.
Commissioner Compas asked what would be the earliest they would be completely finished?
Mr. Buza said discounting the grading restrictions he thought they could build it within two years and have
the hotel up.
Commissioner Compas asked with the approvals from the Commission and Council, what would be the
two biggest worries about this project?
freeway ramp signals.
2. Railroad preemption for the new Avenida Encinas traffic signal.
3. Signing and striping with “KEEP CLEAR” notices to assure intersections are not
blocked during railroad signal preemption.
4. Special preemption phasing for the new Avenida En&as traffic signal to permit
south to east, west to south, and north to east movements during preemption.
5. Dual west to southbound left turns on Cannon Road at Avenida Encinas.
With all the above measures incorporated into the project design, the traffic analysis shows that
the project traffic does not significantly affect the levels of service of the streets or intersections
in the existing, short-term (year 2005) and build-out (year 2020) conditions.
In 1994 the City prepared and certified a Master EIR which anaiyzed the impacts which would
result from the build-out of the City under an updated General Plan. That document concluded
that continued development to build-out as proposed in the updated General Plan will resuit in
increased traffic &tunes. Roadway segments will be adequate to accommodate b uild-out 12 full and 2 partial ui~tions will be severely impacted by region
which the City has no jurisdictional control. These genera&&Iude a
areas and major intersections along Carlsbad Boulevard. ,/ Even ‘i-t
’
’
mplementation of roadway improvements, a number af-~fe~~~~~--~~projected to fail tha
City’s adopted Growth Management performance standards at buildZout. ___.. ------._ -
To lessen or minimize the impact on circulation associated with General Plan build-out,
numerous mitigation measures have been recommended in the Final Master EIR. These include:
1) 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 build-out 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 PIan, 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 projects covered by the General Plan’s Master EIR.
This project is within the scope of that MEIR. This document is available at the Planning
Department. .J j,J --
4 A MEIR may not be used to review projects if it was certified more than five years prior to the
filing of an application for a later project. The City is currently reviewing the 1994 MEIR to .-_
’ in
determine whether it is still adequate to review subsequent projects. Although the MEIR was
certified more than five years ago, the City’s preliminary review of its adequacy finds that no
\,> substantial changes have occurred with respect to the circumstances under which the MEIR was ‘. .-. 13 Rev. 03128196
--\\
:J’\ * L
10 ~ \ certified. The only potential. changed circumstance. the intersection failure at Palomar Airport
L,,* Rd. and El Camino Real, is in the process of being mitigated to below a level of significance.
Additionally, there is no new available information, which was not known and could not have
been known at the time the MEIR was certified. Therefore, the MEIR remains adequate to
review later projects.
7. Biological Resources
The site will not result in an impact to biological resources. The site does not contain any
identified sensitive resources. It contains no designated natural communities or wetland habitat
and does not serve as a migration corridor.
8. Energy and Mineral Resources
The site contains no identified natural resources and will not conflict with any energy
conservation plans. There are no known mineral resources on the site.
9. Hazards
Compliance with the California Health and Safety Code and Rule 20 of the Air Pollution Control
District Rules and Regulations as stated in the required regulatory permits for the construction
and operation of a gasoline dispensing facility will reduce the risk of explosion and release of
hazardous substances to a level of insignificance. Engineering and Fire Department review of
the project will ensure that typical safety features and provisions are designed into the project.
There will be no interference with emergency response or evacuation plans as the site will be
developed in accordance with all applicable City regulations, including placement of the
structures on the site and public/private improvements sidewalks, drainage facilities). Therefore,
the proposed development of the site will not result in the creation of any hazards.
Since the property had previously been used for agricultural uses, a limited Phase II
Environmental Assessment was conducted to evaluate the possibility of agricultural chemical
residue in the soils. The analysis detected the presence of toxaphene, however, it is anticipated
that grading activities (mixing and blending of the soil) will further reduce the levels of
toxaphene to a level of insignificance. Once grading is completed, it was recommended that
additional soil samples be collected an analyzed to determine their concentrations of toxaphene.
If additional actions are required, they can be implemented at that time. Examples of additional
actions would include thicker concrete slabs or the piacement of vapor barriers.
10. Noise
The project is subject to the City of Carlsbad adopted interior noise standards of 45 CNEL for the
hotel use and 55 CNEL for the commercial uses which include the restaurants and food mart.
The City does not have exterior noise standards which apply to these uses. The site is subject to
noise impacts from I-5 and the Amtrack, Coaster, and freight train operations on the AT & SF
railroad. An acoustical analysis was submitted for the project which analyzed the impacts from
these noise sources on the proposed development. The report indicates that the building surfaces
of the hotel will be exposed to worst case noise levels of 77.7 CNEL, and will therefore require
at least a 32.7 dB exterior to interior noise reduction in order to meet the 45 CNEL interior noise
standard. The recommended mitigation measures include building upgrades for a number of
units within the hotel. The area of most concern is the east end of the building that faces the
freeway. The building upgrades consist of upgraded windows, attachment of an additional layer
14 Rev. 03128196 23
Issues (and Supportmg information Sources).
cl
4
e)
cl
9)
h)
9
V. AIR QUALIlY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? (#l:Pgs 5.3-
1 - 5.3-12)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to poilutants? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
c) Alter air movemens moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
d) Create objectionable odors? (#l:Pgs 5.3-l - 5.3-12)
Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (#I:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-11; #5, Pgs
1-7)
Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5.*2-l 1)
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?
(Wl:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-1 I)
Impacts to groundwater qua@? (#l:Pgs 5.2-l - 5..2-
11; #5, Pgs l-7)
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies? (#l:Pgs
5.2-I - 5..2-1 I)
‘\ i 1’1. TIUNSPORTATION/CB2CULATION. Would the ,, J
4
b)
cl
4
e)
0
8)
proposal result in:
Increased vehicle nips or traffic congestion? (#l:Pgs
5.7-l - 5.7.22; # 6)
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-I - 5.7.22)
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.722)
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 57.22)
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
(#l:Pgs 5.7-l - 5.7.22)
Raii. waterborne or air traffic impacts? (#l:Pgs 5.7-l -
5.7.22)
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal resuit
inimpactsto:
a) 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; #2, Pg 2)
Porentiall~
S@n1ricant Impact
q
cl
cl
q
q
q
q
w
q
q
q
w
cl
q
cl
Cl
cl
El
cl
Potentrall~ Si~mlricant
Unless Mitigation Incorporated
cl
cl
cl
@
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
‘0
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Less Than s1grl1ricm
Impact
cl
cl
4’
q
q
q
q
cl
q
q
cl
Pi0
Impacr
El
w
El
El
w
w
w
cl
IXI
El
w
cl cl cl w
q w
cl w
cl El 0 El
q lxl
cl lxl
Rev. 03128196 w- 6
( I
;F-Y . ;o Y t
b I J l(
c “r
1:
A& ;I --GA
1:
1L
1:
l(
Ii
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.
5.
6.
1.
1-G
\ -I I 4 J c /
-i(; i
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
.
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 Conditionai 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. This obiigation
survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City’s
approval is not validated.
The Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24” x 36”,
mylar copy of the Tentative Parcel Map and Site Plan reflecting the conditions
approved by the final decision making body.
The Developer shall include, as part of the plans submitted for any permit plan check, a
reduced legible version of all approving resolution(s) in a 24” x 36” blueline drawing
format (including any applicable Coastal Commission approvals).
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the
Director from the Carisbad Unified School District that this project has satisfied its
obligation to provide school facilities;
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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 and is
subject to all conditions contained in PUD 00-109 and MS 99-16 for the Nonresidential Planned Development Permit and Minor Subdivision.
This approval shall become null and void if the first building permit is not issued for this
project within 18 months from the date of Final Parcel Map approval.
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 f/ I- PC RESO NO. 4978 -5- Y$
If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the pa-yment
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 shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the Cannon Court -
CUP 99-30 Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
.
in this chapter does not include chain. automatic or
,~oin-operased washtack. or automobile sales.
(A) Permits for automobiie service stations shall
1 be granted only in the event one or mote of the ‘,\ 7 \ following factual situations is found to exist: 7 (i) That it is to be developed as part of a I\ ‘4 ; _d . . master-pIanned recreation anx. industrial park,
.; pregional or community shopping center,
(ii) That it is to be developed as part of a
freeway-service facility, containing a minimum of
..JWO freeway oriented uses,
(iii) That it is to be developed as part of a com-
mercial facility that is an integral part of a planned
t > community development,
2. - (B) In the event a permit is granted for an auto-
!I \ 2 mobile service station. the following stat&r& of
development therefor shah be required as conditions
of such granting:
(i) Land use planning office approval of architec-
turaI elevations to insure that the use will harmonize
with the neighbothood
(ii) Apptwval of the land use planning office of
landscape plans consisting of at least the following:
(I) Perimeter planter areas of a minimum of six
feet in width and planter areas adjacent to the struc-
ture
(II) Six-inch concrete curb bounding all planter
areas
(III) Landscaping including a combination of
flowers. shrubs. and trees
(IV) A sprinkler system prroviding total and ef-
fective coverage to all landscaped areas
(V) A statement delineating a mm sched-
ule and responsibility for maintenance of landscaped
alms
(iii) A six-foot high masonry wall shah be con-
structed on ah sides of the subject property which
adjoins residential or professional zoned property
(iv) All exterior lighting shall be shielded or ori-
ented in such way so as not to glare on adjacent
propeties
(v) All displays and stonge shah be contained
within the main structure
(vi) Trash containers shall be contained within a
six-foot high enclosure
21.42.010
(vii) All signs shall be in conformance with the
city’s sign ordinance
(viii) Full public improvements as may be re-
quired for * ” . . r
in this cha - n
.-
(ii) The facility shall comply with all the rules.
regulations and standards nquind by the StYe
Department of Social Services
(iii) Off-street parking as required in Section
21.44.130
(iv) The planning commission or the city council
on appeal may modify any of the above standa&,
if it is found that such modifications will not be
detrimental to the health and safety of the residents:
(B) Professional care facilities:
(9) Recreational vehicle (RV) storage may be
permitted by conditional use permit in the following
zones only: R-3, R-P. RD-M. CL-R. C-2. C-M, M
and P-M.
(A) A conditional use permit for recreational
vehicle storage may be granted provided that the
following requirements are mee
(i) Only recreational vehicles as defmed in Sec-
tion 2 1.04298 may be stored within any recreational
vehicle storage arez ail stored vehicles must be in
an operable condition and. if required. currently
I icensed
(ii) Permitted recreational vehicle storage shall
not be utilized as a sales yard. or as storage for a
sales yard. An occasional saie by an individual may
be permitted
689 alisM I-W)
.
I I
k-l
5 9 i i-4 i ’ ! 4 - i 7 u 2 I T-!
,-
--
w-‘. _ . ../---
-I-- --------- ,./--
EXPANSION
t I I I I' I..
I
1. I. i: t-t-. I 5:. ". I :':I
AS
.:y..; \
f
.I i I ’ I :.I 5 ,,
.fj i
,a& /,
.._ ,:,;y ( i
I’., “., 3 .
---
MT, / r ---- ~~-~~ ------- ;;;- ------------ 7,
- - II i?
CANNO P ROAD
7 i7 ---
URCUATION PLAN
CANNON COURT
81