HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-06-01; City Council; 17653; Final Map Approval: Palomar Forum4B# 17,653
IIITG. 6/01/04
3EPT. ENG
CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
TITLE: APPROVING THE FINAL MAP FOR
AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO PROCESS THE
MAP FOR RECORDATION
CARLSBAD TRACT 99-06, PALOMAR FORUM, AND
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. 2004-177
Forum, and authorizing the City Clerk to process the map for recordation.
approving the final map for Carlsbad Tract CT 99-06, Palomar
ITEM EXPLANATION:
The tentative map for Carlsbad Tract CT 99-06 was approved on October 17, 2001 by the City of
Carlsbad Planning Commission and extended for one year by the Planning Commission on
February 18, 2004. Carlsbad Tract CT 99-06 is located north of Palomar Airport Road and on both
sides of Melrose Drive. The 70.6-acre propetty is being subdivided into 12 lots (IO industrial and
2 open space lots.) The proposed open space lots will be deed restricted as an open space
preserve. This subdivision is within Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) Zone #18.
Financial Guarantee for Faraday/Melrose
At its meeting of June 3, 2003, the Council heard a request from the developer of CT 99-06 on an
alternative approach to meeting the requirement on this project to provide a financial guarantee for
the construction of Faraday Avenue and Melrose Drive prior to recordation of the final map.
The developer proposed to meet this requirement by providing the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Dedicate the right-of-way for Melrose Drive (this has been completed).
Provide a bond for the construction of Melrose Drive (this has been completed).
Rough grade Melrose Drive at this time and complete construction within one year of the
order to begin construction from the Council (these provisions have been incorporated into
the subdivision improvement agreement for the project).
Construct the 3rd westbound lane on Palomar Airport Road along the southerly portion of the
Forum property (this is a requirement of the development and is secured by the subdivision
improvement agreement).
Agree in writing not to oppose the formation of the CFD. The developer entering into a
Waiver and Consent Agreement accomplishes this provision (this agreement has been
drafted and the language agreed to with the exception of the nature and timing of the
security for the developers share of Faraday Avenue).
Post a bond or security for their portion of the proposed CFD (this provision did not deal with
the timing of when the security would be posted. This remains an issue between the
developer and the City staff).
Only develop the east half of their project in advance of the CFD formation (this provision
has been incorporated into the Waiver and Consent Agreement).
Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 17,653
The developer's final map cannot be recorded until the Waiver and Consent Agreement has been
executed and any required security posted. The agreement is complete with the exception of the
nature and timing of the posting of the developers estimated share for the construction of
Faraday Avenue identified in the CFD. Staff, consistent with the conditions of approval, has
indicated that a Letter of Credit for this share should be posted prior to recordation of the final map.
The developer indicates that they are not able to post security until prior to issuance of the first
building permit for the project or at property transfer whichever occurs first. The final map should
only be approved subject to resolution of this issue.
It is staffs position that the conditions of approval require the security prior to final map and that
posting at a later date may be complicated by the existence of new owners and other potential
developers not familiar with the CFD structure.
The developer indicates that no impacts will occur prior to issuance of a building permit and that
entering into the agreement adequately secures the obligation.
The Council needs to resolve this final issue to allow the final map to proceed. This is currently a
pending item. The Council has two options on how to proceed:
1. Resolve the timing question on the CFD Security and return the project to staff to complete
all necessary documents.
2. Accept the final map subject to the City Attorney's final approval of the appropriate Waiver
and Consent Agreement.
Engineering staff has completed checking the final map for Carlsbad Tract CT 99-06. The final map
conforms substantially with the tentative map as approved by the Planning Commission
per Resolution No. 5034. Pending completion of the Waiver and Consent Agreement, in all other
aspects the final map conforms to the General Plan, all the applicable requirements of the Municipal
Code, City Standards, and Growth Management Plan.
Additional discretionary review (Planned Industrial Permit) of the subdivided lots will be required
prior to issuance of building permits.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The developer pays a plancheck fee to cover the expense of planchecking and processing the final
map for recording. All appropriate building permit fees will be paid if and when building permits are
issued for this project.
EXHIBITS:
1. Location Map.
2. Resolution No. 2004-177 approving the final map for Carlsbad Tract CT 99-06, Palomar
Forum, and authorizing the City Clerk to process the map for recordation.
3. Agenda Bill No. 17,181, dated 5/20/03, with related Minutes.
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Clyde Wickham, (760) 602-2742, cwick@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
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
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-177
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE FINAL MAP
AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY CLERK TO PROCESS THE
MAP FOR RECORDATION.
FOR CARLSBAD TRACT CT 99-06, PALOMAR FORUM,
WHEREAS, Palomar Forum Associates, LLP, as owners, have submitted
a final map known as Carlsbad Tract CT 99-06 to the City of Carlsbad for approval; and
WHEREAS, the tentative map of Carlsbad Tract CT 99-06, with
conditions, was approved by the Planning Commission on October 17, 2001 pursuant to
Resolution No. 5034 and extended for one year by the Planning Commission pursuant
to Resolution No. 5567; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the developers’ proposal for
compliance with the requirements to provide a financial guarantee for the construction
of Faraday Avenue and Melrose Drive on April 1,2003 and after discussion, continued
the item to its June 3, 2003 meeting; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the developers’ proposal for
compliance with the conditions of approval for the approved tentative map on June 3,
2003 is acceptable; and
WHEREAS, in compliance with the conditions of approval for CT 99-06,
the City Council finds the appropriate environmental permissions for the construction of
Faraday Avenue extension have been obtained; and
WHEREAS, the Waiver and Consent Agreement is approved in concept,
subject to City Attorney review and modification; and
I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, in recognition of the above, the Public Works Director has
determined that said map substantially conforms to said conditionally approved tentative
map; and
WHEREAS, the conditions of approval for said final map have been
completed or secured; and
WHEREAS, the developer has offered public easements for dedication to
the City of Carlsbad; and
WHEREAS, the final map conforms to the City of Carlsbad General Plan
and all requirements of City codes and standards; and
WHEREAS, the City Council retains control over the timing of the c
construction of Melrose Drive; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad determined it to be in
the public interest to approve said final map,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad, California as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That said final map known as Carlsbad Tract CT 99-06, Palomar
Forum, which is on file with the Public Works Director and is incorporated herein by
reference, is accepted subject to the City Attorney’s final approval of the appropriate
Waive and Consent Agreement.
3. That the City accepts the dedications as shown on the final map.
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
2a
4. That the City Clerk is authorized to cause the original final map to
be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, State of
California.
5. That the City Clerk is authorized to release the map to Lawyers
Title Company for recording in the Office of the County Recorder.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad held on the 1st day of
June ,2004 by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST:
3
TITLE: - \B# 17,181
dTG. 5/20/03 PROPOSAL FINDINGS
PALOMAR FORUM (CT 99-06)
IEPT. ENG I CITY MGR.
& CITY ATTY.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Review Palomar Forum developers’ proposal for compliance with the conditions of approval for the
approved Tentative Map.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
At the April 1, 2003 City Council meeting, Council considered a proposal by the developer of the Palomar Forum property for the financial guarantee for the construction of Faraday Avenue.
Providing an adequate financial guarantee is a condition of the Tentative Map for the project. It was the developer‘s desire that, if Council found the financial guarantee acceptable, the Final Map could be brought before Council for consideration.
In addition to the Faraday Avenue financial guarantee, the developer proposed to delay construction of the required Melrose Drive improvements until directed by Council, in order to prevent the
acceleration of a Growth Management traffic circulation failure along Palomar Airport Road. During Council discussions, the question was raised about whether the developer‘s proposal for the construction of Melrose Drive was consistent with the conditions of approval, or if the map
conditions would need to be revised. Staff was directed to review the issue and return to Council with a recommendation.
After reviewing Council’s concern about the construction of Melrose Drive and the other conditions of approval, staff believes that Council needs to make three findings before the Final Map for this project can be approved. The three findings are:
1. Proposed tlming of Melrose Drive improvements are consistent with the Tentative Map conditions. The developer desires to move forward with its project, but understands that connecting Melrose Drive to Palomar Airport Road before Faraday Avenue is completed may
cause adverse traffic impacts. The developer recommends allowing a longer time ”window“ than is normally allowed to construct the conditioned improvements. The standard time allowed is 18-24 months. The conditions of approval, which reference the Subdivision Map
Act, state, “Improvements shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the secured improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement.” (emphasis added). Staff feels that specifying a time period of up to 5 years in the agreement would
ensure conformance with the conditions of approval and allow flexibility in the timing of the construction of the required Faraday Avenue improvements. The agreement would allow the developer to complete this improvement sooner if directed by City Council. No map
amendments would be required.
2. Developer’s proposal of Faraday Avenue financial guarantee is acceptable. The Tentative Map condition for the Forum project states that “Prior to recordation of a final map or issuance of a grading permit, whichever occurs first, a financial guarantee’for the construction, as specified in the appropriate agency permissions, of Faraday Avenue
extension between Orion Way and Melrose Drive (emphasis added) shall be approved by the Carlsbad City Council.” The developer has offered to bond for their share of Faraday Avenue and to enter into an agreement that they will not oppose the formation of the CFD. The developer can agree to waive its right to oppose the formation of the CFD, but cannot be compelled to vote in favor of its formation. Forum’s share of the Faraday Avenue improvement costs is approximately 10%. So, Council would need to make the finding that the bond (or letter of credit) for 10% of the Faraday costs and the agreement to not protest the CFD formation provides a financial guarantee for the construction of Faraday Avenue.
Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. 17,181
3. Appropriate agency permissions have been obtained. The Tentative Map conditions for
the Forum project state: “Prior to recordation of a final map or issuance of a grading permit,
whichever occurs first, a financial guarantee for the construction, as specified in the appropriate agency permissions (emphasis added), of Faraday Avenue extension between Orion Way and Melrose Drive shall be approved by the Carlsbad City Council.” As of the writing of this Agenda Bill, the City has still not received the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers’ 404 Permit for the construction of Faraday Avenue. Processing of this
permit required consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in what is known as the Section 7 consultation process. The Section 7 process has a 135-day statutory timeline which, according to the Service, is due to expire on May 9, 2003. Time extensions are
allowed, so a firm date for the end of the Section 7 process is not definitive. To this point,
the City has received no firm commitment from the Service that the Faraday Avenue improvements proposed are acceptable. Informal discussions with the Service, however, have indicated that the only concerns the Service has is with the Carlsbad Oaks North
proposed industrial development, not the alignment or improvements proposed for Faraday Avenue. Staff will provide an update on the status of this issue if new information becomes available prior to the meeting.
SUMMARY:
Staff is seeking a determination from Council on the three required findings listed above. If these
findings are made, staff would return with implementing documents and the Final Map for
recordation. If Council does not make these findings, staff would recommend that the Final Map not
be processed until all issues are resolved.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The acceptance of the Forum’s proposal carries with it some risks in terms of the timing and ultimate
financing of the Faraday Avenue extension. The proposal provides for 10% of the cost of the
Faraday Avenue extension. There is no guarantee that the additional 90% will be obtained.
If the Carlsbad Oaks North property does not develop, there is no other identified funding source for
the extension of Faraday Avenue. Traffic studies predict that if Melrose is completed prior to
Faraday Avenue being extended, there is a high likelihood that a growth management failure will
occur at the intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road. At that time, development in
any area that impacts that intersection would need to stop until a financing plan was developed for
the Faraday Avenue extension. Due to the expenditure limitations in the Municipal Code, the City’s
general fund could not be used to pay for the road unless first approved by a vote of the citizens.
EXHIBITS:
1. Agenda Bill 17,123 - Palomar Forum Financial Guarantee for Faraday/Melrose Finance
District.
2.
3. Request for continuance to June 3, 2003.
Letter Proposal for the Financing of Faraday Avenue and Melrose Drive.
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Glenn Pruirn, (760) 602-2407, gprui@ci.carlsbad.com
l7 l2 TITLE: PALOMAR FORUM LBt
ATG. 4/01/03 FARADAY/MELROSE FINANCE DISTRICT
IEPT. ENG
FINANCIAL GUARANTEE FOR
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
4s CKY ATTY.
Review Palomar Forum developers proposal for compliance with the requirements to provide a financial guarantee for Faraday Avenue and Melrose Drive.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
packaround
The property owners for the areas known as the Palomar FoNm (Forum), the Carlsbad Raceway (Raceway) and Carisbad Oaks North ("oaks") have requested that the City consider forming a Community Facilities District (CFD) to finance the lollowing road segments, as well as other related improvements:
1. 2. 3.
4.
The improvements to be financed and the proposed boundaries of the CFD are shown on the accompanying map (Exhibit 1). The estimated cost of the proposed CFD is $26.5 million dollars.
Construction of Melrose Drive and Faraday Avenue combined is designed to relieve traffic congestion on Palomar Airport Road and on El Camino Real, as well as to reduce traffic on adjacent intersections surrounding these arterials. The construction of one of these roadways (Melrose or Faraday) without the other, would cause congestion and overcapacity of intersections due to regional and peak hour traffic.
Each of these properties has conditions on their tentative maps and LFMP's that require them to build one or a portion of the roads and to provide a "financial guarantee" for the construction of the other. Specifically, the Forum condition, as amended by City Council, reads:
Faraday Avenue from terminus west of Melrose Drlve to Orion Street Melrose Drive from Palomar Airport Road to terminus at City of Vita boundary El Fuerte Street from Palomar Airport Road to Faraday Avenue Palomar Airport Road westbound widening from Vista to Melrose Drive
"Prior to recordation of a final map or issuance of a grading pennit, whichever occuts first, a financial guarantee for the constrvction, as specified in the appqtiate agency permissions, of Faraday Avenue extension between Orion Way and Melrose Drive shall be approved by the Carisbad City Council.
The Oaks project is conditioned to build FaradayAvenue and Melrose Drive with the financial mechanism providing for reimbursement beyond their proportionate share. The financial guarantee was anticipated to be the formation of an assessment district, CFD or other type of financing district.
Each of these properties is at a different stage of development and, thus, has a different timeframe
in which it will need to provide the "financial guarantee".
Forum has its approvals from the Resource Agencies and, with the exception of the financial guarantee, is ready to final its tentative map.
Raceway also has its agency approvals and tentative map, but is still working on completing design and conditions of approval. The property owners would like to proceed with their development, but they are not as close to final map approval as Forum.
17,123 Page 2 of Agenda Bill No.
The Oaks project is waiting for Resource Agency approvals. These approvals are for both the Oaks
project, as well as ior the construction of Faraday Avenue. It is expected that an answer from the
Resource Agencies will be forthcoming sometime in the summer of 2003. The actual formation of the Community Facilities District would occur no sooner than three to four months after resource
agency approvals which would place the district formation date sometime at the end of 2003 or early
2004.
Council Policy 33, which governs the formation of financing districts, requires that the right-of-way
for the roads to be financed must be dedicated or acquired prior to formation of the district. It also
generally disallows the cost of the right-of-way to be financed through the district. This is to ensure
that all significant costs are known at district formation. In most cases, road rlght-of-way is required
to be dedicated as part of the map conditions for the development.
In order to form the proposed CFD under Council policies, the right-of-way for the roads would need to be dedicated and all environmental permissions need to be received to the satisfaction of the Cii Council. At this time, the Oaks project has not dedicated the right-of-way for Faraday Avenue and
the project has not received all of its environmental approvals. The property owner (Tchang) has indicated that they will not dedicate the right-of-way until they have final approvals for their project
from the Resource Agencies. Thus, the formation of this CFD cannot occur under Council policies
until the agency permits are received for the Oaks project, which is expected in Summer 2003.
The Reauest
The inability to form the CFD and, thus, financially guarantee the construction of Faraday Avenue and Melrose Drive has caused concern with the owner of the Forum property. He is ready to final his tentative map and only has the Yinancial guarantee" condition remaining to fulfill. He has told
staff that it is costing him significant amounts of money each month that he has to bold up his project while waiting for the formation of the CFD. There is also a concern that if the agency permits
are denied or the process is prolonged, this condition may push his project Into bankruptcy. Thus, the Forum's properly owner is proposing an alternative plan as the "financial guarantee" required by their map conditions [see Exhibit 2)
The following is a summary of their proposal.
1.
2.
Developers will dedicate the right-of-way for Melrose Drive (current map condition).
Developers will provide a bond for the full construction of Melrose Drive (current map condition).
3. Developers will rough grade Melrose Avenue at this time and complete construction within one year of the order to begin construction from Council.
Developers will construct the 3' westbound lane on Palomar Airport Road along the southerly portion of the Forum property (current map condition).
Developers will agree in writing to not oppose the formation of the CFD.
Developers will post a bond or security for their portion of the proposed CFD.
Developer will only develop the east half on their project in advance of the CFD formation.
4.
5.
6.
7.
17,123 Page 3 of Agenda Bill No.
There are numerous advantages and disadvantages associated with Forum’s proposal. Staff has listed the more significant ones below.
Palomar Airport Road widening can move forward relieving some of the congestion on Palomar
Airport Road
Construction of Melrose Drive is assured. Grading and partial improvements will expedite the eventual completion of this arterial.
Some funding for Faraday may be secured. Staff would suggest that Forum’s share of Faraday Avenue construction cost should be bonded or paid at final map if they were to develop prior to the formation of the CFD.
Pisadvantaaes
The proposal does not provide full funding for the construction of Faraday Avenue. The proposal provides no assurance that Oaks will ever enter into the CFD or build Faraday Avenue. If the
Oaks does not develop and Melrose Drive is built, the traffic on Melrose Drive may cause a growth management failure at the intersection of Melrose Drive and Palomar Airport Road, effectively shutting down development in the area until Faraday Avenue is funded.
Compliance with the conditions of approval may be subject to challenge by outside parties.
The Raceway project would likely request similar treatment which could resuR in the early completion of Melrose Drive and acceleration of a potential growth management concern.
SUMMARY
Staff is seeking a determination from Council on whether or not developers proposal satisfies the Council’s requirement to provide a financial guarantee for Faraday Avenue. If acceptable,
staff would return with implementing documents and the final map for recordation. If Council has concern about this approach, staff would suggest that no final maps proceed until the appropriate financial mechanism has been approved consistent with City Policies.
FISCAL IMPACT
The request allows for the d8VelOper to record his subdivision and seek a return for his investment while waiting for The Raceway and the Oaks, as well as the CFD to be approved. There is no change in the fiscal impact to the City of Carlsbad by allowing the developer to proceed as proposed. In all cases, if the developments do not proceed, the financial burden of constructing the
roads will fall upon the remaining developers and/or the City.
EXHIBITS ’
1.
2.
Location map including CFD boundary.
Proposal for the Financing of Faraday Avenue and Melrose.
I
EXHIBIT r
June 3,2003 Carlsbad City Council Meeting
Allison Rolfe, 2924 Emerson Street, Suite 220, San Diego, CA 92106, represent
Kasey Cinciarelli, 2727 Lyons Court, said an open space fund should
used to purchase land at today’s prices instead of waiting to purchase
future.
Rick Lank, 2844 Wilson Street, said that the swimming pool at
be built now.
of waiting until the year 2007.
Mark Mojado, P.O. Box I, Pala, CA 92069, repre
Seeing no one else wishing to address Cou
at 9:23 p.m.
Council Member Packard spoke o
maintain and operate newly const
ission San Luis Rey
tion of cultural artifacts.
ayor Lewis closed the public hearing
rtance of having the financial ability to
ACTION: 0
Council accepted the proposed 2003-2004 to Buildout Capital
Improvement Program Report and set the public hearing for June
Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard.
RECESS
Mayor Lewis declared a recess at 9:31 p.m. Council reconvened at 9:36 p.m. with all
members present.
DEPARTMENTAL AND CITY MANAGER REPORTS (CONTINUED):
12. AB #17,181 - PALOMAR FORUM (CT 99-06) PROPOSAL FINDINGS.
Glenn Pruim, Deputy Public Works Director, presented the staff report and reviewed a Power Point Presentation (on file in the City Clerks Office).
June 3,2003 Carlsbad City Council Meeting Page 10
Mr. Pruim discussed traffic considerations related to the proposal. He said that the
Growth Management Plan requires the City to monitor traffic conditions throughout the
City on an annual basis. Mr. Pruim said that in the 2003 Annual State of Effectiveness
Report, there was an identified traffic circulation failure at the intersection of Palomar
Airport Road and Melrose Drive (level of service "E"). He said the answer is to add a
third West Bound Lane on Palomar Airport Road. Mr. Pruim said that in addition, the
traffic model projects a failure along the fully improved Palomar Airport Road within
three to five years. He said the construction of Faraday Avenue would address the
issue. Mr. Pruim explained that without the third lane on Palomar Airport Road or
without the construction of Faraday Avenue, an interim project might be required to
address traffic concerns to fulfill the requirements of the Growth Management Plan.
Mayor Lewis asked if Melrose Avenue were developed and Faraday Avenue were not
developed, what would be the impact to the traffic in the overall area. Mr. Pruim said
the traffic circulation failure, which would occur at the intersection of Melrose Avenue
and Palomar Airport Road and along the Palomar Airport Road Corridor, would be
accelerated.
Mr. Pruim explained that if there were a Growth Management failure, with no plan in
place for correction, the Carlsbad City Council could cease the issuance of building
permits within the affected area. Mr. Pruim noted that the developers could offer to
participate in the solution.
In response to Council Member Kulchin, Lisa Hitdabrand, Director of Finance, explained
that generally when Council requests financial guarantee for a project, the financial
guarantee is in the form of an assessment district or a CFD. She explained that those
districts guarantee that at some time, depending on the structure of the district, Council
will be able to raise the funds to pay for the road. Ms. Hildabrand said that under the
proposal before Council tonight, Palomar Forum would guarantee only 10% of the cost
of the Faraday Avenue extension. She said there is no guarantee that the additional
90% will be obtained to build the Faraday Avenue extension. In response to Council
Member Kulchin, Ms. Hildabrand said she was not aware of any other approved project
in Carlsbad with this type of arrangement. Ms. Hitdabrand explained the difference
between a Letter of Credit and Bond.
In response to Mayor Pro Tern Finnila, Ms. Hildabrand said that by agreeing to
participate in the Community Facilities District (CFD), the developers indicate their
willingness to pay for their fair share.
In response to Council Member Kulchin, Mr. Pruim explained that affirmative votes are
needed by the property owners of The Forum, The Carlsbad Raceway and Carlsbad
Oaks North in order to create the Community Facilities District (CFD). Mr. Ball
explained that no agreement can compel the property owners to vote in favor of a CFD.
Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning Associates, 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 150, representing
the owners of Palomar Forum, made a Power Point presentation (on file in the City
Clerk's Office) explaining Palomar Forum's proposal. He explained that the Carlsbad
Oaks Project has experienced further delays as a result of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service receiving a 60-day extension to comment on the 404 permit. Mr. Hofman noted
that the extension will delay the formation of the CFD by an additional two months.
June 3,2003 Carlsbad City Council Meeting Page 11
Therefore, the earliest the CFD could form is sometime in 2004, assuming that the
lawsuit filed by the City of Vista against the City of Carlsbad is settled within a
reasonable amount of time. Mr. Hofman described the risks to the City of Carlsbad, in
the event that Palomar Forum declares bankruptcy. He said that if Palomar Forum is
not allowed to proceed with its first phase, then a likely scenario is that Palomar Forum
will declare bankruptcy; the Faraday Avenue CFD will be delayed by at least a year,
and probably more, if the Carisbad Raceway or Carlsbad Oaks maps expire. Mr.
Hofman said that without the CFD proceeding, there is no financial guarantee that
Faraday Avenue will be completed. Mr. Hofman used his Power Point Presentation to
describe the capacity increase by the addition of a lane on Palomar Airport Road, CFD
costs and the Rancho Santa Fe pre-payment agreements.
Larry Nelson, representing Davis Partners (owner of the Palomar Forum project),
explained that their incentive to join the CFD is that they will have $2.5 million in bond
proceeds returned to them through the CFD for the building of public roads. Mr. Nelson
said in order to build the other half of their project, the CFD needs to be formed. Mr.
Nelson spoke in support of their request to proceed with their project.
Diane Nygaard, 5020 Nighthawk Way, Oceanside, representing Preserve Calavera,
spoke of the importance of building a wildlife under crossing under Palomar Airport
Road.
Council and staff discussion ensued regarding the risk associated with the funds
allocated by SANDAG as part of the Regional Arterial Program.
Council Member Hall said he felt that the delay factor was the result of the City of
Vista’s lawsuit against the City of Carlsbad and the City of Vista’s unwillingness to settle
the lawsuit.
Mayor Pro Tem Finnila spoke in support of the Palomar Forum developers’ proposal.
She said that the third lane on Palomar Airport Road is needed. Mayor Pro Tem Finnila
said the Palomar Forum developers have made a good faith effort to have the financing
in place before the development occurs.
Mayor Pro Tem Finnila referred to correspondence from Davis Partners dated March
20, 2003 (included in the agenda bill). She said she would be willing to allow Palomar
Forum to proceed with their project, provided that they fulfilled the bullet points after
”...If this proposal is approved, then Palomar Forum would provide the following:...”,
including the following additional bullet point:
The construction of Melrose and the construction of the open
space lot and the construction of Street “C” would follow the
City of Carlsbad’s schedute.
In response to Council Member Kulchin, Larry Nelson representing Davis Partners
(owner of the Palomar Forum project), explained that the difference between a bond
and a letter of credit, from a developer‘s perspective.
Council
agenda
Member Kulchin said she could not support the three findings, identified in the
bill, allowing Palomar Forum to proceed with their project at this point in time.
Page 12 June 3,2003 Carlsbad City Council Meeting
She expressed concern for potential liability that would be assumed by the City of
Carlsbad.
Council Member Hall said he concurred with Mayor Pro Tem Finnila comments and
could support the three findings.
Council Member Packard said that the City would be in a better situation if Council
approved the three findings, than if Council did not approve the findings. Council
Member Packard spoke in support of allowing the Palomar Forum project to proceed.
Mayor Lewis disagreed and explained why he felt that in the long run, there would be
great liability exposure to Carlsbad. He said that he could not make the three findings
at this time.
Mayor Pro Tem Finnila requested that the correspondence from the County of San
Diego dated June 2, 2003 addressed to Ted Tchang be entered into the record. A fax
copy of this correspondence is on file in the Office of the City Clerk. The subject of this
correspondence is McClelfan-Palomar Airport - Faraday Avenue Extension Mitigation
Ground Lease and Easement.
ACTION: On a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Finnila, Council accepted
Palomar Forum developers’ proposal for compliance with
the conditions of approval for the approved Tentative
Map, with the inclusion that the construction of Melrose,
the construction of the open space lot, and the
construction of Street “C” will follow the City of Carlsbad’s
schedule.
- AYES: - NOES: Lewis and Kulchin.
Finnila, Hall and Packard.
13. AB #I 7.1 94 - HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION APPOINTMENT
ACTION: On a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Finnila, Council adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 2003-143, appointing German Gutierrez to the
Historic Preservation Commission.
- AYES: - NOES: None.
Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard.
14. AB #17.195 -TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMISSION APPOINTMENT
ACTION: On a motion by Mayor Pro Tem Finnila, Council adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 2003-144, appointing Steve Dorsey to the
Traffic Safety Commission.
- AYES:
NOES: None.
Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard.
June 3,2003 Carlsbad City Council Meeting Page 13
COUNCIL REPORTS AND COMMENTS:
Council Member Packard announced that Council Agendas, Council Minutes, Council
Ordinances, Council Resolutions, Deeds, Maps and Drawings are now avaitable at
www.docDub.ci.carlsbad .ca.us.
Council Member Hall said he along with Council Member Kulchin and Council Member
Packard attended a conference in Plano, Texas.
Mayor Pro Tern Finnila said the Citizens' Workshop regarding the Budget would be held
on June 12, 2003, from 500 p.m. to 6:OO p.m. at 1635 Faraday Avenue.
Mayor Lewis gave an update on water issues.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: None.
CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS: None.
ADJOURNMENT:
By proper motion, the Regular Meeting of June 3, 2003, was adjourned at 10:17 p.m. A- ORRAl E M. WOOD, CMC
Janice i reitenfeld, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
17
From: Glenn Pruim (Joe Garuba)
To: Ray Patchett
Date: 6/1/04 1 1 :03AM
Subject: Forum Agenda Bill
There is a minor error in the AB for the Forum Final Map. The AB states that the map will result in 12 parcels, 10 industrial and 2 open space. Subsequent to the Tentative Map, the developer changed the lot
configuration and combined three TM industrial lots into one industrial lot. The net effect is that the map will create 10 lots, 8 industrial and 2 open space. The overall developed area is the same, they are just
requesting removal of two interior lot lines. This is being handled as a substantial conformance issue and the submitted map is consistent with this request. I discussed this w/ Cindee and she recommended that I
send you an email with this correction.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
cc: Ron Ball
The following issues/questions were raised at the Palomar Forum Final Map Council
briefings on Tuesday, June 1,2004.
Total estimated Faraday Avenue improvement costs -
Forum’s “fair share” of estimated Faraday costs -
Length of Faraday extension -
Status of Corps of Engineers’ 404 Permit - Local Corps office to complete permit
processing by first week of June. Document will then be sent to Corps LA
District office for review, approval and issuance. Corps indicated that permit
should be finalized by the end of June
Status of RWQCB 401 Permit - Contacted RWQCB on 5/28 and left message.
Have not received return call yet. Last contact indicated they did not have any
unresolved permit issues and were processing the permit for approval by the
Executive Director. No commitment re: completionhssuance date
Status of the Fish and Game 1601 Permit - The permit has been issued.
Mitigation measures contained within the permit have beedwill be incorporated
into the project construction
Dedication of Melrose Drive rights-of-way - Forum on-site r/w will be dedicated
as part of the final map. The off-site r/w (Raceway property) is covered by a
separate Grant Deed that will be recorded upon approval of the final map
The Subdivision Improvement Agreement for the project specifies that the PAR
improvements shall be completed by March 3 1 , 2005
$15,869,786
$ 2,003,805
1.3 miles
Forum’s % share of Faraday costs - 12.6%
[ Ray Patchett - Forum Agenda Bill Page
MRacsivaAeenda-fl cr
From: Glenn Pruim (Joe Garuba) To: Ray Patchett
Date: 6/1/04 11 :03AM
Subject: Forum Agenda Bill e
There is a minor error in the AB for the Forum Final Map. The AB states that the map will result in 12 parcels, 10 industrial and 2 open space. Subsequent to the Tentative Map, the developer changed the lot configuration and combined three TM industrial lots into one industrial lot. The net effect is that the map
will create 10 lots, 8 industrial and 2 open space. The overall developed area is the same, they are just requesting removal of two interior lot lines. This is being handled as a substantial conformance issue and the submitted map is consistent with this request. I discussed this w/ Cindee and she recommended that I
send you an email with this correction.
Please let me know if you need anything else.
cc: Ron Ball