HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-10-12; City Council; 17839; Carlsbad Ranch PA 5 resort siterl m m I U 0 0 c\l
0 z
g -ti u
rl 0 ul
a
2
a a, u a 0 a (d
a G rb
h hl h I tn z
0 z
a, V
n
C .rl a $4 0
a a, V 1 a 0 M u c *ti
rl -ti
3 0 V
x
4 0 \ hl 4
\ 0 4
.. z 0 F 0 a 4 G z 3 0 0
CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL
AB#
i 7;;;
JITLE:
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-0WPUD
PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE
MTG. 10/12/04 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-01 - CARLSBAD RANCH
DEPT.
DEPT. HD.
CITY ATTY.
CITY MGR
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the Council INTRODUCE Ordinance No. NS727 , APPROVING Specific Plan Amendment (SP 207(E)), and ADOPT Resolution No. , ADOPTING a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and APPROVING Local
Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 90-08(D)), Tentative Tract Map (CT 03-02), Site Development
Plan (SDP 03-02), Coastal Development Plan (CDP 03-04), Non-Residential Planned Unit
Development Plan (PUD 03-01 ), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 03-01 ) and Hillside Development
Permit (HDP 03-01 ) as recommended for adoption and approval by the Planning Commission.
2004-331
ITEM EXPLANATION:
On September 1, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing for a full service
hotel/timeshare resort project. Since the project is requesting a Specific Plan Amendment (SP
207(E)) and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 90-08(D)), in addition to a Tentative Tract
Map and Non-residential PUD (timeshares and hotel) of more than 50 units, the Planning
Commission has forwarded a recommendation of approval to the City Council for its action.
The applicant proposes to develop Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan with a full
service hoteVtimeshare resort. At buildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms, 350
timeshare units, two restaurants, 33,000 square feet of meeting rooms and conference facilities to
accommodate up to 2,000 occupants, and recreational amenities including swimming pools, tennis
courts and a sports center. The subject site is currently used for farming. The subject site is 56.52
acres in area and is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of
f'araday Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 13.
A full disclosure of the Planning Commission's discussion is included in the attached minutes. A
complete description and staff analysis of the project is included in the attached report to the
Planning Commission.
ENVIRONMENTAL:
Environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Planning Area 5 resort project have
been previously evaluated in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program EIR 94-01, certified in
1995 by the City of Carlsbad. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the
f
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. 17,839
Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, staff has conducted
an environmental impact assessment to evaluate changes from the approved Specific Plan and PA-5
as it was contemplated in EIR 94-01.
The previously certified EIR 94-01 identified site CA-SDI-8797, which is located partially on the
project site, as significanthmportant archeologically under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria. Per the Program EIR 94-01, a part of this site was to be placed in open space and capped. However the
site design is such that about 5,000 square feet of this area will have to be mitigated through data
recovery. A data recovery plan for the site was prepared by Gallegos & Associates in April 2003. A
portion of the site will be set-aside as an open space reflection/view area. This area will contain only
native plants, will be assisted in design by Native American representatives and will be posted with a
plaque discussing Native American history.
The necessary mitigation measures have been agreed to by the developer and a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared. Consequently, a Notice of Intent to adopt a
Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in the newspaper and sent to the State Clearinghouse
for public agency review. Letters were received from California Department of Transportation, Native
American Heritage Commission and a joint letter from the Wildlife Agencies during the 30-day public review and comment period.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No fiscal impacts have been identified.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Ordinance No. NS-727
2. City Council Resolution No. 2004-331
3. Location Map
4. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5685, 5693, 5692, 5686, 5687, 5688, 5689, 5690, 5691
5. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated September 1, 2004
6. Draft Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated September 1, 2004.
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Saima Qu res hy , (760) 602-46 1 9, squ re 8 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
ORDINANCE NO. NS-727
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO
THE CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN, SP 207(A) TO
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF PLANNING AREA 5 WITH A
MENT OF PLANNING AREA 8
CASE NAME:
CASE NO.: SP 207(E)
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows:
WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan SP
HOTEUTIME-SHARE RESORT INDEPENDENT OF DEVELOP-
CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN
207(A) on January 16, 1996 by adopting Ordinance No. NS-344; and
WHEREAS] after procedures in accordance with the requirements of law, the
City Council has determined that the public interest indicates that said specific plan amendment
be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 12th day of October
2004 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, said application constitutes a request for a Specific Plan
Amendment as shown on Exhibit “SP 207(E)” dated September 1, 2004, incorporated by
reference.
NOW, THEREFORE] the City Council of the City of Carlsbad does ordain as
follows:
SECTION I: That Specific Plan Amendment SP 207(E) dated September 1,
2004, attached hereto, and incorporated herein by reference, is approved. The Specific Plan
shall constitute the development plan for the property and all development within the plan area
shall conform to the plan.
SECTION II: That the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission in
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5693 shall also constitute the findings and conditions of
the City Council.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
adoption] and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
9 --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
published at least once in a publication of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within
fifteen days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the 12th day of October 2004, and thereafter.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the day of 2004, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAl N :
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-2- 2 J
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-331
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ADDENDUM AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVING
A SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP, SITE DEVELOPMENT
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
AND HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO AMEND THE
CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW THE
DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBJECT SITE (PLANNING AREA 5)
INDEPENDENT OF DEVELOPMENT OF PLANNING AREA 8
AND TO SUBDIVIDE THE SUBJECT SITE INTO 16 LOTS AND
354 AIRSPACE TIMESHARE UNITS TO ALLOW THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A HOTEUTIMESHARE RESORT WITH 350
HOTEL ROOMS AND 350 TIMESHARE UNITS ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON
ROAD, EAST OF ARMADA DRIVE AND WEST OF FARADAY
AVENUE WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
PLAN, COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, NON-RESIDENTIAL
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
CASE NO.: SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP
03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-01
RESORT SITE
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
follows:
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning
Commission did, on September 1, 2004 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law
to consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program and Addendum, Specific Plan Amendment (SP 207(E)), Local Coastal Program
Amendment (LCPA 90-08(D)), Tentative Tract Map (CT 03-02), Site Development Plan (SDP
03-02), Coastal Development Plan (CDP 03-04), Non-Residential Planned Unit Development
Plan (PUD 03-01), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 03-01) and Hillside Development Permit (HDP
03-01 ) ; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 12th day of
October , 2004 held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Local
Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 90-08(D)), Tentative Tract Map (CT 03-02), Site
Development Plan (SDP 03-02), Coastal Development Plan (CDP 03-04), Non-Residential
;'b
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
Planned Unit Development Plan (PUD 03-01), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 03-01) and Hillside
Development Permit (HDP 03-01) and;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does
hereby resolve as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program are adopted as shown on Exhibit “MND”, attached hereto
and made a part hereof, based on information presented at the public hearing and contained in
Exhibit “PII”, attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 5685 on file with the City Clerk
and incorporated herein by reference.
That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of Local
Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 90-08(D)), Tentative Tract Map (CT 03-02), Site
Development Plan (SDP 03-02), Coastal Development Plan (CDP 03-04), Non-Residential
Planned Unit Development Plan (PUD 03-01), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 03-01) and Hillside
Development Permit (HDP 03-01) is approved by the City Council and that the findings and
conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No.
5685, 5693, 5692, 5686, 5687, 5688, 5689, 5690, 5691 on file with the City Clerk and made a
part hereof by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City Council.
3.
....
....
. . ..
. . ..
....
....
. . ..
....
....
....
....
....
-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
4. That the approval of LCPA 90-08(D) shall not become effective until it is
approved by the California Coastal Commission and the California Coastal Commission's
approval becomes effective.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
day of October of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 12th
2004, by the following vote, to wit:
Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall, and Packard AYES:
NOES: None
ABSENT: None /7
ATTEST:
< LmAINE'M&dOD,@y Clerk
Karen R. Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk (SEAL)
-3-
EXHIBIT 3
SITE
CARLSBAD RANCH
PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
SP 207( E)/LCPA 90-08( D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/ CDP 03-04/PUD 03=01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-01
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 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5685
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND ADDENDUM AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT
OF A HOTEW TIMESHARE RESORT WITH 350 HOTEL
ROOMS AND 350 TIMESHARE UNITS ON PROPERTY
GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON
ROAD, EAST OF ARMADA DRIVE AND WEST OF
FARADAY AVENUE WITHIN LOCAL FACEITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/
CDP 03-04PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-01
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding,
Inc., “Owner,” described as
Boundary Parcel “A?) of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction with
said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
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.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Exhibit
“MND,” according to Exhibits “NOI” dated May 21,2004, and “PII” dated May
10,2004, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project, and any comments
thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and
b. 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
c. it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
d. based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence
the project will have a significant effect on the environment.
Conditions:
1. Developer shall implement or cause the implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
2. This approval is granted subject to the approval of SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02,
SDP 03-02, CDP 03-04, PUD 03-01, CUP 03-01 and HDP 03-01 and is subject to all
conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5693, 5692, 5686, 5687,
5688,5689,5690 and 5691 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference.
3. 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 Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, (b)
City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-
discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein.
13- PC RES0 NO. 5685 -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
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that the approval of your project inclddes the imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions. 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 feedexactions
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.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: . Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
%RANK H. WH’M’ON, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLMILL#
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5685 -3-
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NAME:
CASE NO:
Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Resort Site
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(’D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PLJD 03-01/CUP 03-01/
HDP 03-01
PROJECT LOCATION: West side of Hidden Valley Road between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road
(APN 211-100-14)
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed proiect is for a Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Promam Amendment,
Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional
Use Permit and Hillside Development Permit to allow for the development of a full service destination hotelltimeshare resort.
The Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 resort proiect is proposed to be a full service destination resort adjacent to the Legoland
California theme park. At buildout, the proiect will have a total of 350 hotel rooms and 350 timeshare units. There will be
two restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants and recreational amenities including pools,
tennis courts and sports center.
The subiect site is a total of 56.52 acres which is currently in agricultural use. Land uses surrounding the subiect site include
open space, a water reservoir and the future City of Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course to the east, Cannon Road and agricultural
uses to tile north, Legoland to the south. and a vacant property to the west.
Environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Planning Area 5 resort project have been previously evaluated
in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Pro,gram EIR 94-01, certified in 1995 bv the City of Carlsbad. This EIR included
various mitigation measures designed to reduce potential adverse impacts associated with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan
and related development including the development of Planning Area 5 as a resort. All mitigation measures have been
incorporated into the overall proiect design or will be included as conditions of auproval.
DETERMINATION: 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, and the City of Carlsbad finds as follows:
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.
0 The proposed project MAY have “potentially significant impact(s)” on the environment, but at least one potentially
significant impact 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.
(Mitigated Negative Declaration applies only to the effects that remained to be addressed).
0 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
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b)
have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, nothing further is required.
A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning
Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008.
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER
Planning Director
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
August 18,2004 ADDENDUM
EIA FOR : SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-O8@)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-0YCDP 03-04PuD 03-
Ol/Cl.JP 03-01/HDP 03-01 - Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Resort
Site
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15074.1 and Section 15073.5
addresses the circumstances under which substitution of mitigation measures in a
proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) can occur and when re-circulation of a
proposed MND is required. Pursuant to these sections, mitigation measures may be
substituted or added which will avoid or reduce the significant effect to at least the same
degree as, or to a greater degree than the original measure and will create no more
adverse effect of it’s own than would the original measure. No re-circulation of the
proposed MND is required when 1) Mitigation measures are replaced with equal or more
effective measures pursuant to Section 15074.1; 2) New project revisions are added in
response to written or verbal comments on the project’s effects identified in the proposed
MND which are not new avoidable significant effects; 3) Measures or conditions of
project approval are added after circulation of the MND which are not required by
CEQA, which do not create new significant environmental effects and are not necessary
to mitigate an avoidable significant effect; and 4) New information is added to the MND
which merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the MND.
This addendum is in response to a joint comment letter from USFWS and CDFG received
on June 21, 2004 which is attached for reference to this addendum. New information and
responses to the comment letter are included in the attached letter prepared by Merkel
and Associates and additional mitigation measures are included as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Low-pressure sodium lamps should be used in any outdoor lighting fixtures adjacent
to the preserve. These lights should be directed away from the adjacent habitat and
used in conjunction with cut-off shields (fully shielded full cutoff lighting). Lighting
shall result in a predicted increase in illumination at the preserve boundary by no
more than 10% of the ambient levels.
The project boundary adjacent to the preserve area shall be fenced using a fence
designed to minimize accessibility of the open space by both people and domestic
animals. The fence selection shall be coordinated with the Wildlife Agencies and the
city to address barrier designs.
The project shall restrict the use of landscape materials on Lists A & B of the
California Invasive Plant Council’s list of “Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological
Concern in California as of October 1999”. In addition, proposed landscape plant
material palettes shall be reviewed by the City of Carlsbad and a qualified biologist to
ensure that materials to be used do not possess known invasive qualities.
Prior to any construction activities scheduled from February 15 through August 31,
the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a survey for nesting birds,
.- .
including northern harrier, within three days prior to the work in the area and ensure
that no nesting birds on-site, or gnatcatchers in the adjacent preserve area shall be
impacted by the project. If an active nest is identified, a buffer shall be established
between the construction activities and the nest. The buffer shall be a minimum
width of 300 feet (500 feet for raptors), shall be delineated by temporary fencing and
shall remain in effect as long as construction is occurring or until the nest is no longer
active.
5. The applicant shall retain a biological monitor to be present on-site during
construction and implementation of mitigation programs to ensure conservation
measures in the MND, resource agency permits, and construction documents are in
compliance with mitigation measures.
6. The project should include the preparation of informational material and signage that
specifically addresses the requirements of development occupants. Materials should
be posted along the preserve fence and should also be provided as pamphlets made a
part of the disclosure documentation for all new occupants. Material shall be
developed and approved for use by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department in
coordination with Wildlife Agencies.
19
- City of Carlsbad
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
CASE NAME:
CASE NO:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Resort Site
CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-011
LCPA 90-08(DYSP 207(E)
West side of Hidden Valley Road between Cannon Road and Palomar
Airport Road (APN 211-100-14)
The proposed project is for a Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan,
Coastal Development Permit, Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit, Hillside
Development Permit, Local Coastal Program Amendment and a Specific Plan Amendment to allow for the
development of a full service destination hotelltimeshare resort. The Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 resort
project is proposed to be a full service destination resort adjacent to the Legoland California theme park. At
buildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms and 350 timeshare units. There will be two
restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants and recreational amenities including
pools, tennis courts and sports center.
The subject site is a total of 56.52 acres which is currently in agricultural use. Land uses surrounding the
subject site include open space, a water reservoir and the future City of Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course to the
east, Cannon Road and agncultural uses to the north, Legoland to the south, and a vacant property to the west.
Environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Planning Area 5 resort project have been
previously evaluated in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program EIR 94-01, certified in 1995 by the
City of Carlsbad. This EIR included various mitigation measures designed to reduce potential adverse impacts
associated with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and related development including the development of
Planning Area 5 as a resort. All mitigation measures have been incorporated into the overall project design or
will be included as conditions of approval of the project.
PROPOSED DETERMINATION: 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 (EM 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 will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad City
Council.
A copy of the initial study (EL4 Part 2) documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration are 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 the date of this notice.
The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approvalladoption by the
City of Carlsbad Planning Commission and City Council. Additional public notices will be issued when those
public hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please call Saima Qureshy in the Planning
Department at (760) 602-4619.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD
PUBLISH DATE MAY 2 1,2004
MAY 21,2004 TO JUNE 21,2004
a0
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us @ January 30,2003
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I1
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02KDP 03-04PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-01
DATE: May 10,2004
BACKGROUND
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
4.
7.
8.
9.
CASE NAME: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Resort Site
LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad,
CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Saima Oureshy - (740) 602-4619
PROJECT LOCATION: West side of Hidden Valley Road between Cannon Road and Palomar
Airport Road (APN 21 1-100-14)
PROJECT SPONSOR’S NAME AND ADDRESS: Timothy Stripe, 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite
200, Carlsbad. CA 92008
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: T-R (Travel/ Recreation Commercial)
ZONING: C-T-0 (Commercial-Tourist/ Qualified Development Overlay Zone)
OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing
approval or participation agreements): California Coastal Commission
PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND
USES:
Request for approval of a Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract
Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Develoument Permit, Non-Residential Planned Development
Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Hillside Development Permit for the development of a full service
hotelhimeshare resort. At buildout, the proiect will have a total of 350 hotel rooms and 350 timeshare
units. There will be two restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants, and
recreational amenities including pools, tennis courts and a sports center.
The subiect site is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday
Avenue. Land uses surroundinp the subiect site include open space, a water reservoir and the future City
of Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course to the east, agricultural uses to the west and north and Legoland to the
south. Environmental impacts for the proDosed project have been previously analyzed in the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR 94-01, SCH #9505 1001). Impacts
will not be different than those already anticipated by the Program EIR. Mitigation measures from this
previous EIR have been incorporated into the proposed project where applicable and are listed at the back
of this EIA.
1 Rev. 07/03/02
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 Aesthetics 0 Geology/Soils Noise
Agricultural Resources 0 HazarddHazardous Materials 0 Population and Housing
Air Quality 0 Hydrology/Water Quality Public Services
[7 Biological Resources 0 Land Use and Planning Recreation
Cultural Resources 0 Mineral Resources TransportatiordCirculation
0 Utilities & Service Systems u Mandatory Findings of
Significance
2 Rev. 07103102
2%
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
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 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION wilI 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 “potentially significant impact(s)” on the environment. but at
least one potentially significant impact 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 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 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION
pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required.
i I I#- 4 5 / IL. I C.Cf
Planner Signature Date
3 Rev. 07/03/02
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELIKES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 1.5063 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 Lvith information
to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Xegative Declaration. or
to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are adequately supported
by an information source cited in the parentheses following each question. A “No Impact” ansiver 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.
“Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not
significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies.
“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.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significantly
adverse.
Based on an “EIA-Part 11”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the
environment, but &I potentially significant adverse 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.
When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR
if the significant adverse 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.
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 adverse effect on the environment.
. If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there
are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse 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.
,
4 Rev. 07/03/02 a4
An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including but not limited to
the following circumstances: ( 1 ) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been discussed or
mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to nitigation
measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant: (2) a “Statement of O\,erriding
Considerations” for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR: (3)
proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant: or (4) tluou_gh the
EIA-Part I1 analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect.
or determine the effectiveness of a nitigation 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.
5 Rev. Q7fO3lQ2
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but
not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a State scenic highway'?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
11. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In determining
whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant
environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the
California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site
Assessment Model-1 997 prepared by the California
Department of Conservation as an optional model to use
in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would
the project:
Convert Prime Farmland. Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the
Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?
Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
111. AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance
criteria established by the applicable air quality
management or air pollution control district may be relied
upon to make the following determinations.) Would the
project:
Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation'?
Potentially
Significant Potentially Unless Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant Xo Impact Incorporated Impact Inipct
0 0 1510
0 0 0151
0 0
0 0 DEI
0 0 OH
0 CI OH
0
6 Rev. 07103102
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially Significant
Mitigation Significant ho
ncorpornted Impact Impact
Unless Less Than Potentially
Significant
Impact 1
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of
any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
in non-attainment under an applicable federal or state
ambient air quality standard (including releasing
emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for
ozone precursors)?
0 0 Ixio
o
0
0 Isin
0 ow
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations'?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people'?
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
0 0 a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by California Department of Fish and
Game or US. Fish and Wildlife Service?
0 0 wo b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian,
aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, or regulations or by California Department
of Fish and Game or US. Fish and Wildlife Service?
0 ow c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filing, hydrological interruption, or other means?
0 0 wo d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
0 0 ow e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
0 ow f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservation plan?
0 ow g) Impact tributary areas that are environmentally
sensitive'?
7 Rev. 07/03/02 $7
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless LCSS Than Significant Mitigation Significant ho
Impact Incorporated Impact lnipacr
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project'
Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
$15064.5?
Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi-
cance of an archeological resource pursuant to 5 15064.5?
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique pale
ontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other . substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides'?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse'?
d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
CI 0 OH
0 IXI on
0 0 OB
0 0 OB
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ow
wo wn
ow
OIXI
ow
ow
8 $8 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). .. . Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
0 0 om e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not available for the
disposal of wastewater'?
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS -
Would the project:
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
Create a significant hazard to the public or
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to the public or
environment?
For a project within an airport land use plan, or
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area'?
Impair implementation of or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan'?
Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ow
OB
OB
OB
OB
OB
OB
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the
project:
0 0 OBI a) Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements?
9 49 Rev. 07103lO2
Potentially
Sign i ti can t
Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mi tigat ion Significant KO
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with ground water recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local ground water table
level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)?
0 0 w
0
0
c) Impacts to groundwater quality?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-
site?
0
0
ow ow
0 e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or substantially increase
the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in
a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-
site?
0
o f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff!
0 ow
0 o g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation
map?
0
0
1510
0 'w
0 i) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures,
which would impede or redirect flood flows? ow
0 j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam'?
0
0
k) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
1) Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface
waters.
0 ow
0
El m) Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics,
nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash)
into receiving surface waters or other alteration of
receiving surface water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
0
10 Rev. 07103102 30
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
Potentially Significant
Impact o n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or
wetland waters) during or following construction'?
0 0) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list'?
0 p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater
receiving water quality objectives or degradation of
beneficial uses?
IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including but not limited to the general plan,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
0
0
0 c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) 0 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?
0 b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land
use plan?
XI. NOISE - Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of
other agencies?
El b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise
levels'?
0 c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
0 d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
.. . Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Significant So Incorporated linpact Impact
Unless Less Than
MU
0 OBI
0 OBI
0 BIO
0 nIx1
0 ixIu
0 mu
11 Rev. 07103102 31
.Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
e) For a project located within an airport land
or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
use plan
within 2
miles of a public airport or public use airport. would
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project:
a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly
(for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere'?
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in substantial adverse
physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered government facilities, a
need for new or physically altered government
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or
other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
i) Fire protection'?
ii) Police protection'?
iii) Schools?
iv) Parks'?
v) Other public facilities?
XIV. RECREATION
a) Would the project increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or other
recreational facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
Potentially
Significant Potentially Unless Less Than
Sipnificant Mitipion Significani
Impact Incorporated lnipact
0 [xi 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
Ti0
Impact
I
[XI
[XI
[XI
[XI
[XI
Ixl
Ixl
Ixl
[XI
[XI
12 Rev. 07/03/02
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ho
Impact Incorporated lnipact Impact
0 KIM b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment'?
XV. TRANSPORTATIONlTRAFFIC - Would the project:
Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the
street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in
either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)'?
Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Result in inadequate emergency access?
Result in insufficient parking capacity?
Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turn-
outs, bicycle racks)?
0 0
0 0
0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the
project:
a)
o
0
Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which would
cause significant environmental effects?
Require or result in the construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
b)
c)
d)
lxl
IXI
0
0
0
0
0
0
IXI
151
[XI
[xi
[XI
0 om
0 OIXI
0 ow
0
13 Rev. 07103102 33
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider, which serves or may serve the
project that it has adequate capacity to serve the
project‘s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing conmitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste
disposal needs’?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Potentiall>
Significant
1 nipact
0
cl
0
Potentially
Significant
Mitigation Significant ho
Incorporated Impact Impact
Linless Less Than
0 om
0 om
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
0 0 mu 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?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumula- .
tively considerable” means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable when-viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the
effects of other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects?)
Does the project have environmental effects, which
will cause the substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly‘?
0 mu
0 NO
XVIII. 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:
a) 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.
14 Rev. 07/03/02 34
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
PROJECT DESCRIPTIOB
The proposed project is for a Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan. Coastal Development Permit. Planned
bnit Development Permit, Conditional Use Pernit, Hillside Development Pernit. Local Coastal Program
Amendment and a Specific Plan Amendment to allow for the development of a full ser\,ice destination
hotelltimeshare resort. The Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 resort project is proposed to be a full service
destination resort adjacent to the Legoland California theme park. At buildout. the project \vi11 have a total of 350
hotel rooms and 350 timeshare units. There will be two restaurants. meeting rooms and conference facilities for
2000 seats, recreational amenities including pools, tennis courts and sports center.
The subject site is a total of 56.52 acres which is currently in agricultural use. Land uses surrounding the subject site
include open space, a water reservoir and the hture City of Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course to the east. Cannon
Road and agricultural uses to the north, Legoland to the south, and a vacant property to the west.
Environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Planning Area 5 resort project have been previously
evaluated in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program EIR 94-01, certified in 1995 by the City of Carlsbad.
This EIR included various mitigation measures designed to reduce potential adverse impacts associated with the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and related development including the development of Planning Area 5 as a resort.
All mitigation measures have been incorporated into the overall project design.
I. AESTHETICS - Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Less Than Significant Impact. The subject site is located along Cannon Road which is designated as “Community
Scenic Corridor” in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Design features incorporated into the project to
reduce adverse aesthetic impacts include contour grading, landscaping and architectural detail to soften the visual
effects and to enhance the visual character of the project. Incorporation of these design features will substantially
reduce the project visual effects to a level considered less than significant.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees. rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its
surroundings?
No Impact (b&c) - The proposed project will cause changes in visual character in that the current use of the subject
site is agriculture which will change to a developed site. The overall project design seeks to enhance the visual
character of the area through implementation of a consistent architectural and design theme which will enhance and
connect the project with surrounding land uses. Features incorporated into the project to reduce adverse aesthetic
impacts include contour grading, substantial landscaping and architectural detail to soften the visual effects and to
enhance the visual character of the project. Incorporation of these design features will enhance the visual character
and quality of the project area.
d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will result in the introduction of new sources of light and
glare into the project area. However impacts involving the creation of light or glare would be less than significant as
there are no existing land uses that would be significantly or adversely be affected by project lighting or glare.
11. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
15 Rev. 07/03/02 34
.. . Less Than Significant Impact. The conversion of Prime Farmland and Farmland of Statewide Importance to 11011-
agricultural use was addressed by the previously ,certified Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program EIR.
Mitigation measures are not proposed as impacts have been reduced to a level less than significant through the
payment of fees consistent with the City's Local Coastal Program, and implementation of policies in the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a W;illianison Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which. due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use?
No Impact (b&c). The proposed project will not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use. The Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan requested an early cancellation of Williamson Act contracts, which was approved as a part of
the original approval for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and Final Program EIR 94-0 1.
111. AIR QUALITY-Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a federal and state non-attainment area
for ozone (03), and a state non-attainment area for particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter
(PMlo). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution
controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is
embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District
(APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG).
A plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state-
mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non-attainment areas having
serious ozone problems and used to create the California State implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by
the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through 10th in 1994, and was forwarded to
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly
regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996.
The proposed project relates to the SIP andor RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are
incorporated into the air quality planning document, These growth assumptions are based on each city's and the
County's general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the'project
presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that
the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact.
Section 15 125(B) of the State of California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific
reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality
management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set
forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California
Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms to the RAQS which include the
following:
Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area'?
Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan'?
The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being
implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions of the City's General Plan, Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan and the RAQS. Therefore, the project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no
way conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
Potentially Significant unless Mitigation Incorporated. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project
site is in the City of Oceanside. Data available for this monitoring site through April, 2002 indicate that the most
recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (one day in both 2000 and 2001)
16 Rev. 07103102
and one day in 2001 for the federal 8-hour average for ozone and one day for the 24-hour state standard for
suspended particulates in 1996. No violations of any other air quality standards have been recorded recently. The
project would involve minimal short-term enlissions associated with grading and construction. Such enlissions
would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and
watering the site for dust control. The proposed project will generate long-term emissions as a result of additional
vehicular traffic associated with travel to and from the project site. All air pollutant emissions analyzed by the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program EIR are considered significant prior to iniplenientation of mitigation
measures at build out of the proposed project. Throughout the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program EIR 93-
01, general mitigation measures for air quality are listed. Mitigation measures are incorporated in the project design
and are also included in the MMRP. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project. they
would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to
overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Less Than Significant Impact. The Air Basin is currently in a non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine
particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net
increase in emissions throughout the air basin. It was concluded in the analysis for the Final Program EIR 94-01
that the development anticipated under the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan together with the development of other
related projects will have a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact on the region’s air quality. A statement
of overriding considerations was adopted for this cumulative impact. (EIR section 5.2).
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific
Plan. The proposed project will generate additional vehicular traffic and an increase in vehicle pollutant
concentrations. However, there are no sensitive receptors in the vicinity. Therefore impacts involving the exposure
of sensitive receptors to pollutants will not be greater than those already anticipated by the Final Program
Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (EIR 94-01). Any inipact is assessed as less
than significant.
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
No Impact. The construction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the operation of construction
equipment, which may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would be short-term or
transient. In addition, the number of people exposed to such transient impacts is not considered substantial.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
A Biological Survey and Report was prepared for the proposed project by Merkel & Associated, Inc. in January
2003. The report was based upon surveys of the site conducted in September and October 2002. The report
identifies four plant communities on the 56.52 acre site. Impacts to 41.23 acres of agriculture and 8.13 acres of
disturbed habitat will not be considered significant. The project will have no direct impacts on 0.16 acres of Diegan
Coastal Sage Scrub, located along the northeastern property boundary. Impacts to 1.98 acres of Non-native
grassland will require mitigation at a 0.5: 1 ratio or by paying a mitigation in-lieu fee to the City.
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less than significant impact. A Biological Survey conducted on the proposed project site by Merkel & Associates,
Inc. on September 24, 2002 stated that, as proposed the project will impact 1.98 acres of non-native grassland. This
impact can be mitigated by payment of a mitigation in-lieu fee to the City of Carlsbad pursuant to the proposed
Habitat Management Plan.
17 Rev. 07lO3102
.- .
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than Significant Impact. No aquatic or wetland habitat is present on the site. No habitat under the
jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game. or the Regional Water
Quality Control Board would be impacted. The development of the project would result in the loss of raptor
foraging habitat. However a significant amount of natural habitat occurs in the IO-acre hardline preserve to the east.
thus sensitive species will not be affected.
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 303 of the
Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool. coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, tiling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
No Impact.
occur on site.
The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and no wetlands
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific
Plan. Therefore any impacts to the movement of native resident or migratory wildlife species or with established
native resident or migratory corridors will not be greater than those already anticipated by the previously certified
Program EIR for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (EIR 94-01). According to the Biology Report, prepared for this
project, there are no wildlife corridors or habitat linkages on the site. The 0.16 acre of coastal sage preserved on-site
is contiguous with habitat to the east. Overall the property is used for agriculture and has only a small amount of
habitat on-site.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community
conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
g) Impact tributary areas that are environmentally sensitive?
No Impact (e-g) - The eastern boundary of the site borders natural open space that is part of an existing hardline
conservation area for the Carlsbad HMP. This off-site open space consists primarily of Diegan coastal sage scrub'
habitat. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and Program EIR 94-01
and therefore will not conflict with any HCP, NCCP or other approved habitat conservation plan.or local policies or
ordinances protecting biological resources.
No aquatic or wetland habitat is present on or immediately adjacent to the site. No habitat under the jurisdiction of
the US. Army Corps of Engineers, California Department of Fish and Game, or the Regional Water Quality Control
Board would be impacted.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5?
No Impact. A previously recorded archeological site is located within the project boundary. The mitigation
measures as identified in a report prepared by Gallegos & Associates in April 2004, are incorporated in the project
design and are included as conditions of approval. Therefore any impacts to the significance of a historical resource
as identified in 6 15064.5 will be reduced to a level less than significant and will be mitigated where applicable based
on reconmendations of the archeological report and data recovery.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to
§15064.5?
18 Rev. 07/03/02 38
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final
Program EIR 94-01 identified site CA-SDI-8797. which is located partially on the project site. as
significandimportant under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria. Per the Program EIR 94-01. a part of this site \vas
to be placed in open space and capped. However the site design is such that about 5,000 square feet of this area \[-ill
have to be mitigated through data recovery. A data recovery plan for the site was prepared by Gallegos R:
Associates in April 2003. The data recovery plan states that mitigation of impacts can be achie\.ed through
avoidance, capping or through completion of a data recovery program. A portion of the site will be set-aside as an
open space reflectiodview area. This area will contain only native plants, will be assisted in design by 5atii.e
American representatives and will be posted with a plaque discussing Native A4nierican history. Waterlines and
other utilities will be placed outside of the open space easement or within the fill soil to avoid impacts to cultural
resources. The remaining portion of the site cannot be avoided and thus mitigation of impacts will be achieved
through the completion of a data recovery program.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
No Impact (c & d) - The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and the
Program EIR 94-01. There will be no impacts to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic features. The
site is currently used as agriculture. There will be no impacts to human remains including those interred outside of
formal cemeteries. Therefore impacts will not be greater than those already anticipated by the Environmental
Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (EIR 94-01).
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury
or death involving:
1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
No Impact. Ground rupture generally is considered to occur along pre-existing fault strands. Since no active faults
have been mapped on the site or in the vicinity of the project site, ground rupture on-site is considered unlikely.
Therefore there will be no impacts involving ground rupture.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Less Than Significant Impact (aii-aiii.) - There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zones within the City of
Carlsbad and there is no other evidence of active or potentially active faults within the City. However there are
several active faults throughout Southern California, and these potential earthquakes could affect Carlsbad. The
project site is located in an area of stable soil conditions and the risk of seimic-realted ground failure or liquefaction
is very minimal (according to City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study, November
1992). In addition a project specific Geologic Reconnaissance was prepared by Leighton and Associates dated
November 29, 2001. The report sates that the potential for liquefaction, earthquake induced settlement and lateral
spread are considered to be low for the site because of the low susceptibility to liquefaction.
iv. Landslides?
No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and the site is not at
risk for landslides. Therefore impacts involving landslides will not be greater than those already anticipated by the
Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (EIR 94-0 1).
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
19 Rev. 07/03/02 39
~. . No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Therefore inipacts
involving substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil will not be greater than those already anticipated b!. the
Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (EIR 94-01).
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable. or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence. liquefaction.
or collapse?
No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Therefore impacts
involving unstable geologic unit or soil will not be greater than those already anticipated by the Program
Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (EIR 94-01).
a Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1991).
creating substantial risks to life or property?
No Impact. The proposed project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Therefore impacts
involving expansive soils will not be greater than those already anticipated by the Program Environmental Impact
Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (EIR 94-01).
e) Have soils incapable of adequately 'supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
No Impact. The proposed project does not propose septic tanks and will use public sewer system. Therefore there
will be no impacts involving soils that support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems.
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS-Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public
or environment?
No Impact (a-d). Based on the nature of the land use, there is no routine transport or use of disposal of hazardous
materials associated with hotelhimeshare resort and other associated uses proposed. Therefore, there is no potential
of a significant hazard associated with the project from accidents involving the release of hazardous materials into
the environment, or from the emission of hazardous substances within the proximity of a school.
e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people
residing or working in the project area?
Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Influence Area.
The influence area encompasses those areas adjacent to airports which could be impaired by noise levels exceeding
the California State Noise Standards or where height restrictions would be needed to prevent obstructions to
navigate airspace as outlined in Federal Aviation Administration regulations. The proposed project lies within the
60-65 CNEL contours of the airport. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan McClellan-Palomar Airport developed by
SANDAG dated April 1994 states that CNEL levels of 60 - 70 are conditionally compatible for Hotels. Thus the
proposed project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
20 Rev. 07103102
No Impact. The proposed project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip and therefore !vi11 not result 111 a
safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plari or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wild land fires.
including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with
wild lands?
NO Impact (g-h). The project will not impair the implementation or physically interfere with any adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation since the project site is surrounded by urban developnient ahich
is adequately served by emergency services.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY-Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements?
No Impact. The applicant is required to comply with Order 2001 -02 issued by the Regional Water Quality Control
Board. A preliminary Storm Water Management Plan for the project was prepared by Excel Engineering to address
existing and proposed pollutants of concern and what measures will be implemented to ensure that pollutant loads
are not increased as a result of this project, to the maximum extent practicable.
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table
level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?
No Impact. The project does not propose to directly draw any groundwater for potable or irrigation use. The
project will be served via existing public water distribution lines adjacent to the site.
c) Impacts to groundwater quality?
No Impact. This project is required to implement measures to reduce urban pollutants prior to discharge, thus
groundwater quality will not be affected by this project.
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation
on- or off-site?
No Impact. The proposed project does not propose to alter existing drainage patterns, nor any stream or river that
would result in erosion or siltation on or offsite.
e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration
of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of
surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will change land use of the site from agriculture to a
hotelhimeshare resort. The developed site will have a drainage pattern different from the existing use. The project
is required to comply with Order 2001-02 of Regional Water Quality Control Board.
f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm
water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
No Impact. The existing storm drain system will adequately convey runoff from the subject site. Since this project
maintains peak runoff to predevelopment flows, there is no additional impact to consider. Compliance with NPDES
requirements ensure that the off-site flow does not increase pollutant discharges.
g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
21 Rev. 07103l02
.- . Less Than Significant Impact. As a result of the project 1) Implementing source BMP measures to avoid pollutant
contact and; 2) Installing treatment BMP measures to remove pollutants from storm water, the proposed project is
not anticipated to contribute additional pollutants, to rhe maximum extent practicable.
h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary
or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map?
No Impact. The proposed project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate iMap or other flood delineation map. Therefore there \vi11 be no impacts
regarding flooding.
i) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows?
No Impact. The proposed project would not place structures within 100-year flood hazard areas. Therefore there
will be no impacts from flooding.
j) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss injury or death involving flooding. including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
k) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
No Impact (j & k) - According to the City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study.
November 1992, the project site is not located within any dam failure inundation, or area subject to inundation by
seiche or tsumani.
Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters?
Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic
organics, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into receiving surface waters or other
alteration of receiving surface water quality (e.g.. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)?
Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following
construction?
Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list?
The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or
degradation of beneficial uses?
Less Than Significant Impact (1, m, n, o & p) - The project is not located immediately adjacent to any body of
water. The project is within a watershed that ultimately drains to Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Agua Hedionda Lagoon
is not listed as an impaired water body per the 303(d) list adopted February 4, 2003. The project will be required to
comply with Order 2001-01 and the Storm Water Management Plan for this project. Drainage and development will
be controlled via best management practices to ensure that pollutant loads are not increased to the maximum extent
practicable. Therefore, the project will not adversely impact water quality.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING - Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
bj Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over
the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or
zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan?
No Impact (a-c) - The project site is surrounded by development on three sides, including Cannon Road to the
north, LEGOLAND to the south and a vacant lot to the west. The proposed resort development of the site will be
compatible with and will integrate into the existing community. The project is consistent with the property’s
22 Rev. 07/03/02 42
General Plan designation of Travel! Recreation Commercial (TR). with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and \vith
the Final Program EIR 94-01.
The eastern boundary of the site borders natural open space that is part of an existing hardline conser\.ation area for
the Carlsbad HMP. This off-site open space consists primarily of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub habitat. The proposed
project is consistent with the approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and therefore \vi11 not conflict nit11 the
applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan.
x. MINERAL RESOURCES
No Impact. There are no known mineral resources. of local importance or otherwise. on the project site. Therefore,
the proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of such resources.
XI. NOISE
Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies?
Less than significant impact. An Acoustical Analysis report was prepared for the proposed project by Acoustech
Consultants in December 2002. The report indicates that the principal noise source impacting the southern portion
of the site is the McClellan-Palomar Airport, with additional noise contribution from Palomar Airport Road. The
project site will be subject to exterior noise levels of up to 66 dB CNEL in the southern portion of the project site.
The principal noise source impacting the northern portion of the site is traffic noise due to Cannon Road. Future
noise levels from Cannon Road are predicted to be as hgh as 66.7 dB CNEL at facades facing the roadway.
No special building construction is required to achieve interior noise levels of 45 dB CNEL, with the exception that
single glazed windows need to be closed. Typical building construction provides approximately 10-15 dB noise
reduction with windows open and 25-30 dB with closed windows. Mechanical ventilation and air-conditioning is
included as part of project design.
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise
levels?
No Impact. Based upon the nature of the proposed hotelhimeshare use, the project will not result in any activity
that would generate excessive groudbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels. In addition, the project site is
not located adjacent to any use that generates excessive groundbourne vibrations or groudbourne noise levels.
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
Less Than Significant Impact (c & d) - Other than traffic generated noise, typical hotelhimeshare land use does
not generate a substantial amount of noise. With regard to temporary or periodic increase in noise levels, the only
potential increase in noise would be from construction activity associated with the development of the project. The
City incorporates standard regulations on all project construction activity to ensure that noise and other potential
impacts to surrounding properties are not significant. Therefore, the proposed project will not result in a substantial
permanent or temporary increase in ambient noise level in the project vicinity.
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The project site is located within the McClellan-Palomar
Airport Influence Area. The influence area encompasses those areas adjacent to airports which could be impaired
by noise level exceeding the California State Noise Standards or where height restrictions would be needed to
prevent obstructions to navigable airspace as outlined in Federal Aviation Administration regulations. The proposed
project lies within the 60-65 db CNEL contours of the airport. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-
23 Rev. 07/03/02 4-3
.Palomar Airport developed by SANDAG dated April 1994 states that db CNEL levels of 60-70 are conditionall!,
compatible for hotels and the outdoor noise levels are acceptable for associated outdoor activities.
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or
working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No Impact. The proposed project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip and therefore will not expose people
residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING
No Impact (a-c). The project would result in the development of a hotel and timeshare units surrounded by other
commercial development therefore, the project would not induce substantial growth either directly or indirectly.
The project is proposed on a vacant lot and would not displace any existing housing or individuals.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new
or physically altered government facilities, a need for new or physically altered government facilities,
the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public
services:
No Impact. The proposed project is located in Zone 13 of Local Facilities Management Plan. The provision of
public facilities within the Zone 13 LFMP, including fire gL police protection, parks, libraries and other public
facilities, have been planned to accommodate the projected growth in that area. Because the project will not exceed
the total growth projections anticipated within the Zone 13 LFMP, all public facilities will be adequate to serve the
proposed development on the site. Therefore, the project will not result in substantial adverse impacts to or result in
the need for additional government facilities.
XIV. RECREATION
No Impact (a and b). The proposed project is in Park District 1 NW quad. Since the area is non residential there is
linlited demand for recreational facilities. The project will be assed a fee of $00.40 a square foot according to City
guidelines to mitigate for the use of recreational facilities by employees and visitors. The project does not increase
the use of existing neighborhood and regional facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated. Nor does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity
of the street system?
Less Than Significant Impact. A traffic analysis was conducted for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan EIR in
August 1994, and a Congestion Management Plan was prepared in May 1995. Urban Systems developed a trip
generation chart in 2003 specifically for the hotelhimeshare project. The project is estimated to generate 7,167
ADT.
I I The project is served by Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road. While the increase in traffic from the proposed
project may be slightly noticeable, the street system has been designed and sized to accommodate traffic from the
24 Rev. 07103102 44
i. . project and cumulative development in the City of Carlsbad. The proposed project would not cause an increase in
traffic that is substantial in relation to existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. The impacts from the
proposed project are, therefore, less than significant.
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively. a level of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
Less Than Significant Impact. This project does not exceed a level of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads or highways. The proposed project is in conformance nith the
approved layout of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Therefore impacts involving level of service not be
greater than those already anticipated by the Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan (EIR 94-01).
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change
in location that results in substantial safety risks?
No Impact. Although the project lies within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Plan it does not include any
aviation components. Therefore it will not result in a change of air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety
risks.
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses?
No Impact. All project circulation improvements will be designed and constructed to City standards: and, therefore,
would not result in design hazards. The proposed project is consistent with the City’s General Plan, Zoning
Ordinance and Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use.
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire and Police
Departments.
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
No Impact. Parking for the hotelhimeshare project and accessory uses is adequate and meets all City of Carlsbad
standards.
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks, etc.)?
No Impact. The proposed project does not conflict with adopted .policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative
transportation.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS-Would the project:
No Impact (a-g) - The proposed project development will be required to comply with all Regional Water Quality
Control Board Requirements. In addition, the Zone 13 LFMP anticipated that the project site would be developed
with a hotelhimeshare project thus wastewater treatment facilities were planned and designed to accommodate
future commercial and tourist uses on the site. All public facilities, including water facilities, wastewater facilities,
wastewater treatment facilities and drainage facilities, have been planned and designed to accommodate the growth
projections for the City at build-out. The proposed project will increase the demand for theses facilities. However,
the proposed project would not result in an overall increase in the City’s growth projection. Therefore, the project
will not result in development that will result in a significant need to expand or construct new water
facilitiesisupplies, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage facilities.
Existing waste disposal services are adequate to serve the proposed commercial uses on site without exceeding
landfill capacity. In addition, the proposed commercial development will be required to comply with all federal,
state, and local statues and regulations related to solid waste.
25 Rev. 07i03102
XVII.
a)
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. substantially reduce
the habitat of fish or wildlife species. cause 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 or
rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California or prehistory?
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project will not degrade the quality of the environment. The project
site does not contain any fish or wildlife species. Therefore, the project will not reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species.
The proposed project is consistent with previously approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and Final Program EIR
94-01. The proposed project may have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. Any potential
impacts to the quality of the environment will not be greater than those already anticipated by EIR 94-01.
Mitigation measures from the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Program EIR 94-0 1 will be implemented to reduce any
impacts to less than significant.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects?)
Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project is in conformance with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and
Program EIR 94-01. The proposed project has impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable.
Impacts that are cumulatively considerable will not be greater than those already anticipated and mitigated through
mitigation measures, contained in Final Program EIR 94-01.
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projects regional growth for the greater San Diego area, and
local general plan land use policies are incorporated into SANDAG projections. Based upon those projections,
region-wide standards, including storm water quality control, air quality standards, habitat conservation, congestion
management standards, etc., are established to reduce the cumulative impacts of development in the region. All of
the City’s development standards and regulations are consistent with the region wide standards. The City’s
standards and regulations, including grading standards, water quality and drainage standard, traffic standards, habitat
and cultural resource protection regulations, and public facility standards, ensure that development within the City
will not result in a significant cumulatively considerable impact.
There are two regional issues that development within the City of Carlsbad has the potential to have a cumulatively
considerable impact on. Those issues are air quality and regional circulation. As described above, the project would
contribute to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described
above, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the development is implemented.
The County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino
Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system.
The CMA had determined, based on the City’s growth projections in the General Plan, that these designated
roadways will function at acceptable levels of service in the short-term and at build-out. The project is consistent
with the City’s growth projections, and therefore, the cumulative impacts from the project to the regional circulation
system are less than significant.
With regard to any other potential impacts associated with the project, City standards and regulations will ensure
that development of the site will not result in any significant cumulatively considerable impacts.
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause the substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less Than Significant Impact. Based upon the commercial nature of the project and the fact that future
development of the site will comply with all City standards, the project will not result in any direct or indirect
substantial adverse environmental effects on human beings. However the project site is located in an area where
humans beings could be exposed to high noise levels generated from McClellan-Palomar Airport. As discussed
above, any potential impact from noise can be mitigated to a level less than significant. Mitigation measures will be
26 Rev. 07103102 46
incorporated as conditions of project approval. Any future commercial development on the site \vi11 be required to
comply will all applicable federal. state. regional and City regulations. which \vi11 ensure the dei.elopnient of the site
will not result in an adverse impact on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORILIATIOR’ SOURCES
The following documents were used in the analysis of ths project and are on file in the. City of Carlsbad Planning
Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carisbad, California, 92008.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Citv of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and MaDping Study. November, 1992.
Citv of Carlsbad Habitat Manacement Plan for Natural Communities in the Citv of Carlsbad. December.
1999.
Cultural Resource Date Recovery Plan For the Grand Pacific Resorts Site CA-SDI-8797 Locus A Citv of
Carlsbad, California, Gallegos 8: Associates, April, 2003.
Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 Biological Survey, Merkel & Associates, January 10, 2003.
Commehensive Land Use Plan McClellan-Palomar Airport Carlsbad. California, SANDAG, April, 1994.
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment Final Program Environmental Impact Report, EIR 93-01, City
of Carlsbad, November, 1995
Plannins Area 5 Resort Trip Generation, Urban Systems, January 28, 2003.
Acoustical Analysis Report for Carlsbad Ranch Plannine Area 5 Legoland Resort & Hotel Tentative Map,
Acoustech Consultants, December 2,2002.
27 Rev. 07103102 47
LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES
AIR QUALITY:
1. Use of energy-efficient low-sodium parking lot lights.
2. Use of synchronization of traffic lights on streets impacted by development.
3. Scheduling of truck deliveries and pickups for off-peak hours.
4. Construction of bus turnouts, passenger benches, or shelters as deemed necessary by NCTD
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES:
5. Low-pressure sodium lamps should be used in any outdoor lighting fixtures adjacent to the preserve. These
lights should be directed away from the adjacent habitat and used in conjunction with cut-off shields (fully
shieldedi full cutoff lighting).
6. The boundary of the site that abuts the preserve area should be fenced to discourage trespassing.
7. Use native plants where feasible for landscaping especially along the eastern boundary to prevent invasion
of exotics into sensitive habitat. Avoid the use of invasive landscaping plants including Pampas grass and
Hottentot-Fig (Carpobrotus spp.)
CULTURAL RESOURCES:
8. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide written evidence that a certified
archaeologist has been retained, shall be present at the pre grading conference, shall establish
procedures for archaeological resource surveillance, and shall establish, in cooperation with the project
proponent, procedures for temporarily halting or redirecting work to permit the sampling,
identification, and evaluation of artifacts as appropriate. If additional or unexpected archaeological
features are discovered, the archaeologist shall report such findings to the applicant and to the City. If
the archaeological resources are found to be significant, the archaeological observer shall determine
appropriate actions, in cooperation with the applicant for exploration and/or salvage. These actions, as
well as final mitigation and disposition of the resources, shall be subject to the review of the City.
9. The applicant shall place 5,000 square feet of site CA-SDI-8797, as identified on project plans, in an
open space easement and capped. The capping will be one inch of clean sand and a minimum of 12-
inches of clean fill. Water lines and other utilities will need to be placed outside the open space
easement or within the fill soil. This area as well as the adjacent slope shall contain only native plants,
shall be assisted in design by the Native American representative and shall be posted with a plaque
discussing Native American history.
Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a data recovery program shall be completed for CA-SDI-8797.
The data recovery program shall be completed in compliance with the City of Carlsbad “Cultural
Resources Guidelines” and with Data Recovery Plan prepared by Gallegos. & Associates, April, 2003.
10.
11. Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the developer shall present a letter to the City of Carlsbad
indicating that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out an appropriate mitigation
program. (A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a MS or Ph.D. in paleontology or
geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques.
A qualified paleontologist shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the
grading and excavation contractors.
A paleontological monitor shall be on-site at all times during the original cutting of previously
undistributed sediments of the Santiago Formation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. Periodic
inspections of cuts involving the Lindavista Formation is also recommended. In the event that
fossils are discovered in the Lindavista Formation it may be necessary to increase the per/day in
field monitoring time. Conversely, if fossils are not being found then the monitoring should be
reduced. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the
28 Rev. 07t03102 48
.- . collection and salvage of fossil materials.
direction of a qualified paleontologist.)
The paleontological monitor shall n,ork under the
When fossils are discovered. the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them.
In most cases this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However. some fossil
specimens (such as a complete large manlmal skeleton) may require an extended salvage period.
In these instances the ,paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily
direct, divert. or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of
the potential for the recovering of small fossil remains. such as isolated mamrnal teeth. it may be
necessary in certain instances, to set up a screen-washing operation on the site.
0 Fossil remains collected during the monitoring and salvage portion of the mitigation program shall
be cleaned, repaired, sorted, and cataloged.
Prepared fossils, along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos. and maps, shall be
deposited (as a donation) in a scientific institution with permanent paleontological collections such
as the San Diego Natural History Museum. Donations of the fossils shall be accompanied by
financial support for initial specimen storage.
A final summary report shall be completed that outlines the results of the mitigation program.
This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphic sections(s) exposed. fossils
collected, and significance of recovered fossils.
NOISE:
12. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide an updated and detailed acoustical
analysis to show compliance with interior noise level of 45dB CNEL.
29 Rev. 01103l02 49
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATb'G MEASURES AND COSCUR
WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date
30 ro Rev. 07/03/02
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 1 of 3
I
v)
a
a
4
W n!
c3 z z -
n
I 0 z
n! a
n a m v) J
0 2
w 5
QU =t
cn
K c m
1
E
-
m
C
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 2 of 3
m
K c m
1
r
- L
-
m
c K m
E
i
ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST: Page 3 of 3
Q
It m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5693
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT SP 207(E)
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBJECT SITE
SHARE RESORT INDEPENDENT OF DEVELOPMENT OF
PLANNING AREA 8. THE SUBJECT SITE IS GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON ROAD, EAST
OF ARMADA DRIVE AND WEST OF FARADAY AVENUE
WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
(PLANNING AREA 5) WITH A PROPOSED HOTEUTIME-
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: SP 20703)
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding,
Inc., “Owner,” described as
Boundary Parcel “A” of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Specific Plan
Amendment as shown on Exhibits “X” dated September 1, 2004, on file in the Carlsbad
Planning Department, CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - SP
207(E) as provided by SP 207(A) and Government Code Section 65453; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the SP 207(E); and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, on January 16, 1996, the City Council approved SP 207(A), as
described and conditioned in Planning Commission Resolution No. 3848 and City Council
Ordinance No. NS-344; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA
5-RESORT SITE - SP 207(E) based on the following findings and subject to the
following conditions:
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The proposed development as described by the Specific Plan (SP 207(E)) is consistent
with the provisions of the General Plan in that the proposed design and improvements
for the proposed hotelhimeshares resort are in compliance with requirements of
CMC Titles 20 and 21 and all necessary public facilities and services needed to serve
the proposed project are or will be in place prior to occupancy of any building
proposed for the project site
The proposed specific plan amendment would not be detrimental to the public interest,
health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City in that the proposed amendment will
allow PA 5 to be developed independent of a golf course on PA 8. The proposed
amendment will have no impact on public interest, health, safety, convenience and
welfare of the City.
All necessary public facilities can be provided concurrent with need and adequate
provisions have been provided to implement those portions of the capital improvement
program applicable to the subject property in that the project is served by existing fully
improved public streets, Cannon Road and Hidden Valley Road, which operate at
acceptable levels of service. On-site circulation consists of private streets, which
provide access to hotels, timeshare units and other amenities. The circulation
system is designed to provide adequate access to the proposed lots and complies with
all applicable City design standards and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
The proposed project will be appropriate in area, location and overall design to the
purpose intended. The design and development standards are such as to create an
environment of sustained desirability and stability. Such development will meet
performance standards established by this title in that the project design complies with
the requirements of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan which was found to be
consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan. Varying
building setbacks have been incorporated into the project design. Pedestrian
connections are provided throughout the site. The proposed uses are permitted by
PC RES0 NO. 5693 -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
4.
5.
6.
7.
...
the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. No adverse impacts onsite or on surrounding
properties are expected to occur, based on the project design which contains
adequate building and landscape setbacks to provide a transition to adjacent
properties.
The existing streets and thoroughfares are suitable and adequate to carry the anticipated
traffic thereon in that the subject site will have access from Cannon Road and Hidden
Valley Road, which are fully improved public streets and are adequate to
accommodate the traffic generated by this project. The project is expected to
generate 7,167 ADT, which corresponds to the maximum ADT projected in the
previously certified Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Program EIR for this Planning
Area. The required circulation improvements identified for the Carlsbad Ranch
will therefore still be adequate to accommodate the vehicle trips generated by this
project.
The area surrounding the development is planned and zoned in coordination and
substantial compatibility with the development in that the proposed amendment is to
allow the development of PA 5 with the proposed hotelhimeshare resort without
requiring concurrent development of PA 8 with a golf course.
The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments
thereon, and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (the Program), on
file in the Planning Department, prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
the project; and
b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Program have been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of
Carlsbad; and
c. they reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
d. based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission, finds
that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on
the environment.
The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
PC RES0 NO. 5693 -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
Conditions:
Note:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
...
...
Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the approval
of final map, issuance of grading permit, or issuance of a building permit, whichever
occurs first.
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; record a notice of violation on the
property title; 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 Specific Plan Amendment.
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Specific Plan Amendment 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.
Prior to the issuance of any permits for the project, the applicant shall submit to the
Planning Director a digital copy and a camera-ready master copy of the
CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE - SP 207(E), in
addition to the required number of bound copies.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, LCPA 90-
08(D) and CT 03-02 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 5685,5692 and 5686 for those other approvals incorporated herein by
reference.
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 Specific Plan Amendment,
(b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-
discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein.
PC RES0 NO. 5693 -4- 3- 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that the approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feedexactions
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.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
RLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOBMILLWR
Planning Director
58 I PC RES0 NO. 5693 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5692
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE CARLSBAD
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO ALLOW AN
AMENDMENT TO THE CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC
PLAN FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBJECT SITE
SHARE RESORT INDEPENDENT OF DEVELOPMENT OF
PLANNING AREA 8. THE SUBJECT SITE IS GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON ROAD, EAST
OF ARMADA DRIVE AND WEST OF FARADAY AVENUE
WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
(PLANNING AREA 5) WITH A PROPOSED HOTEUTIME-
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: LCPA 90-08m)
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified
application for an amendment to the Local Coastal Program with the City of Carlsbad regarding
property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding, Inc., “Owner,” described as
Boundary Parcel “A” of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal
Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit “X” dated September 1,2004, attached to Planning
Commission Resolution No. 5693 and on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department,
CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - LCPA 90-08(D) as provided
in Public Resources Code Section 30574 and Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 5.5
of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations of the California Coastal Commission
Administrative Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 0
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, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment; and
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review period
for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on July 1,2004
and ending on August 12,2004, staff shall present to the City Council a summary
of the comments received.
C) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA
5-RESORT SITE - LCPA 90-08(D) based on the following findings and subject
to the following conditions:
Findings:
1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment meets the requirements of, and is
in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and all applicable policies
of the Mello I1 segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program not being amended by
this amendment, in that the proposed amendment in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific
Plan allows for the development of the subject site with a proposed hotelhimeshare
resort independent of development of Planning Area 8. The proposed project is
required to provide drainage and erosion control measures and no other impacts to
Coastal Resources are created by this amendment. Planning Area 8 can still
develop consistent with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
2. That the proposed amendment to the Mello I1 segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal
Program is required to bring it into consistency with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the approval
of final map, issuance of grading permit, or issuance of a building permit, whichever
occurs first.
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
PC RES0 NO. 5692 .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
2.
3.
4.
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; record a notice of violation on the
property title; 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 Local Coastal Program
Amendment.
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Local Coastal Program Amendment 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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, SP 207(E) and
CT 03-02 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions
No. 5685,5693 and 5686 for those other approvals incorporated herein by reference.
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 Local Coastal Program
Amendment, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether
discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that the approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions. 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 feedexactions
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 feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PC RES0 NO. 5692 -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
2f
27
28
.. .
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
/$RANK H. WHITTON, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5692 -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
.- .
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5686
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
SUBDIVIDE A 56.52 ACRE LOT INTO 16 LOTS AND 354
AIRSPACE TIMESHARE UNITS TO ALLOW THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A HOTEL/TIMESHARE RESORT WITH
350 HOTEL ROOMS AND 350 TIMESHARE UNITS ON
PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE
OF CANNON ROAD, EAST OF ARMADA DRIVE AND WEST
OF FARADAY AVENUE! WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES
MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
APPROVAL OF CARLSBAD TRACT NUMBER CT 03-02 TO
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: CT 03-02
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts, Inc. “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding,
Inc., “Owner,” described as
Boundary Parcel “A” of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Tentative Tract
Map as shown on Exhibits “A 1” - “A-44,” “C 1” - “C 33,” “L-1” - “L-23,” and “H 1” - “H
9” - dated August 18, 2004, on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department, CARLSBAD
RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - CT 03-02, as provided by Chapter 20.12 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
L3
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, 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 Tentative Tract Map.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA
5-RESORT SITE - CT 03-02, based on the following findings and subject to the
following conditions:
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
That the proposed map and the proposed design and improvement of the subdivision as
conditioned, is consistent with and satisfies all requirements of the General Plan, any
applicable specific plans, Titles 20 and 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and the State
Subdivision Map Act, and will not cause serious public health problems, in that the
proposed design and improvements for the subdivision are in compliance with
requirements of CMC Titles 20 and 21 and with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan,
and all necessary public facilities and services needed to serve the proposed project
are or will be in place prior to occupancy of any building proposed for the project
site.
That the proposed project is compatible with the surrounding future land uses since
surrounding properties are designated for Travel-Recreation Commercial, and Open
Space on the General Plan, and that the proposed resort development will be
compatible with and will integrate into the existing community.
That the site is physically suitable for the type and density of the development since the
site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate nonresidential development at the
intensity proposed, in that all public facilities and service requirements have been
planned for the maximum buildout allowed under the Carlsbad Ranch Specific
Plan, which this project does not exceed, and all applicable code requirements have
been met relative to the site design.
That the design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will not conflict with
easements of record or easements established by court judgment, or acquired by the
public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision, in
that all existing easements of record within the project are consistent with the
proposal or shall be relocated as necessary concurrent with recordation of the final
map.
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -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
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
That the property is not subject to a contract entered into pursuant to the Land
Conservation Act of 1965 (Williamson Act).
That the design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for fkture passive or
natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that adequate separations
will be provided to allow for breezes to cool the area and landscaping will be
installed to provide shade and reduce the temperature of developed areas. The
proposed buildings are oriented in different directions to take advantage of the
ridge-top location of the site.
That the design of the subdivision and improvements are not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage nor substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their
habitat, in that project site has been used for agricultural purposes and the native
vegetation located at the north-east corner of the site will not be impacted by the
proposed project.
That the discharge of waste from the subdivision will not result in violation of existing
California Regional Water Quality Control Board requirements, in that the project has
been designed in accordance with the Best Management Practices for water quality
protection in accordance with the City’s sewer and drainage standards and the
project is conditioned to comply with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) requirements.
The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in
conformance with the Elements of the City’s General Plan and the Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan based on the facts set forth in the staff report dated August 18, 2004
including but not limited to the following:
A. Land Use - The project is consistent with the City’s General Plan and with
the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan since the subject site has a T-R land use
designation and is designated to be developed as a full service destination
resort, according to the Specific Plan.
B. Circulation - The project is served by existing fully improved public streets
Cannon Road and Hidden Valley Road, which operate at acceptable levels of
service. On-site circulation consists of private streets, which provide access
to hotels, timeshare units and other amenities. The circulation system is
designed to provide adequate access to the proposed lots and complies with
all applicable City design standards and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
C. Noise - The project is conditioned to comply with the 45 dBA CNEL interior
noise standard.
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13 and all City public facility policies and
ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or
provide fLinding 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
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -3- L 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
11.
12.
13.
14.
project will be installed to serve new development prior to or concurrent with need.
Specifically,
a.
b.
Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 20.44, and
will be collected prior to issuance of building permits.
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.
The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments
thereon, and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (the Program), on
file in the Planning Department, prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
the project; and
b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Program have been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of
Carlsbad; and
c. they reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
d. based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission, finds
that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on
the environment.
The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
The project is consistent with the City’s Landscape manual (Carlsbad Municipal Code
Section 14.28.020 and Landscape Manual Section I B).
The Planning Commission hereby finds that all development in Carlsbad benefits fiom
the Habitat Management Plan, which is a comprehensive conservation plan and
implementation program that will facilitate the preservation of biological diversity and
provide for effective protection and conservation of wildlife and plant species while
continuing to allow compatible development in accordance with Carlsbad’s Growth
Management Plan. Preservation of wildlife habitats and sensitive species is required by
the Open Space and Conservation Element of the City’s General Plan which provides for
the realization of the social, economic, aesthetic and environmental benefits from the
preservation of open space within an increasingly urban environment. Moreover, each
new development will contribute to the need for additional regional infrastructure that, in
turn, will adversely impact species and habitats. The In-Lieu Mitigation Fee imposed on
all new development within the City is essential to fund implementation of the City’s
Habitat Management Plan.
PC RESO NO. 5686 -4- 291,
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
15. 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:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the approval
of final map, issuance of grading permit, or issuance of a building permit, whichever
occurs first.
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; record a notice of violation on the
property title; 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 Tentative Tract Map.
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Tentative Tract Map 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.
Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws and
regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment
of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project
are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code
Section 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be
invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies
with all requirements of law.
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 Tentative Tract Map, (b)
City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-
discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein.
The Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24” x 36” mylar
copy of the Tentative Map reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision
making body.
PC RES0 NO. 5686 .5- L?
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
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures, which are required
as part of the Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to
that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits.
Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing
water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that
adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the
time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and
facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy. A note to this effect
shall be placed on the Final Map.
Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of the Project Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and SP 207(E),
LCPA 90-O8(D), SDP 03-02, CDP 03-04, PUD 03-01, CUP 03-01 and HDP 03-01 and
is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5685,
5693, 5692, 5687, 5688, 5689, 5690 and 5691 for those other approvals incorporated
herein by reference.
This project has been found to result in impacts to wildlife habitat or other lands, such as
agricultural lands, which provide some benefits to’ wildlife, as documented in the City’s
Habitat Management Plan and the environmental analysis for this project. Developer is
aware that the City has adopted an In-lieu Mitigation Fee consistent with Section E.6 of
the Habitat Management Plan and City Council Resolution No. 2000-223 to fund
mitigation for impacts to certain categories of vegetation and animal species. The
Developer is flirther aware that the City has determined that all projects will be required
to pay the fee in order to be found consistent with the Habitat Management Plan and the
Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan. The fee becomes effective
following final approval of the Habitat Management Plan. The City is currently updating
the fee study, which is expected to result in an increase in the amount of the fee. If the
Habitat Management Plan is approved, then the Developer or Developer’s successor(s) in
interest shall pay the adjusted amount of the fee. The fee shall be paid prior to
recordation of the final map, or issuance of a grading permit or building permit,
whichever occurs first. If the In-lieu Mitigation Fee for this project is not paid, ths
project will not be consistent with the Habitat Management Plan and the General Plan
and any and all approvals for this project shall become null and void.
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,
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -6- ds
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
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
parcel map or certificate of compliance, required to process the non-residential PUD,
whichever pertains. If linkage fees are required for this project, and they are not paid,
this project will not be consistent with the General Plan and approval for this project will
become null and void.
The Developer shall submit and obtain Planning Director approval of a Final Landscape
and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan
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 thving condition, free from weeds, trash, and debris.
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.
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, shall be free from advertising and shall include at a
minimum a bench and a pole for the bus stop sign. The facilities shall be designed to
enhance or be consistent with basic architectural theme of the project. The design of the
required bus shelter shall be compatible with the project architecture. Plans for the
bus shelter design shall be submitted to the Planning Director and the North County
Transit District for review and approval prior to the issuance of a building permit
for the project. The bus shelter shall be constructed prior to occupancy of the first
phase of the project.
Developer shall construct trash receptacle and recycling areas enclosed by a six-foot high
masonry wall with gates pursuant to City Engineering Standards and Carlsbad Municipal
Code Chapter 21.105. Location of said receptacles shall be approved by the Planning
Director. Enclosure shall be of similar colors andor materials to the project to the
satisfaction of the Planning Director.
No outdoor storage of materials 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.
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 project is approved to be constructed in a maximum of ten (10) phases, as shown
on exhibit “A-44”. Each phasing plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director,
City Engineer, Fire Marshal and Principal Building Inspector for review and
approval prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit. Each phase shall
include proposed buildings, parking, landscaping, hardscape and any improvements
required to serve the uses, located within that phase. Building permits for the first
phase must be issued within 24 months of the date on which the project received
lb9 PC RES0 NO. 5686 -7-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
.- .
final City Council approval or this approval shall expire. ‘Building permits for all
the future phases must be issued within 8 years of the date on which the project
receives final City Council approval or the future phase approval will expire.
The number of buildong permits issued for timeshare units shall never exceed the
number of building permits issued for hotel rooms unless otherwise approved by the
Planning Director.
Occupancy permit for timeshares proposed in Phase 1 will not be issued until such
time that Hotel 1 is fully operational.
The maximum time increment for recurrent exclusive use of occupancy of a
timeshare unit shall be four months. A note indicating this requirement shall be
placed on the final map for the project.
Pursuant to Section 21.42.010(10)(iii) of the CMC, timeshare units in this project
shall be converted to a hotel use if it cannot be successfully marketed as a timeshare
project.
The management and maintenance plan submitted by the Developer titled
“Management And Maintenance Plan-Planning Area 5 Resort Site” attached to this
resolution is approved and made a part of the permit for the project.
Landscape plans prepared for this project shall show landscaping as required by
Section E.3-1.2-2 of the Landscape Manual for the areas of the project not
constructed as part of the initial phase of construction due to the high visibility of
this area to the public.
The Developer shall submit a solid waste management plan for review and approval
by the City of Carlsbad. This plan shall provide the following:
a. The approximate location, type and number of containers to be used to
collect refuse and recyclables.
b. Refuse and recyclable collection methods to be used.
c. A description and site plan for any planned on-site processing facilities or
equipment (balers, compactors).
d. A description of the types of recycling services to be provided and
contractual relationships with vendors to provide these services.
e. The estimated quantity of waste generated and estimated quantities of
recyclable materials.
This plan shall also evaluate the feasibility of the following diversion
programs/measures:
a.
b. Cardboard recycling.
c.
Source separated green waste collection.
Programs which provide for the separation of wet (disposable) and dry
(recoverable) materials.
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -8- 70
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
27.
28.
29.
30.
d.
e. Glass recycling in restaurants.
Where feasible, providing compactors for non-recyclables to reduce the
number of trips to disposal facilities.
The applicant shall retain a qualified hazardous materials specialist to be present
on-site during grading operations to observe any possible contamination such as the
presence of underground facilities, buried debris, stained soils, waste drums, and
tanks or odorous soils. Should such materials be encountered, further investigation
and analysis shall be required to identify the significance of the potentially
contaminated area. Soil remediation measures shall be implemented based on the
recommendations of the hazardous materials specialist.
a.
b.
C.
Randomly selected surface samples shall be collected after each phase of
grading and chemically tested for pesticides to verify that toxaphene and
DDT plus its derivatives are below the established TTLC and STLC action
levels.
During site development, soils contaminated with petroleum hydrocarbons
shall be mitigated. Mitigation techniques shall include:
Place the affected soil beneath a proposed road/parking area as a base
material;
Recycle the affected soil; or
Bio remediate the affected soil on site.
The applicant shall prepare a report documenting results of any future
testing. This report shall indicate the measures taken to mitigate
contamination, as appropriate. The report shall be submitted to the City of
Carlsbad Engineering Department. All recommendations contained in the
report shall be complied with by the applicant.
Developer shall dedicate on the final map, an open space easement for that portion
of the lot which is identified on project plans as a culturally significant site to
prohibit any encroachment or development, including but not limited to fences,
walls, decks, storage buildings, pools, spas, stairways and landscaping.
The developer shall enter into an agreement with the City of Carlsbad that if in the
future a comprehensive open space management program is set up, the developer
will pay its fair share for the management of Planning Area 9 of the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan.
All construction activities shall be planned so that grading will occur in units that can be
easily completed within the summer construction season. All grading operations shall be
limited to April 1 to October 1 each year. All areas disturbed by grading shall be planted
within 60 days of initial disturbance and prior to October 1 with temporary or permanent
(in the case of finished slopes) erosion control methods. The October 1 grading season
deadline may be extended with the approval of the City Engineer subject to
implementation by October 1 of erosion control measures designed to prohibit discharge
71 PC RES0 NO. 5686 -9-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
of sediments offsite during and after the grading operation is completed. Extensions
beyond November 15 may be allowed in areas of very low risk of impact to sensitive
coastal resources and may be approved either as part of the original Coastal Development
Permit or as a formal amendment to an existing Coastal Development Permit.
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 #1 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 13, 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.
Prior to final map approval, 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 Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal
Development Permit, Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit and
Hillside Development Permit by Resolutions No. 5686, 5687, 5688, 5689, 5690 and
5691 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 condition 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 showing of
good cause by the Developer or successor in interest.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall submit to the Planning Director
a recorded copy of the Timeshares/Condominium Plan filed with the Department of Real
Estate which is in conformance with the City approved documents and exhibits.
The Developer shall display a current Zoning and Land Use Map, or an alternative,
suitable to the Planning Director, in the sales office at all times. All sales maps that are
distributed or made available to the public shall include but not be limited to trails, future
and existing schools, parks and streets.
Prior to the recordation of the first final tract map or the issuance of building permits,
whichever occurs first, the Developer shall prepare and record a Notice that this property
is subject to overflight, sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar
Airport, in a form meeting the approval of the Planning Director and the City Attorney
(see Noise Form #2 on file in the Planning Department).
The Developer shall post aircraft noise notification signs in all sales and/or rental offices
associated with the new development. The number and locations of said signs shall be
approved by the Planning Director (see Noise Form #3 on file in the Planning
Department).
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall record an Avigation Easement
for the property to the County of San Diego and file a copy of the recorded document
with the Planning Director.
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -10-
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
38. Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in
conformance with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and shall require review and
approval of the Planning Director prior to installation of such signs.
39. Any damage incurred to existing public trails located on-site shall be repaired to
previous pre-construction condition. The applicant shall be responsible for the
maintenance of the existing trail located along the southern property line.
Engineering;:
General
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
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 subdivision and all
the private improvements: streets, sidewalks, street lights, parkways and street trees,
storm drain and water quality treatment facilities located therein and to distribute the
costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties
within the subdivision.
There shall be one Final Map recorded for this project.
Developer shall install sight distance corridors (see below for types) at all street
intersections in accordance with Engineering Standards and shall record the following
statement on the Final Map (and in the CC&Rs).
Type I
"No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, siLgn, or other object over 30 inches above the
street level may be placed-or permitted tokncroach within the area identified as a sight
distance corridor in accordance with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section
8.B.3. The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition."
Type I1
"No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object shall be placed or
permitted on the subject property within the Caltrans corner sight distance
corridors. No obstructions shall impede nor conflict with the line-of-sight which is
established per City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.1 The sight
line is depicted on the tentative map. The underlying property owner shall
maintain this condition."
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -1 1- 73
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 limits of these sight distance corridors shall be reflected on any improvement,
grading, or landscape plan prepared in association with this development.
Developer shall cause property owner to apply for and obtain reapportionment of the
assessments imposed on the subject project in accordance with law governing the
associated Carlsbad Ranch Assessment District (AD 95-01), or the assessments must be
paid in full. Developer shall pay all associated costs of said reapportionment. The
application shall be submitted to the City Engineer with the application for the final map.
45.
FeedAgreements
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
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 subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street
Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1 and/or to the formation or annexation into an
additional Street Lighting and Landscaping District. Said written consent shall be
on a form provided by the City Engineer.
Developer shall execute and record a City standard Basin Maintenance Agreement prior
to the approval of grading, building permit or final map, whichever occurs first for this
Project.
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.
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.
Developer shall cause property owner to execute, record and submit a recorded copy to
the City Engineer, a deed restriction on the property which relates to the proposed cross
lot drainage as shown on the Tentative Map. 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
C. State that all future use of the property along the drainage course will not restrict,
impede, divert or othenvise'alter drainage flows in a manner that will result in
damage to the underlying and adjacent properties or the creation of a public
nuisance.
Grading
51. 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.
74 PC RES0 NO. 5686 -12-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
52. Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the
Tentative Map, a grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall apply for and
obtain a grading permit from the City Engineer.
Dedications/Improvements
53.
54.
55.
56.
Developer shall cause Owner to make an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City
and/or other appropriate entities for all public streets and other easements shown on the
Tentative Map. The offer shall be made by a certificate on the final map and/or by
separate document. All land so offered shall be offered free and clear of all liens and
encumbrances and without cost. Streets that 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.
Developer shall execute and record a City standard Subdivision Improvement Agreement
to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public improvements
shown on the Tentative Map and the following improvements including, but not limited
to paving, base, signing & striping, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, medians, grading,
clearing and grubbing, undergrounding or relocation of facilities, sewer, water, fire
hydrants, street lights, water quality treatment and reclaimed water, to City Standards
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The improvements are:
a) Onsite improvements including but not limited to sewer, water, recycled
water, storm drain, water quality treatment facilities, and streets and as
shown on the Tentative Map.
b) Developer shall design and install a fully-actuated traffic signal, including all
appurtenances, interconnects and Video Detection at the intersection of Cannon
Road and the entrance to this project to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The traffic signal shall not be installed until such time that written approval is
received from the City Engineer.
A list of the above shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the Final Map per the
provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act. Improvements listed above
shall be constnicted within 18 months of approval of the subdivision or development
improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement.
Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first,
Developer shall submit for City approval a “Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP).” The SWPPP shall be in compliance with current requirements and provisions
established by the San Diego Region of the California Regional Water Quality Control
Board and City of Carlsbad Requirements. The SWPPP shall address measures to reduce
to the maximum extent practicable storm water pollutant runoff during construction of
the project. At a minimum, the SWPPP shall:
7s PC RES0 NO. 5686 -13-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a.
b.
c.
include all content as established by the California Regional Water Quality
Control Board requirements;
include the receipt of “Notice of Intent” issued by the California Regional Water
Quality Control Board;
recommend source control and treatment control Best Management Practices
(BMPs) that will be implemented with this project to avoid contact or filter said
pollutants from storm water to the maximum extent practicable before discharging
to City right-of-way or natural drainage course; and
establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special
considerations and effort shall be applied to employee education on the proper
procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants.
d.
57. Prior to the issuance of grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first,
Developer shall submit for City approval a “Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP).”
The SWMP shall demonstrate compliance with the City of Carlsbad Standard Urban
Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), Order 2001-01 issued by the San Diego Region of
the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of Carlsbad Municipal
Code. The SWMP shall address measures to avoid contact or filter said pollutants from
storm water, to the maximum extent practicable, for the post-construction stage of the
project. At a minimum, the SWMP shall:
a.
b.
c.
identify existing and post-development on-site pollutants-of-concern;
identify the hydrologic unit this project contributes to and impaired water bodies
that could be impacted by this project;
recommend source controls and treatment controls that will be implemented with
this project to avoid contact or filter said pollutants from storm water to the
maximum extent practicable before discharging to City right-of-way;
establish specific procedures for handling spills and routine clean up. Special
considerations and effort shall be applied to resident education on the proper
procedures for handling clean up and disposal of pollutants;
ensure long-term maintenance of all post construct BMPs in perpetuity; and
identify how post-development runoff rates and velocities from the site will not
exceed the pre-development runoff rates and velocities to the maximum extent
practicable.
d.
e.
f.
58. Developer shall incorporate into the gradinghmprovement plans the design for the project
drainage outfall end treatments for any drainage outlets where a direct access road for
maintenance purposes is not practical. These end treatments shall be designed so as to
prevent vegetation growth from obstructing the pipe outfall. Designs could consist of a
modified outlet headwall consisting of an extended concrete spillway section with
longitudinal curbing and/or radially designed rip-rap, or other means deemed appropriate,
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -14-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Final Map Notes
59. Note(s) to the followi Ffect(s) shall be placed on the map as non-mapping data
A. Building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless
the appropriate agency determines that sewer and water facilities are available.
B. Geotechnical Caution:
1. The owner of this property on behalf of itself and all of its successors in
interest has agreed to hold harmless and indemnify the City of Carlsbad
from any action that may arise through any geological failure, ground
water seepage or land subsidence and subsequent damage that may occur
on, or adjacent to, this subdivision due to its construction, operation or
maintenance.
C. No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches above
the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified
as sight distance corridors.
Special Condition:
60. The Average Daily Trips (ADT) and floor area contained in the staff report and
shown on the Tentative Map are for planning purposes only. Developer shall pay
traffic impact and sewer impact fees based on Section 18.42 and Section 13.10 of the
City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, respectively. Bridge and Thoroughfare District
No. 3 (B&TD#3) fees shall be paid in accordance with the fee payment provisions
contained within the B&TD#3 fee study report.
Water
61.
62.
63.
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 District 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 Dieao County Water
Authority capacity charae(s1 prior to issuance of Building Permits.
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -15-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
The Developer shall prepare a colored recycled water use map and submit this map for
processing and approval by the District Engineer. A copy of the approved exhibit shall
accompany the landscape, improvement and grading plans for reference.
The Developer shall design landscape and irrigation plans utilizing recycled water as a
source. Said plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the District Engineer.
The Developer shall install potable water and recycled water services and meters at a
location approved by the District Engineer. 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
District Engineer. 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 Tentative Map to the satisfaction of the District
Engineer. Proposed public facilities shall be reflected on public improvement plans.
Prior to Final Map approval or issuance of building perrnits, 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
District Engineer.
The Developer shall coordinate with the District Engineer regarding the looped system
and easements.
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.
Code Reminders:
The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to
the following:
72. The tentative map shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date this tentative map
approval becomes final.
73. Developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to
prevent offsite siltation. Planning and erosion control shall be provided in accordance
with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 15.16 (the Grading Ordinance) to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -16- 18
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
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
The Developer shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the City, prior to the approval of the final
map as required by Chapter 20.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
The Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section
20.08.050 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
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.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees, dedications,
reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exa~tions.’~
You have 90 days from date of approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions. 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 feedexactions
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 feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
...
...
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -17-
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
Commissi
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
n of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES : Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
AB SENT : Commissioner C ardo s a
ABSTAIN:
H. WHITTON, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HOL~-IL&R
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5686 -18-
MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PLAN
PLANNING AREA 5 RESORT SITE
The property will be managed by a timeshare management company, Grand
Pacific Resort Services Company LLC (an affiliate of the developer) which will be
responsible for all facets of the operation including:
I Housekeeping - maids' salaries, laundry, cleaning supplies, etc;
I Maintenance - covers both scheduled routine upkeep and special repairs
needed for building, amenities and grounds;
a Utilities - water, sewer, electricity, etc. for units and common areas;
Front Desk - salaries for front desk, reception, PBX operators, activities
department, etc.;
I Insurance - including fire and casualty, flood, earthquake and liability;
Reserves - a reserve fund is established to provide for the long-term
replacement of furnishings, fixtures and building rehab; and
Management - includes a management fee based on a percentage of the
operating expenses excluding reserves.
Management will be performed under a written management contract between
Grand Pacific Resort Services Company LLC and the timeshare homeowners
association. The California Department of Real Estate requires that all timeshare
homeowners associations enter into management contracts with a recognized
management company prior to the Department's issuance of the Public Report. The
management contract has an initial term of three years with automatic three-year
renewal terms. (This is the same arrangement as at the seven other Southern
California timeshare projects managed by Grand Pacific Resorts Services Company
LLC or its affiliate.)
The resort is operated on the same basis as a hotel, but without the seasonal
layoffs often necessary in a hotel due to seasonal occupancy variations. The resort will
have a 24-hour front desk. Main services will include a major weekly cleaning, a light
cleaning mid-week, and trash and towel service.
A maintenance staff of 240 (at build-out) people will be employed on-site. Most
maintenance functions will be performed by the on-site staff. Other functions are
performed by Grand Pacific Resort Services Company LLC staff from the other resorts it
manages, who specialize in other facets of the operation such as landscaping or
locksmiths. Other facets of the operation such as pool maintenance and pest control
are performed by outside contractors.
1 *
AOMIN/CORPILWLEGO/MANAGEMENTANO MAINTENANCE. DOC
h
The cost of needed repairs and refurbishment is paid through the annual
homeowners association assessment on all timeshare owners. The homeowners
association adopts an annual budget of the cost of operating the resort including all
salaries, benefits, supplies, contract costs, utilities and insurance. The homeowners
association levies an assessment annually on all timeshare owners, pursuant to the
project's recorded covenants, conditions and restrictions. The assessment averages
$550 per unit week per year at Grand Pacific Resort Services Company LLC's other
resorts.
In addition, the homeowners association assesses a reserve for replacement for
capital expenses such as furniture, roof and appliances. The replacement reserve
assessment is approximately $1 00 per unit week per year (which equates to
approximately $5,100 per unit per year). This preserves the quality of the resort over
time and provides for major future replacement items without special assessment.
Homeowners associate budgets and reserves are closely monitored and audited
by the Department of Real Estate prior to its initial issuance or subsequent renewal of a
Public Report.
2
AOMINICORP/LKILEGO/MNAGEMENTAND MAINTENANCE. DOC
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5687
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HOTEL/TIMESHARE
RESORT WITH 350 HOTEL ROOMS AND 350 TIMESHARE
UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON ROAD, EAST OF ARMADA
DRIVE AND WEST OF FARADAY AVENUE WITHIN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SDP 03-02 TO
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: SDP 03-02
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding,
Inc., “Owner,” described as
Boundary Parcel “A” of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site Development
Plan as shown on Exhibits “A 1” - “A-44,” “C 1” - “C 33,” “L-1” - “L-23,” and “H 1” - “H
9” dated August 18, 2004, on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department, CARLSBAD RANCH
PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - SDP 03-02 as provided by Chapter 21.06 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the SDP.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the PIanning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA
5-RESORT SITE - SDP 03-02 based on the following findings and subject to
the following conditions:
Findings:
1. That the requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and environmental
settings, is consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, will
not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area in which
the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroundings or
traffic circulation, in that the project design complies with the requirements of the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan which was found to be consistent with the various
elements and objectives of the General Plan. Varying building setbacks have been
incorporated into the project design. Pedestrian connections are provided
throughout the site. The proposed uses are permitted by the Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan. No adverse impacts onsite or on surrounding properties are expected
to occur, based on the project design which contains adequate building and
landscape setbacks to provide a transition to adjacent properties.
2.
3.
That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use,
in that the project complies with all City policies and standards including the
underlying C-T-Q Zone and the standards and design criteria established by the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The proposed parking reduction is consistent with
the shared parking provisions of Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.44.050(a).
The parking necessary to meet the peak hourly demand of the project will be
provided on the project site along with all other design features such as parking lot
landscaping. The proposed parking reduction of 9 percent equals 130 parking’
spaces. The Parking Analysis prepared for the project supports this reduction.
That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust
the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be
provided and maintained, in that the project is consistent with the design criteria of
the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Varying setbacks have been provided to reduce
the amount of building mass. Adequate vehicle circulation is provided in addition
to loading spaces. The project is proposed to be developed in phases and is
conditioned to provide landscaping with each phase. Pedestrian connections have
been provided throughout the site linking various uses proposed on-site.
4. That the street systems serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic
generated by the proposed use, in that the subject site will have access from Cannon
Road and Hidden Valley Road which are fully improved public streets and are
8f PC RES0 NO. 5687 -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
adequate to accommodate the traffic generated by this project. The project is
expected to generate 7,167 ADT which corresponds to the maximum ADT projected
in the previously certified Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Program EIR for this
Planning Area. The required circulation improvements identified for the Carlsbad
Ranch will therefore still be adequate to accommodate the vehicle trips generated by
this project.
5. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13 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.
Specifically,
a. Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 20.44, and
will be collected prior to issuance of building permits.
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.
6. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments
thereon, and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (the Program), on
file in the Planning Department, prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
the project; and
b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Program have been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of
Carlsbad; and
c. they reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
d. based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission, finds
that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on
the environment.
7. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
8. 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
PC RES0 NO. 5687 -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
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:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the approval
of final map, issuance of grading permit, or issuance of a building permit, whichever
occurs first.
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; record a notice of violation on the
property title; 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 Site Development Plan.
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Site Development Plan 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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and SP 207(E),
LCPA 90-O8(D), CT 03-02, CDP 03-04, PUD 03-01, CUP 03-01 and HDP 03-01 and is
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5685,5693,
5692, 5686, 5688, 5689, 5690 and 5691 for those other approvals incorporated herein
by reference.
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 Site Development Plan, (b)
City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non-
discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein.
A parking study is required within one year of the completion of each phase of the
project to determine if there is a shortage of parking spaces onsite to accommodate
the parking demand generated by the project. Building permits for the subsequent
phase or phases of the project will not be issued unless this requirement .is complied
with. Should the Planning Director determine at any time that the parking supply
onsite is inadequate, he shall have the authority to require any mitigation measures
he deems necessary to eliminate any parking problems.
@ PC RES0 NO. 5687 -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
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that the approval of your project includes the “imposition of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions. 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 feedexactions
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 feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
AB STAIN:
&2m -_
I%. WHITTON, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5687 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5688
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CDP
TIMESHARE RESORT WITH 350 HOTEL ROOMS AND 350
TIMESHARE UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON ROAD, EAST
OF ARMADA DRIVE AND WEST OF FARADAY AVENUE
WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
03-04 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HOTEU
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: CDP 03-04
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding,
Inc., “Owner” described as
Boundary Parcel “A” of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for Coastal
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A 1” - “A-44,” “C 1” - “C 33,” “L-1” - “L-23,”
and “H 1” - “H 9,’ dated August 18, 2004, on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department,
CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - CDP 03-04 as provided by
Chapter 21.201.040 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the CDP.
ff
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA
5-RESORT SITE - CDP 03-04 based on the following findings and subject to
the following conditions:
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
That the proposed development is in conformance with the Mello I1 Segment of the
Certified Local Coastal Program and all applicable policies in that the subject site is
designated as Tourist-RecreationaVCommercial and the proposed use of hotel/
timeshares is consistent with the LCP Land Use Plan designation.
The proposal is in conformity with the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3
of the Coastal Act in that the project is not located adjacent to the shore. Therefore,
the project will not interfere with the public’s right to physical access to the sea and
the site is not suited for water-oriented recreational activities.
The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay
Zone (Chapter 21.203 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that the proposed project will adhere
to the City’s Master Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinances, Storm Water Ordinance,
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) and Jurisdictional Urban Runoff
Management Program (JURMP) to avoid increased urban run off, pollutants and soil
erosion. No steep slopes or native vegetation is located on the subject property and the
site is not located in an area prone to landslides, or susceptible to accelerated erosion,
floods or liquefaction.
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13 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.
Specifically,
a. Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 20.44, and
will be collected prior to issuance of building permits.
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.
The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
89 PC RES0 NO. 5688 -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
a.
b.
C.
d.
6. The
it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments
thereon, and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (the Program), on
file in the Planning Department, prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
the project; and
the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Program have 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
they reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission, finds
that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on
the environment.
Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
7. The project is not located in the Coastal Agriculture Overlay Zone, according to Map X of
the Land Use Plan, certified September 1990 and, therefore, is not subject to the
provisions of the Coastal Agriculture Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.202 of the Zoning
Ordinance).
8. The project is not located between the sea and the first public road parallel to the sea and,
therefore, is not subject to the provisions of the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay
Zone (Chapter 21.204 of the Zoning Ordinance).
9. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed
to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the
degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
Conditions:
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to the approval
of final map, issuance of grading permit, or issuance of a building permit, whichever
occurs first.
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; record a notice of violation on the
90 PC RES0 NO. 5688 -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
2.
3.
4.
property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said
conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer
or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of this Coastal Development Permit.
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Coastal Development 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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and SP 207(E),
LCPA 90-08(D), CT 03-02, SDP 03-02, PUD 03-01, CUP 03-01 and HDP 03-01 and is
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5685,5693,
5692, 5686, 5687, 5689, 5690 and 5691 for those other approvals incorporated herein
by reference.
Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold
harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims
and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising, directly
or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Coastal Development
Permit, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or
non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that the approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified feedexactions
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 feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
...
PC RES0 NO. 5688 -4- 9f
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 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
BANK H. WHI?"TON, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
la-
MICHAEL J. HOMMIL~~ER
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5688 -5- 9a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5689
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF NON-RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PUD 03-01 TO SUBDIVIDE A 56.52
ACRE LOT INTO 16 LOTS AND 354 TIMESHARE UNITS TO
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HOTEUTIMESHARE
RESORT WITH 350 HOTEL ROOMS AND 350 TIMESHARE
UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON ROAD, EAST OF ARMADA
DRIVE AND WEST OF FARADAY AVENUE WITHIN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: PUD 03-01
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding,
Inc., “Owner,” described as
Boundary Parcel “A” of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof NO. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Non-Residential
Planned Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A 1” - “A-44,” “C 1” - “C 33,” “L-1” -
“L-23,” and “H 1” - “H 9” dated August 18, 2004, on file in the Carlsbad Planning
Department, CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - PUD 03-01 as
provided by Chapter 21.47 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
28
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the PUD.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA
5-RESORT SITE - PUD 03-01 based on the following findings and subject to
the following conditions:
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
The granting of this permit 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 project is
consistent with the [T-R] TraveVRecreation Commercial General Plan Land Use
designation and is in compliance with all standards including the requirements of
the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary and desirable to provide a
service or facility which will contribute to the long-term general well-being of the
neighborhood and the community, in that the development of hotel and timeshare units
and associated recreation facilities is consistent with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific
Plan and is compatible with adjacent existing and planned land uses.
That such use 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 project design conforms to all design and development standards
pursuant to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Public improvements will be
provided concurrent with development of the project to meet all city standards. All
manufactured slopes will be landscaped to prevent erosion and visually screen the
slopes.
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13 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.
Specifically,
PC RES0 NO. 5689 -2- 94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
a. Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 20.44, and
will be collected prior to issuance of building permits.
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.
5. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative DecIaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments
thereon, and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (the Program), on
file in the Planning Department, prior to RECOMMEmING APPROVAL of
the project; and
b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Program have been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of
Carlsbad; and
c. they reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
d. based on the EIA Part II and comments thereon, the Planning Commission, finds
that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on
the environment.
6. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
7. 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 the approval of
final map, issuance of grading permit, or issuance of a building permit, whichever
occurs first.
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; record a notice of violation on the
PC RES0 NO. 5689 -3- 93-
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
2.
3.
4.
property title; 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 Non-Residential Planned
Development Permit.
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Non-Residential Planned Development 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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and SP 207(E),
LCPA 90-08(D), CT 03-02, SDP 03-02, CDP 03-04, CUP 03-01 and HDP 03-01 and is
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5685,5693,
5692, 5686, 5687, 5688, 5690 and 5691 for those other approvals incorporated herein
by reference.
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 Non-Residential Planned
Development Permit, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether
discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that the approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions. 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 feedexactions
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 feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PC RES0 NO. 5689 -4- 9b
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
Commissi
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
f the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
ABSTAIN:
RLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5689 -5 - 97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5690
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HOTEUTIMESHARE
RESORT WITH 350 HOTEL ROOMS AND 350 TIMESHARE
UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE
SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON ROAD, EAST OF ARMADA
DRIVE AND WEST OF FARADAY AVENUE WITHIN LOCAL
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 03-01 TO
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: CUP 03-01
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding,
I
Inc., “Owner,” described as
Boundary Parcel “A” of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Con itional Use
Permit as shown on Exhibits “A 1” - “A-44,” “C 1” - “C 33,” “L-1” - “L-23,” and “H 1” -
“H 9” dated August 18, 2004, on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department, CARLSBAD
RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - CUP 03-01 as provided by Chapter 21.42 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the CUP.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
€3) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA
5-RESORT SITE - CUP 03-01 based on the following findings and subject t0
the following conditions:
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
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 timeshares are allowed uses on the subject site with
City Council’s approval, pursuant to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The
proposed project is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use,
in that the project complies with all City policies and standards including the
underlying C-T-Q Zone and the standards and design criteria established by the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan.
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 required buildings and landscape setbacks have
been provided in addition to an onsite circulation design which complies with City
of Carlsbad standards. The proposed landscaping is consistent with the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan and Landscape Manual.
That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic
generated by the proposed use, in that the project will generate 7,167 average daily
trips (ADT) which corresponds to the maximum ADT projected in the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan Program EIR for this planning area. The required circulation
improvements identified for the Carlsbad Ranch will therefore still be adequate to
accommodate the vehicle trips generated by this project.
The Planning Commission finds that the timeshare project is located in reasonable
proximity to an existing resort or public recreational area and therefore can financially
and geographically function as a successful timeshare project and that the project will not
be disruptive to existing or future uses in the surrounding neighborhood in that the
proposed project is located adjacent to LEGOLAND theme park and can function
financially as a successful timeshare project. The project is also consistent with
other proposed and existing non-residential land uses in the surrounding
neighborhood.
PC RES0 NO. 5690 -2- 99
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
6. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13 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.
Specifically,
a. Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 20.44, and
will be collected prior to issuance of building permits.
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 pennit.
7. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments
thereon, and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (the Program), on
file in the Planning Department, prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
the project; and
b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Program have been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the
State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of
Carlsbad; and
c. they reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
d. based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission, finds
that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on
the environment.
8. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
9. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed
to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the
degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
...
PC RES0 NO. 5690 -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
Conditions:
Note:
1.
2.
3.
4.
...
...
...
...
...
...
satisfied prior to th Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall b approval
of final map, issuance of grading permit, or issuance of a building permit, whichever
occurs first.
If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terns, 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; record a notice of violation on the
property title; 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.
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.
This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and SP 207(E),
LCPA 90-08(D), CT 03-02, SDP 03-02, CDP 03-04, PUD 03-01 and HDP 03-01 and is
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5685, 5693,
5692, 5686,5687,5688, 5689 and 5691 for those other approvals incorporated herein
by reference.
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.
PC RES0 NO. 5690 -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
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that the approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these feedexactions. 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 NOTIFED 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.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
NOES:
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
.,&ANK H. WHITTON, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5690 -5-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5691
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HDP 03-
01 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HOTEUTIME-
SHARE RESORT WITH 350 HOTEL ROOMS AND 350
TIMESHARE UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CANNON ROAD, EAST
OF ARMADA DRIVE AND WEST OF FARADAY AVENUE
WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 13.
CASENAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-
RESORT SITE
CASE NO.: HDP 03-01
WHEREAS, Grand Pacific Resorts Inc., “Developer,” has filed a verified
application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by Carlsbad Estate Holding,
Inc., “Owner,” described as
Boundary Parcel “A” of C.O.C. recorded March 9, 1998 as
Doc. #1998-125301 per City of Carlsbad Boundary Adjustment
Plat No. 498 and Lot 20 of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, in the City of
Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according
to Map thereof No. 13408, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County on April 1,1997
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Hillside
Development Permit as shown on Exhibits “A 1” - “A-44,” “C 1” - “C 33,” “L-1” - “L-23,”
and “H 1” - “H 9” dated August 18, 2004, on file in the Carlsbad Planning Department,
CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - HDP 03-01 as provided by
Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 1st day of September 2004,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the HDP.
io 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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA
5-RESORT SITE - HDP 03-01 based on the following findings and subject to
the following conditions:
Findings:
1. Undevelopable areas of the project, pursuant to Section 21.53.230(b) of the CMC, have
been properly identified.
2. The project complies with the purpose and intent provisions of Sections 21.95.010 and
21.95.612 of the CMC in that hillside conditions are properly identified and are
incorporated in the design. The project is designed to relate to the slope of the land
and alteration of natural hillside will be done in an environmentally sensitive
manner so that lagoons and riparian ecosystems will be protected from increased
erosion and no substantial impacts to natural resources, wildlife habitats or native
areas will occur.
3. The project design substantially conforms to the hillside development guidelines manual
in that the project complies with the design standards contained in the manual which
include screening of hillside drainage and grading volumes.
4. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local
Facilities Management Plan for Zone 13 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.
Specifically,
a. Park-in-lieu fees are required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 20.44, and
will be collected prior to issuance of building permits.
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.
5 The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project and said comments
thereon, and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program (the Program), on
PC RES0 NO. 5691 -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
file in the Planning Department, prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
the project; and
the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Program have 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
b.
c. they reflect the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad; and
d. based on the EIA Part I1 and comments thereon, the Planning Commission, finds
that there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on
the environment.
6. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that
during project implementation the Developer and any other responsible parties implement
the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in
the CEQA Findings and the Program.
7. 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 the approval of
final map, issuance of grading permit, or issuance of a building permit, whichever
occurs first.
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; record a notice of violation on the
property title; 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 Hillside Development Permit.
2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections
and modifications to the Hillside Development 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. This approval is granted subject to the approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and SP 207(E),
PC RES0 NO. 5691 -3- 105-
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
LCPA 90-O8(D), CT 03-02, SDP 03-02, CDP 03-04, PUD 03-01 and CUP 03-01 and is
subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5685,5693,
5692, 5686, 5687, 5688, 5689 and 5690 for those other approvals incorporated herein
by reference.
4. 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 Hillside Development
Permit, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or
non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that the approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“feedexactions.”
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously been given a
NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
...
...
...
...
...
PC RES0 NO. 5691 -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
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of September 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez,
Heineman, Montgomery, and Segall
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa
ABSTAIN:
.2&2+-
/$RANK H. WHITTON, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RES0 NO. 5691 -5-
EXHIBIT 5
The City of Carlsbad Planning Department
P.C. AGENDA OF: September 1,2004
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Application complete date: January 14, 2004
Project Planner: Saima Qureshy
Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham
ST JBJECT: SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-
Ol/HDP 03-01 - CAFUSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local
Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan,
Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit,
Conditional Use Permit and Hillside Development Permit for the development of
a full service hotel/timeshare resort. At buildout, the project will have a total of
350 hotel rooms, 350 timeshare units, two restaurants, meeting rooms and
conference facilities for 2,000 occupants, and recreational amenities including
pools, tennis courts and a sports center. The subject site is 56.52 acres in area and
is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of
Faraday Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 13.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5685,
RECOMMENDING ADOPTION of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions
No. 5693,5692,5686,5687,5688,5689,5690 and 5691 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of
Specific Plan Amendment (SP 207(E)), Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 90-08(D)),
Tentative Tract Map (CT 03-02), Site Development Plan (SDP 03-02), Coastal Development
Plan (CDP 03-04), Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Plan (PUD 03-01), Conditional
Use Permit (CUP 03-01) and Hillside Development Permit (HDP 03-01) based on the findings
and subject to the conditions contained therein.
11. INTRODUCTION
The applicant proposes to develop Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan with a
full service hotelhimeshare resort. At buildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms,
350 timeshare units, two restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000
occupants, and recreational amenities including swimming pools, tennis courts and a sports
center. The subject site, Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, is currently used
for fanning. The subject site is 56.52 acres in area and is located on the south side of Cannon
Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday Avenue within Local Facilities Management
Zone 13. The development of the proposed resort project requires the processing and approval
of a Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site
Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development,
Conditional Use Permit and Hillside Development Permit. The Conditional Use Permit for the
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04PTJD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 -RESORT SITE
September 1 , 2004
Paae 2
project is being requested pursuant to Municipal Code Section 21.44.050(a)(5) to allow the
provision of common parking facilities resulting in a 9% parking reduction from the sum of the
various uses computed separately. This section of the zoning ordinance contains provisions for a
maximum parking reduction of 15%. An analysis of the hourly parking demand for all the uses
proposed for the site has been prepared.
The proposed land uses of hotel, timeshares and other associated amenities are included in the
list of permitted uses for Planning Area 5 in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The project as
designed and conditioned is in compliance with all City standards including the General Plan,
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, Local Coastal Program and the Zoning Ordinance.
The project will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative
Declaration has been prepared for the project. Environmental impacts for the proposed project
were also previously analyzed in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program Environmental
Impact Report (EIR 94-01, SCH #95051001). The project conforms to all applicable standards,
there are no outstanding project issues, and findings can be made for approval of the project.
The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan requires that the City Council make the final decision to
approve or disapprove the Site Development Plan.
111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Project Site:
The subject site, Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, is 56.52 acres in size and
is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday Avenue.
Land uses surrounding the subject site include open space, a water reservoir and the future City
of Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course to the east, Cannon Road and agricultural uses to the north,
LEGOLAND to the south, and a vacant property to the west. The site is currently being used for
agricultural purposes. Primary access to the site will be taken from Cannon Road and a second
access will be provided from Hidden Valley Road.
Topographically the site is characterized by gently sloping land, increasing in steepness towards
the eastern side of the site. The highest elevation of the site is on the easterly side, towards the
middle of the property.
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan:
The City Council adopted the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan in 1995 to provide a comprehensive
set of guidelines, regulations and an implementation program to ensure the orderly development
of the Carlsbad Ranch in accordance with the General Plan. The Specific Plan defines the
allowable type and intensity of land uses, provides development and design standards and
criteria, and describes implementation methods. The permitted land uses in the Specific Plan
area are a mix of non-residential uses which include the LEGOLAND theme park, the
Gemological Institute of America campus, a hotel, a destination resort, flower fields, golf course
and light manufacturing/offices. The subject site, described as “Planning Area - 5 (PA 5)” in the
Specific Plan, was designated for a full service destination resort. Permitted uses for the site are
hotels and timeshares, which may be permitted by the City Council in conjunction with a hotel.
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PT.JD 03-01/CUl' 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 -RESORT SITE
September 1 , 2004
Approximate
Resort and Conference Facilities Unit Square Quantities Footage
Resort Administration and Support N/A 26,000 S.F. fi 120 seats 9,500 S.F.
Meeting Rooms and Support 2,000 seats 33,000 S.F.
Guest Service and Buildings 2 buildings 2,000 S.F.
Utility and Storage Buildings 3 buildings 3,000 S.F.
Total 73.500 S. F.
~
Proposed amendment to the Specific Plan: At the time of the approval of the Specific Plan, it
was anticipated that PA 5 would develop concurrently with a private golf course on PA 8. It was
assumed, for purposes of the Specific Plan description, that the golf course would be developed
concurrently with the hotel project on PA 5 and by the same developer. The golf course was
intended to be 18 holes in size and golf holes were to be located within PA 8 and a portion of the
SDG&E property located north of Cannon Road. At the time, a lease arrangement was being
negotiated by SDG&E and the original owner to provide for the golf course holes on the SDG&E
property.
~ Commercial Building Pads
Restaurant #I
Sports Center
Total
Since that time, the prospective developer of PA 5 (Pointe Resorts) abandoned its plans for
development of PA 5 and the lease arrangement with SDG&E. Today, PA 5 and PA 8 are under
separate ownerships and the SDG&E land is not available for golf course use.
1 7,000 S.F.
1 3,000 S.F.
10.000 S. F.
Because of the change of circumstances, it became necessary for the applicant to amend the
Specific Plan to develop PA 5 as a stand-alone project without concurrently developing PA 8 as
a golf course.
Proposed Proiect:
The proposed project is for the development of a fill service hoteytimeshare resort. At buildout,
the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms, 350 timeshare units, two restaurants, meeting
rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants, and various recreational amenities including
pools, tennis courts and a sports center. The project will be directly accessible from Cannon
Road and also from Hidden Valley Road. Internal circulation for the project is provided by a
number of private streets. The project will generate 7,167 average daily trips (ADT), which
corresponds to the ADT projected in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Program EIR for this
planning area. The required circulation improvements identified in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific
Plan will therefore still be adequate to accommodate the vehicle trips generated by this project.
The following table summarizes various uses proposed and their square footage.
Table 1: PROJECT AREA SUMMARY
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1 , 2004
Hotel Building 1
Hotel Building 2
125 units 78,800 S.F.
125 units 69.420 S.F.
Hotel Building 3
Undernround Parking Structure - Hotel Building 1
100 units 64,010 S.F.
N/A 34.400 S.F. 1 N/A 17,600 S.F.
~~ Total 264,230 S.F.
Timeshare Villa Buildings
Total - Villa Buildings #1 through #27
APPROXIMATE TOTAL PROJECT BUILDING AREA
I 350 units
Following is a description of each of the components of the resort.
357,300 S.F.
705,030 S. F.
Conference Facilities: The main conference facilityhesort building is proposed to be located
along the eastern property line, in the central portion of the site. The building will be one story
high and will be able to accommodate up to 2,000 people in 33,000 square feet of meeting room
space. An additional 26,000 square feet will be utilized for resort administration and support.
The main entrance to the resort will be through the porte cochere, which will be enhanced with
lighting features and landscaping. The hotel buildings and amenities of the resort will be easily
accessible from the conference facility. The conference facilities will be a valuable resource for
businesses in the surrounding areas in need of large meeting spaces.
Restaurant: The applicant is proposing two restaurants to be developed on the subject site. A
7,000 square foot stand-alone restaurant is proposed adjacent to Cannon Road, which will
service hotel guests as well as the general public due to its accessible and prominent position.
The second restaurant is proposed to be located in the main conferencehesort building. The
location of this 3,000 square foot restaurant provides a close and convenient restaurant option for
hotel guests and conference attendees and will also be open to the general public.
Hotel Buildings: Three separate hotel buildings are proposed for a total of 350 hotel rooms.
These three buildings will be located along the eastern side of the project site, in the central
portion of the property. All three buildings will be a maximum of 35 feet high and will have
three stories. The hotel buildings will consist of standard one-bedroom hotels units,
approximately 430 square feet in size. Hotel buildings 1 and 2 will contain 125 rooms, while
hotel building 3 will contain 100 rooms. All hotel units will have exterior decks to take
advantage of surrounding views. Low patio walls will be located at poolside ground level units
to provide an added sense of privacy for hotel guests. Palm trees, small shrubs and turf areas
will be located around all sides of each building.
Timeslznre Villas: The project is proposed to be developed with 350 timeshare units, located in
27 different villa buildings. Seven buildings are clustered at the northeastern corner of the
property, near the Cannon Road entrance. Twelve additional buildings are clustered on the
northwestern side of the property, while the remaining eight buildings are clustered in the
southern portion of the project site, near the entrance from Hidden Valley Road. Twenty-two of
the Villa buildings are three stories and a maximum of 35 feet high, while five of the Villa
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNrNG AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
buildings are two stories and a maximum of 27 feet high. The number of timeshare units
contained in each building ranges from 8 to 22 units. Five different timeshare villa building
layouts are proposed, ranging in size fi-om 8,400 square feet to 25,610 square feet. All villa units
will have exterior patios or balconies to take advantage of surrounding views. Palm trees, small
shrubs and other ground cover are proposed to be planted on all sides of the buildings.
Approximately 50% of the units (178 units) will be lock-off units. Lock-off units allow a portion
(typically one bedroom and one bathroom) of each unit to be completely locked off from the
remainder of the unit. This allows two groups to stay in the same unit while still maintaining
some privacy. According to the applicant, lock off units are typically used by the same family
with friends or relatives. However, it is possible that two separate groups can use these spaces.
The parking requirement for lock off units is 1.5 parking spaces per unit while regular units
require 1.2 spaces per unit.
Villa building 1 will be used as a temporary sales office. It will be converted into 12 habitable
timeshare units when all the units have been sold. Sales uses will include guest areas, personal
offices, presentation area, administrative functions, sales activities and unit models.
Recreation Areas: Four recreation areas are proposed on the subject site at various locations
throughout the project. All recreation areas are easily accessible by foot and are connected to the
hotel and timeshare buildings by a pedestrian walkway system. The recreation areas include
amenities such as swimming pools, spas, tennis courts, barbeque areas, bathroomkhanging
rooms, play equipment and sunning decks.
A family poolside area will be Iocated in the northeastern comer of the project site and includes a
swimming pool and sunning areas. A sports center will be located on the western edge of the
project and will be open to both resort guests and the general public. The sports center will be
approximately 3,000 square feet in size and will be 23 feet high. The sports center will include a
fitness center, a sports and tennis retail outlet, locker rooms, refreshments and arcade games.
Also included in this recreation area will be four tennis courts, half court basketball, a swimming
pool, elevated sunning terraces, a guest recreation and service building, and multiuse turf areas
for family recreation.
On the eastern edge of the project, a recreation area will be geared toward adult activities and
will include a lap swimming pool, pool deck with various levels and secluded decks for sunning,
an outdoor exercise area, and a workout gym. At the southern end of the property, just east of
the adult recreation area, hotel guests will utilize a play area with barbeque facilities, open turf
areas for light recreation and a safe “splash toys” for children.
In addition to the above mentioned recreation areas, passive recreational open space has been set
aside as part of the archeological mitigation. This open space area is located on the eastern side
of the property. This open space area will include a decomposed granite pathway,
sittinghiewing area and informational plaques.
Parking: The project is proposed with both surface and underground parking. A total of 1,293
spaces will be provided throughout the project site. A total of 1,212 spaces (94%) are located
throughout the site as surface parking and 81 parking spaces (6%) are located in a 52,000 square
foot underground parking structure, located below hotel buildings 1 and 2. The applicant is
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 -RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
Proposed Phases
Phase A
requesting a 9% (214 space) parking reduction as provided in section 21.44.050(a)(5) of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code. The proposed parking reduction will be covered further in the
analysis section of this report.
Proposed Facilities
Hotel 1 (125 units)
Restaurant #2
Architecture: The architectural theme for the project is proposed to be a Mediterranean style.
Building materials include stucco walls, S-tile roofs, simulated stone columns and trim, split face
masonry block, black metal railings, trellis and clear glass windows. The architectural faqade
will be varied to add to the building appeal and will provide opportunities for color and texture
changes. The architectural style and design is in conformance with the requirement of the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Wherever possible, buildings have been oriented to take
advantage of views overlooking the Pacific Ocean.
Phase B
Phase C
Phase D
Phasing: The applicant is proposing to develop the project in multiple construction and grading
phases as shown on Exhibit PH-1. Generally, the applicant is proposing to build the hotel in
three phases, each building being one phase. The first phase will include 125 hotel units and 64
timeshare units. The applicant is proposing and will be conditioned to build one third of the
conference facilities concurrent with the first hotel phase and the completion of the conference
facilities concurrent with the last hotel phase. The following table shows proposed phases of the
project:
Villas 6-8 (40 units)
Hotel 2 (125 units)
Additional Parking
Phase E
Phase F
Meeting Rooms (Phase 1)
Villas 1-5 (64 units)
Hotel 3 (100 units)
Villas 9. 10. 14. 15 (48 units)
Phase G
Phase H
Meeting Rooms (Phase 2)
Villas 11. 12. 13 (40 units)
Phase J
Villas 24-27 (52 units)
Villas 16-23 (72 units) I PhaseK 1 Restaurant #1
The project is conditioned to provide parking, landscaping and recreational amenities as needed
for each construction phase. The applicant is proposing these construction phases to ensure
financial sustainability throughout the construction life of the project. Commencement of each
phase will be partially dictated by market conditions; however, staff has added a condition
requiring that the entire project be completed within five years from the date of the first building
permit.
Economic and Market Analysis: The project, as proposed by the applicant
facility. Two economic and market feasibility studies were conducted by
will be a 3 star
the applicant to
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01lHDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
STANDARD
Permitted Uses
Page 7
REQUIRED PROPOSED
Hotels; Timeshares (may be
permitted by City Council);
Accessory Uses
350 hotel units, 350 timeshare units,
accessory uses (conference facility,
restaurants, sports center, recreational
amenities)
ascertain feasibility of the site for the proposed resort. The City retained Keyser Marston
Associate, Inc. (KMA) in March, 2004 to conduct a third party review of the two market studies
conducted by the applicant. The report by KMA concludes that methods applied by the
applicant’s studies were thorough and consistent and that the subject site’s potential for
development as a 4 or 5 star lodging property is adversely impacted by limited view corridors,
incompatible adjacent uses and existing competitive supply of rooms in 4 and 5 star level resorts.
The report by KMA is attached to the staff report.
IV. ANALYSIS
The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207(D));
General Plan T-R (TravelRecreation Commercial) designation;
C-T-Q Zone (Commercial-TourWQualified Development Overlay) Chapters
21.29 and 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code;
Hillside Development Regulations (Chapter 2 1.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code);
Site Development Plan findings required by the Qualified Development Overlay
Zone (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Section 21.06.020);
Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code);
Non-residential Planned Development Ordinance (Chapter 21.47 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code);
Common Parking Facilities (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Section 21.44.050(a)(5));
Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport;
Mello 11 Segment of the Local Coastal Plan; and
Growth Management Regulations (Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan.
The recommendation for approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project’s
consistency with the applicable regulations and policies. The project’s compliance with each of
the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below.
A. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan
The subject site is Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The proposed project
meets the development standards and design guidelines, as contained in the Specific Plan.
The following table demonstrates compliance with the Specific Plan:
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
Design Guidelines
Orientation: provide views of Carlsbad Ranch and
the ocean bevond fiom a maximum number of suites
Page 8
Compliance
Yes
Table 3: COMPLIAN(
STANDARD
Building Height
Architectural Character: Mediterranean style with
courtyard, arcades, balconies, terraces, arches
Building Coverage
Parking Standard
Yes
Signage
Service/Loading Areas
Trash Enclosures
Building Setbacks and
Landscape Setbacks
E WITH CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN CONTINUED
REQUIRED
35 ft. max./3 stories
Allowed architecture
projections 55 ft. max.
50% of the lot area
1,424 spaces for all the
proposed used
Sign program required to be
approved with the SDP
Architecturally detailed &
screened
6 ft. high masonry wall with
gates. Color and/or materials
similar to the moiect
Front Yard on Cannon Road
- 50 ft.
Front Yard on Hidden Valley
Road - 20 ft.
Rear, Side Yard from PA-8
and LEGOLAND Carlsbad -
50 ft.
Rear or Side Yard from
Open Space - 20 ft.
PROPOSED
35 ft. max./3 stones
55 ft. max.
15.6%
1,293 spaces with a proposed 9%
parking reduction (2 14 spaces) per
CUP section allowing for joint use of
parking facilities (CUP section of this
report has further details)
Sign Program proposed is in
conformance with Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan
Located in the parking structure or
screened with landscaping
6 ft. high masonry wall with gates.
Color & finish similar to the project
50 ft. & greater
20 ft. & greater
50 ft. & greater
20 ft. & greater
The Specific Plan also contains specific design guidelines which are applicable only to Planning
Area 5. The guidelines address building orientation, architectural character, building materials,
roofs and access. The project design complies with the design guidelines of the Specific Plan.
Table 4: COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN GUIDELINES
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
Page 9
Design Guidelines
Table 4: COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN GUIDELINES CONTINUED
Compliance
planes to reduce appearance of bulk. Include
balconies, window and entry recesses to provide
visual interest and detail.
Proposed Specific Plan Amendment: The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan. When the Specific Plan was approved, it was anticipated that PA 5 would
develop concurrently with a private golf course on PA 8. It was assumed, for purposes of the
Specific Plan description, that the golf course would be developed concurrently with the hotel
project on PA 5 and by the same developer. The golf course was intended to be 18 holes in size
and golf holes were to be located within PA 8 and a portion of the SDG&E property located
north of Cannon Road. At the time, a lease arrangement was being negotiated by SDG&E and
the original owner to provide for the golf course holes on the SDG&E property.
Buildings MateriaZs: use earth tones for exterior
wall and roof colors, stucco walls and sloping tile
roofs
Roof Tops: Varying roof heights, mechanical
equipment shall be screened, enclosed and
architecturally incorporated into visually interesting
building tops.
Since that time, the prospective developer of PA 5 (Pointe Resorts) abandoned its plans for
development of PA 5 and the lease arrangement with SDG&E. Today, PA 5 and PA 8 are under
separate ownership and the SDG&E land is not available for golf course use.
Yes
Yes
Because of the change of circumstances, it is necessary for the applicant to amend the Specific
Plan to develop PA 5 as a stand-alone project without concurrently developing PA 8 as a golf
course. The applicant is proposing that three sections of the Specific Plan be amended. The
wording changes are relatively minor in nature and are intended to remove obligations from the
developer of PA 5 to build a private golf course on PA 8. The exact changes are shown on
“Proposed Specific Plan Amendments” attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 5693.
It should be noted that it is still possible that a golf course could be located on PA 8 in the future.
Because of the significance of the remaining undeveloped land in this general area, the City
Council has directed staff to review the planned land uses for those properties located along the
Cannon Road corridor. This review has recently been initiated and staff will be reporting its
findings to the City Council over the current fiscal year. Any land use changes proposed for PA
8 will require a future amendment to the Specific Plan.
Staff is recommending approval of the requested amendment to the Specific Plan to allow the
proposed hotevtimeshare resort be developed independent of a golf course on PA 8. Staff
believes that the resort proposed on PA 5 will ultimately be consistent with future land uses on
PA 8.
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September I, 2004
B. General Plan
The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan. The
existing General Plan Land Use designation for the site was adopted concurrently with the
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan to achieve consistency. The property has a General Plan
designation of Travel-Recreation, TR which allows the development of commercial uses that
provide for visitor attractions and commercial uses which serve the travel and recreational needs
of tourists and residents. The proposed project complies with all of the elements of the General
Plan as outlined in Table 1 below:
Table 5: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE
ELEMENT
Land Use
Housing
Public Safety
Noise
Open Space
&
Conservation
USE,
CLASSIFICATION,
GOAL OBJECTIVE
OR PROGRAM
Site is designated for
TravelAXecreation
Commercial.
N/A
Provide project review
that allows
consideration of seismic
and geologic hazards.
Interior noise standards
of 45 dBA CNEL.
Minimize environmental
impacts to sensitive
resources within the
City.
Preserve areas of unique
scenic, historic,
archaeological and
cultural value.
Utilize Best
Management Practices
for control of storm
water and to protect
water quality.
PROPOSED USES.&
IMPROVEMENTS
350 hotel units, 350 timeshare villas, 2
restaurants, conference and
recreational facilities.
NIA
Project improvements will not
significantly impact or be impacted by
geologic or seismic conditions.
The project is conditioned to comply
with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise
standard.
The project is conditioned to mitigate
impacts to 1.98 acres of non-native
grassland.
Mitigation measures are incorporated
to set aside 5,000 square feet of
culturally significant area into an
Open Space easement and to conduct
Data recovery on the rest of the
archeologically significant site.
The project will conform to all
NPDES requirements.
COMPLY
Yes
N/A
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01EIDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
USE,
CLASSIFICATION,
GOAL OBJECTIVE
OR PROGRAM
ELEMENT PROPOSED USES &
IMPROVEMENTS
Requires new All circulation improvements
development to
needed to serve
including an internal private street
constructed concurrent with the
COMPLY
Yes
C. Zoning
The proposed project is subject to the C-T-Q Zone regulations. The zoning designation permits
the use subject to approval of a site development plan. Similar to the General Plan Land Use
designation, the Zoning designation for the site was adopted concurrently with the Carlsbad
Ranch Specific Plan to achieve consistency. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan specifies that
development of each site requires approval of a site development plan and the zoning reflects
this criteria.
D. Hillside Development Regulations (Chapter 21.95 of the CMC)
A Hillside Development Permit is required for the project since the subject site contains slopes
of 15 percent or greater and has an elevation differential greater than 15 feet.
The constraints map associated with this project properly identifies existing and proposed
hillside conditions and slope percentages. The geotechnical study prepared for this project
revealed that the project site is located in an area of stable soil conditions and the risk of seismic-
related ground failure or liquefaction is very minimal. In addition, the project is consistent with
the previously certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch
Specific Plan (EIR 94-01). Pursuant to CMC Section 21.195.120, proposed grading quantities
are within “acceptable” levels, less than 8,000 cubic yards per acre.
E. Site Development Plan - Q-Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.06 of the CMC)
The Qualified Development Overlay Zone (Q-Overlay) which is part of the zoning designation
for the property requires that a site development plan be approved for the proposed use prior to
the issuance of any building permit. Four findings are required by the Q-Overlay Zone. The
required findings with justification for each are contained in Planning Commission Resolution
No. 5687. This section summarizes the necessary findings and supports each.
The requested use is properly related to the site, surrounding and environmental settings as the
project design complies with the requirements of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan as
demonstrated in Section “A” of this report. Varying building setbacks, in addition to required
landscape setbacks, have been incorporated into the project design. A pedestrian connection
from the site to LEGOLAND has been provided to encourage pedestrian usage. The site is also
adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use as all applicable code requirements have
.- .
118
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 -RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
Lots
1
2
been met.
landscaped.
The building coverage is proposed to be 15.6% with 36% of the total site area
Acreage Airspace Condominium Units
12.30 acres
0.77 acres 30
4 Units: Hotel 1, 2 and 3, Conference Facilities
All features necessary to adjust the use to existing and permitted future uses will be provided.
Varying building setbacks have been provided to reduce the amount of building mass along the
perimeter setback areas. Adequate vehicle circulation has been provided with internal private
streets. The project is proposed to be developed in phases and staff has conditioned the future
phase building areas to be landscaped concurrently with the development. Furthermore, staff has
conditioned all building areas to be landscaped as required by the City Landscape Guidelines
since the site has been identified as being highly visible to the public and therefore warranting
immediate treatment (Landscape Manual Section E.3-1.2-2. IC).
3
4
The project will generate 7,167 ADT which corresponds to the maximum ADT projected in the
previously certified Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Program EIR for this site. The required
circulation improvements identified for the Carlsbad Ranch are still adequate to accommodate
the vehicle trips generated by this project.
1.14 acres 28
2.50 acres 40
F. Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20 of the CMC)
5
6
The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed tentative map and has concluded that
the subdivision, as conditioned complies with all the applicable requirements of the Subdivision
Map Act and the City’s Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant is requesting approval of a 16-lot
subdivision on this 56 acre site in addition to the creation of 354 condominiums to provide for
individual ownership of 350 timeshare units. The use proposed for each of the 16 lots is as
follows:
2.40 acres Restaurant
5.46 acres 96
7 2.84 acres
8 1.85 acres
Recreational Amenities
52
10
11
2.57 acres 52
0.47 acres 12
19 I 3.63 acres 1 40
A
B
6.40 acres Main Driveway/Parking
2.94 acres Parking
C
D
3.77 acres Parking
6.26 acres Parking
E I 1.12 acres
Total Airmace Condominium Units
If9
Parking
354
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CuP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CAJXLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
Page 13
The map will be recorded in one phase. However, construction is planned to occur in a
maximum of 10 phases. The project as conditioned will provide all necessary improvements and
all required Title 20 findings can be made.
The other infrastructure improvements (sewer, water, drainage, etc.) are currently in place to
serve the project and no off-site improvements are required. The project is served by Cannon
Road and Hidden Valley Road and has direct access to public streets. The streets adjacent to the
project site are adequate to serve the 7,167 average daily trips (ADT) generated by this project.
The proposed building setbacks and structure separation will allow for adequate air circulation
and the opportunity for passive heating and cooling.
G. Non-Residential Planned Development Ordinance (Chapter 21.47 of the Zoning
Ordinance
The intent of the non-residential planned development regulations are to:
1.
2.
3.
Ensure projects develop in accordance with the General Plan and applicable
specific plans;
Provide for non-residential projects which are compatible with surrounding
development; and
Provide a method to approve separate ownership of planned development lots.
The proposal to create individual ownership lots which do not have direct access from a publicly
dedicated street necessitates that a Non-Residential Planned Development Permit be processed to
supplement the proposed tentative map (CT 03-02). The applicant is proposing to create 16
separate lots and 354 airspace condominiums. The project will have shared driveways, access,
landscaping and parking. The project complies with the General Plan and Zoning standards as
addressed in the discussion above. The hotelhimeshare resort, by nature of the use, will not be
detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the surrounding occupants of the area and the
proposed use is similar to the adjacent uses. No modifications to the development standards are
required to protect public health, safety, and general welfare. There are no size nor configuration
standards for non-residential planned development lots beyond those imposed as a part of the
permit, but shall be reasonable as to the intended use and relation to the project.
H. Common Parking Facilities (CMC Section 21.44.050(a)(5))
The project is proposing a 9% (214 space) reduction in required parking as provided in Section
21.44.050(a)(5) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This section of the Zoning Ordinance provides
that when a common parking facility is to occupy a site of 5,000 square feet or more, then the
parking requirements as specified in the code for each of the two or more participating buildings
or uses may be reduced not more than 15% upon approval of development plans. The proposed
common (shared) parking program allows for the parking needs of the various uses taking into
consideration the peak parking demands of the uses conducted on the project site. The following
table summarizes the parking requirements for various uses proposed on-site.
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-O8(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
Res taurant #2
Meeting Rooms/
3,000 S.F. @ 1 space/l00 S.F. 30 spaces
2,000 seats @ 5 seats/space 400 spaces 1 40 spaces + 1 space/50 I Restaurant #l S.F.
1 Conference facilities I -1 I I
100 spaces
Hotel 1
Hotel 2
Hotel 3
Timeshare units
Timeshare lock-off
units
125 units 0, 1.2 spacedunit 150 spaces
125 units @ 1.2 spaces/unit 150 spaces
100 units 0, 1.2 spaceshnit 120 spaces
172 units @ 1.2 spacedunit 206 spaces
178 units @ 1.5 spacedunit 267 spaces
..--~ .- I I Total Required Parking
Total Parking Provided on-site (with 9% reduction)
A parking analysis, dated May 28, 2004, was prepared for the project by Urban Systems
Associates, Inc. The parking analysis is attached to this staff report. The study concludes that
the types of uses planned for the site should not be evaluated as entirely separate uses since
shared parking between facilities is expected to occur and this shared parking can be accounted
for in planning for the project. The conference facilities will be utilized by out of town guests
staying in the hotel as well as by local businesses in need of large meeting space. In addition, the
two quality restaurant sites planned for the project will serve timeshare and hotel guests as well
as conference attendees and the general public, thereby fiirther reducing the parking demand.
The hotel and timeshare areas would primarily be used by hotel and timeshare guests. Outside
use of the public area generally occurs during early morning and afternoon hours when the
restaurant and hotel guest parking demand is at a minimum.
1,423 spaces
1,293 spaces 1
The parking analysis includes a table which shows parking occupancy for each use by hour
which accounts for both shared parking and hours of operation. The table shows that the peak
parking demand is in the early evening at 6:OO p.m. and is for 1,142 spaces. The greatest
demand comes in the early evening when people are returning to the hotel from their daily off-
site activities, heading to the restaurants to eat dinner, and conferences are wrapping up for the
day. Therefore, the proposed 1,293 spaces for the project should be more than adequate to meet
the peak parking demand of 1,142 spaces, considering shared parking and the hours of operation
for the proposed uses.
I. Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport (CLUP)
The project site is located within the Airport Influence Area for the McClellan-Palomar Airport
and within the 60 CNEL noise contour. As stated in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for
McClellan-Palomar Airport (CLUP), hotels are conditionally compatible uses in 60-65 CNEL
noise contours. The interior noise level must be attenuated to 45 decibels CNEL, however the
outdoor noise level is acceptable for associated outdoor activities, pursuant to the CLUP. The
project is conditioned to comply with this requirement.
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-O1/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 -RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
Page 15
An Acoustical Analysis report was prepared for the proposed project by Acoustech Consultants
in December 2002. The report indicates that the principal noise source impacting the southern
portion of the site is McClellan-Palomar Airport, with additional noise contribution from
Palomar Airport Road. The project site will be subject to exterior noise levels of up to 66 dB
CNEL in the southern portion of the project site. Future noise levels predicted for the northern
portion of the site are 66.7 CNEL due to traffic volumes on Cannon Road.
An avigation easement for noise is required to be recorded with the County Recorder as a
condition of approval of the project. This requirement is listed in the CLUP as well as the
previously certified Program EIR for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The project is deemed
compatible with the Airport Land Use Plan with imposition of these two conditions. The project
has been reviewed and deemed conditionally consistent with the CLUP by the Airport Land Use
Commission at their hearing on July 8,2004.
J. Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Plan
The project is located in the Mello I1 Local Coastal Program Segment. The proposed project is
for the development of a hotel/timeshare resort. The project complies with the applicable Local
Coastal Program provisions. The LCP Land Use Plan designates the subject site for T-R
(TouristlRecreation Commercial), which allows for hotels, timeshares and other accessory uses.
The project is consistent with the surrounding development of hotel, LEGOLAND theme park
and future golf course. The proposed project will not obstruct views of the coastline as seen
from public lands or the public right-of-way, nor otherwise damage the visual beauty of the
coastal zone. The conversion of agricultural uses which currently exist on the site, to the
proposed development was addressed in the previously certified Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan
Final Program EIR. The Specific Plan requested an early cancellation of Williamson Act
contracts, which was approved as part of the Specific Plan. The proposed project is not located
on an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard. No public opportunities for coastal
shoreline access are available from the subject site since it is not located between the first public
road and the ocean, and no public access requirements are conditioned for the project. The site is
not suited for water-oriented recreation activities.
Coastal Resources Protection Overlay Zone (Chapter 2 1.203 of the CMC)
The subject site is located in the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, however, due to its
location and the absence of native vegetation, additional submittals, standards or requirements do
not apply. Construction of the project will adhere to the City’s Master Drainage Plan, Grading
Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) and
Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program (JURMP) to avoid increased urban run off,
pollutants and soil erosion. Construction of the project will adhere to the City’s Master Drainage
and Storm Water Quality Management Plan and Grading Ordinance to avoid increased runoff
and soil erosion.
The proposed amendment to the Local Coastal Program is required because of the changes
proposed to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan to allow the development of PA 5, independent of
development of PA 8 with a golf course.
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
STANDARD IMPACTS
City Administration NIA
Librarv NIA
K. Growth Management
COMPLIANCE
Yes
Yes
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 13 in the Northwest
quadrant of the City. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance
with the adopted performance standards, are summarized in the following table:
Waste Water Treatment
Parks
NIA Yes
NIA Yes
Drainage
Circulation
Fire
Open Space
Schools
Yes
7,167 ADT Yes
Station No. 4 Yes
N/A Yes
NIA Yes
Sewer Collection System
Water
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
637 EDU Yes
140,140 GPD Yes
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection
Ordinance (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, staff has conducted an environmental
impact assessment to determine if the project could have any potentially significant impact on
the environment.
Environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Planning Area 5 resort project
have been previously evaluated in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program EIR 94-01,
certified in 1995 by the City of Carlsbad. This EIR included various mitigation measures
designed to reduce potential adverse impacts associated with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan
and related development including the development of Planning Area 5 as a resort. All
mitigation measures have been incorporated into the overall project design or will be included as
conditions of approval of the project.
The initial study, Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part 11, conducted for the proposed
project focused on the changes from the approved Specific Plan and PA-5 as it was contemplated
in EIR 94-0 1.
The subject site is not identified by any habitat conservation plan as containing a protected, rare
or endangered plant or animal community. A Biological Survey and Report was prepared for the
proposed project by Merltel & Associates, Inc. in January 2003. The report was based upon
surveys of the site conducted in September and October 2002. The report identifies four plant
communities on the 56.52 acre site. Impacts to 41.23 acres of agriculture and 8.13 acres of
disturbed habitat will not be considered significant. The project will have no direct impacts on
0.16 acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub, located along the northeastern property boundary.
la 3
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CAFUSBAD RANCH PLAN'NTNG AREA 5 -RESORT SITE
September 1 , 2004
Impacts to 1.98 acres of Non-native grassland will require mitigation at a 0.5:1 ratio or by paying
a mitigation in-lieu fee to the City.
The previously certified EIR 94-01 identified site CA-SDI-8797, which is located partially on the
project site, as significanthmportant Archeologically under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria.
Per the Program EIR 94-01, a part of this site was to be placed in open space and capped.
However the site design is such that about 5,000 square feet of this area will have to be mitigated
through data recovery. A data recovery plan for the site was prepared by Gallegos & Associates
in April 2003. The data recovery plan states that mitigation of impacts can be achieved through
avoidance, capping or through completion of a data recovery program. A portion of the site will
be set-aside as an open space reflectiodview area. This area will contain only native plants, will
be assisted in design by Native American representatives and will be posted with a plaque
discussing Native American history. Waterlines and other utilities will be placed outside of the
open space easement or within the fill soil to avoid impacts to cultural resources. The remaining
portion of the site cannot be avoided and thus mitigation of impacts will be achieved through the
completion of a data recovery program.
The project is located within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Influence Area. The influence area
encompasses those areas adjacent to the airport which could be impaired by noise levels
exceeding the California State Noise Standards. The proposed project lies within the 60-65
CNEL contours of the airport. An Acoustical Analysis report was prepared for the proposed
project by Acoustech Consultants in December 2002. The report indicates that the principal
noise source impacting the southern portion of the site is McClellan-Palomar Airport, with
additional noise contribution from Palomar Airport Road. An impact to the northern portion of
the site is traffic noise due to Cannon Road. The project site will be subject to exterior noise
levels of up to 66 dB CNEL in the southern portion of the project site. Future noise levels as
high as 66.7 dB CNEL are predicted for the northern portion of the site. The Comprehensive
Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport developed by SANDAG dated April 1994 states
that CNEL levels of 60-70 are conditionally compatible for Hotels, therefore, it has been
determined that noise is a less than significant impact.
The necessary mitigation measures have been agreed to by the developer and a Mitigation .
Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared. Consequently, a Notice of Intent to adopt
a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in the newspaper and sent to the State
Clearinghouse for public agency review. During the 30-day public review and comment period
letters were received from California Department of Transportation, Native American Heritage
Commission and a joint letter from the Wildlife Agencies. The letters and staffs responses are
attached to this report. An Addendum to the EIA and revised mitigation measures are also
attached to the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration which are in response to the letter from
the wildlife agencies.
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-
01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
September 1,2004
Page 18
ATTACHMENTS:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5685 (MND)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5693 (SP)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5692 (LCPA)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5686 (CT)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5687 (SDP)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5688 (CDP)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5689 (PUD)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 5690 (CUP)
Planning Commission Resolution No. 569 1 (HDP)
Location Map
Background Data Sheet
Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
Disclosure Statement
Parking Study dated May 6,2004
Review of Economic Feasibility Studies, dated March 18,2004
Letters received from different agencies and staff‘s responses
Reduced Exhibits (previously distributed)
Exhibits “A 1” - “A 44” dated September 1, 2004
Exhibits “C 1” - “C 33” dated September 1, 2004
Exhibits “L 1” - “L 23” dated September 1, 2004
Exhibits “H 1” - “H 9” dated September 1,2004
Exhibit Key: A = Architecture, C = Engineering, L = Landscape, H = Hillside
Development Permit
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP
03-0 1
CASE NAME: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5-Resort Site
APPLICANT: Timothy Stripe, Grand Pacific Resorts
REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request for a Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal
Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development
Permit, Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit and a Hillside Development
Permit to allow for the development of a full service destination hotelhimeshare resort. The
Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 resort project is proposed to be a full-service, destination resort
adjacent to the LEGOLAND California theme Dark. At buildout, the project will have a total of
350 hotel rooms and 350 timeshare units. There will be two restaurants, meeting rooms and
conference facilities for 2,000 occupants and recreational amenities including pools, tennis courts
and sports center.
The subject site is a total of 56.52 acres which is currently in agricultural use. Land uses
surrounding the subject site include open space, a water reservoir and the future City of Carlsbad
Municipal Golf Course to the east, Cannon Road and agricultural uses to the north, LEGOLAND
to the south, and a vacant property to the west.
LEGALDESCRIPTION: Being all of Lot 17 of City of Carlsbad Tract 94-09, Carlsbad
Ranch Units 2 & 3, according to map thereof No. 13408, filed in the office of the County
Recorder on April 1, 1997, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego. State of California.
APN: 211-100-14 Acres: 56.52 Proposed No. of LotsKJnits:
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation: T-R - TravelAXecreation-Commercial
Density Allowed: n/a Density Proposed: n/a
Existing Zone: C-T-O (Commercial-Tourist) Proposed Zone: n/a
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use:
Zoning General Plan
Site C-T-Q T-R
North 0-S, P-U 0-s
South C-T-Q
East 0-S
West 0-S
T-R
0-s
0-s
Current Land Use
Agriculture
Agriculture
LEGOLAND theme park
Open space, water tank, future Municipal Golf Course
Vacant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District: Carlsbad Unified Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity):
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: N/A
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Negative Declaration, issued
0 Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated
Other, Mitigated Nevative Declaration
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D/ CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04lPUD 03-
Ol/CUP 03-01MDP 03-01/) - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: LGENERAL PLAN: TR (TravelAXecreation)
ZONING: CT-O (Commercial-Tourist/ Oualified Overlay Zone)
DEVELOPER’S NAME: Timothy Stripe, Grand Pacific Resorts
ADDRESS: 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200, Carlsbad, CA 92008
PHONE NO.: 760-431-8500 ASSESSOR’S PARCEL NO.: 21 1-100-14
QUANTITY OF LAND USELDEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 56 AC/350 Hotel Rooms,
350 Timeshare Units
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: Unknown
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
L.
City Administrative Facilities : Demand in Square Footage = N/A
Library : Demand in Square Footage = N/A
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) NIA
Park: Demand in Acreage = $.40/sq .ft.
Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Identify Drainage Basin = C
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADT = 7,167
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = 4
Open Space: Acreage Provided = N/A
Schools: N/A
Sewer: Demands in EDU 637
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: Demand in GPD = 140,140
The project is not proposing any dwelling units thereby not impacting the Growth
Management Dwelling unit allowance.
/a 8
-
Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require
discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee.
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot
be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
Note:
Person is defined as “Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city
municipality, 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 entity of the applicant and property owner must be
provided below.
1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of & persons having a financial
interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the
names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO
APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publicly-owned corporation, include the
names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if
necessary.)
Person Timothy Stripe CorpRart
Title President Title
Address 5900 Pasteur Coiirt, Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-
Address
2. OWNER (Not the owner’s agent)
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of,& persons having any ownership
interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (Le,
partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a
corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more
than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES,
PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-
owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate
page may be attached if necessary.)
Person W i I I iam Haviluk Corp/Part Edfbsbad Estate Holding, Inc.
Title President c/o LEG0 California, Inc.
Address One LEGOLAND Drive Title
One LEGOLAND Drive, Carlsbad CA Carlsbad, CA 92008 Address - 92008
J49 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559
3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (I) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the
names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit
organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
Non Profit/Trust Non Profit/Trust
Title Title
Address Address
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months?
Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s):
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge-
William Haviluk Timothy Stripe
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
,3& /x- A
a- Signature of owner/ap&icant's agent if applicable/date
Print or type name of owneriapplicant's agent
H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 130 Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENT 14
URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCMTES, LVC.
E-MAIL MEMO
TO: Timothy Stripe €-Mail Address
COMPANY: Grand Pacific Resorts /
FROM: Sam P. Kab I1
Tstri pe@gra n dpa cjfi cresorts.com
TOTAL PAGES (including this page): 2 i;lv";lj" JOB NUMBER.' 004501 DATE: May 28, 2004 TIME.' 220 pm
SUBJECT: CARLSBAD RANCH PA-5 RESORT SITE
The current site plan (May 5, 2004) indicates that 1,293 parking spaces will be provided,
accounting for a fifteen percent reduction due to shared parking among the varied uses (see
parking tabulation in Attachment 1).
A shared parking accumulation using the Urban Land Institutes (ULI) parking demand
characteristics for the Hotel[Resort[ Restaurant/Meeting Room uses substantiates the fifteen
percent shared parking reduction.
The ULI parking accumulation (see Attachments 2 and 3) indicates that 1,142 spaces would be
needed during the hour of highest total demand for these uses. This parking demand results in
281 spaces less than the required amount of spaces.
PARKING REQUIRED 1,423 spaces
ULI PARKING DEMAND -1,142 spaces
~
281 spaces less than required
Therefore, the fifteen percent shared parking reduction of 214 spaces is considered appropriate.
Cc: Bill Hofman . . , . . . , , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , I . , , . , . bhoftnan@hofmanplanning.com
#004501 C:\OFFICE-ZOO4\45l?1-1-52804-~pk. wpd/disk
ATACHMENT 1
Parking Tabulation
L PARKING SUMMARY - (15% SHARED PARKING) I
REQUIRED PARKING:
VILLA UNITS (TIMESHARES1
FACILITIES UNK CIUANTTIES
CQNVEI.ITIONAL UNITS 172 UNKS @ LOCKAFF UNITS 178 UNITS @
PARKING REQUIRED (15%
HOTEL UNITS
FACIIJTICS UNIT QUANTITIES
HOTEL 1 HOTEL S' HOTEL 3
125 UNITS @ 125 UNITS @ 100 UNKS @)
PARKING RECIUIRED {E%
RESORT AfiD CONFERENCE FACILITIES
FACILITIES UNIT QUANMIES
RESTAURANT #2 3.W S.F. @ MERlNG ROOMS 2.m SmIS @
PARKING RECIUIRED 115%
BUILDING PADS
FACILITIES UNIT QUANTITIES
RESTAURANT #l 7.W S.F. @
PARKING REQUIRED 115%
TOTAL PARKiNG AVAIINLE ON SITE (REFER TO TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED ON SrE (WITH 15%
PROVIDED SHOWN ON SITE PLAN:
PARKING SPACE DESCRlIllON y.
PARKING PER UNIT
1.2 SPACESNNT
1.5 SPACES /UNIT
SUBTOTAL: SHARED PARKINGI:
PARKING PEA UNIT
1.2 SPACES /UNIT 1.2 SPACES /UNiT 12 SPACES /UNIT
SUBTOTAL: SHARED PARKING]:
PARKING PER UNIT
1 SPACE /lw S.F. 5 SEATS/S?ACE
SUBTOTAL: SHARED PARKING):
PARKING PBR UNIT
40 SPACES + 1 SPACE /50 SF.
SUBTOTAL: SHARED PARKING]:
SUMMARY BELOW]: SHARED PARKINGI: SURPLUS PARKING:
OF TOTAL PARKING
STANDARD PARKING (ei-a**Xzaw): PARKING ON-GRAOE: 65.0% OF TOTAL PARKING PAHKlNG IN PARKING STRUCTURE 8.0% OF TOTAL PARKING
COMPACT PARKING (e'-O.XlS'il'): PAAKlNG OFHiPAOE: 7.0% OF TOTAL PARKING PARKING IN PARKWG STRLZTUR& 0.0% OF TOTAL PARKING
ACCESSIBLE PARKING (PER zoo1 caq: PARKING ON-GRAOE 2.0% OF TOTAL PARKING PARKING IN PARKING STRUCTURE: 0.0% OF TOTAL PARKING
TOTAL PARKING ON GRADE TOTAL PARKING IN PARKING STRUCTURE
TOTAL PARKING PROWOE0 ON SITE:
REQUIRED PARKING 206 SPACES 267 SPACES
473 SPACES 402 SPACES
REauim
150 SPACES PARKING
150 SPACES 120 SPACES
420 SPACES 357 SPACES
RECIUIRED PARKING 30 SPACES 400 SPACES
430 SPACES 366 SPACES
REQUIRED PARKING
1W SPACES
100 SPACES E5 SPACES
1,293 SPACES 1.210 SPACES 63 SPACES
PROVIDED PARKING
E1 SPACES 1,033 SPACES
94 SPACES 0 SPACES
25 SPACES 0 SPACES
1.212 SPACES ai SPACES
1,293 SPACES
ARCHITECTURAL
SHEET A-1 OF 44
i3a
ATTACHMENT 2
Shared Parking Accumulation
RESTAURANT CONFERENCE OCCUPANCY
ACCUMUMTION
1 .oo 400
1.00 400
~
1 .oo 400 79 1
1 .oo 400 79 1
1 .oo 400 867
1.00 400 1,027
1,142
1,000
100 (3 1,044
200 @
0 Source ULI - Shared Parking.
0 Increased to 100% to account for Maximum Use.
@ Decreased to Actual Expected Use, Per Grand Pacific Resorts.
#004501 C:\OFFICE- 2004\4501-1-52804-~pk. wpd/disk
133
ATACHMENT 3
ULI Parking Accumulation
EXHIBIT 28 REPRESENIXTNE HOURLY ACCUMULATION BY PERCENTAGE OF PEAK HOUR
RuidsaU Piaiden.
Gz- InmCBDI U11 lCBDl
0- Wcrk4.y Sitrrdadry Ow ---
100% 100% 100% ICO%, 90% 20% 20%. - - 6:OO a.m. 3% - - - - - -
8; 95 95 85 70 20 20 - - 7:OO a.m. 20 20% 8% 3% 2% 2% -
79 88 90 65 60 20 20 50% 50% 8.00 a.m. 63 60 18 :0 5 3 -
73 81 87 55 50 20 20 !OO 100 9:OO a.m. 93 EO 42 30 i0 6 -
1O:OO a.m. 100 80 68 45 20 8 - 68 74 85 15 40 20 20 100 loo
59 71 85 38 35 30 30 :00 100 11:OO a.m. 100 100 87 73 30 10 -
12:OO Noon 90 100 97 85 50 30 30% 60 71 85 30 30 50 30 100 100 1.00 p.m. 90 80 100 95 70 45 70 50 70 85 30 30 70 48 !oo 100 2:OO pm 97 60 97 100 6C 45 70 60 71 85 35 35 @: 45 100 150 3:OO p.m. 93 40 95 100 6C 45 70 61 73 85 35 40 55 45 iOC 100 4:OO p,n. 77 40 87 90 52 45 70 65 75 8i 45 50 50 45 :00 100 500 p.m. 17 20 79 75 7C 60 70 77 81 90 60 63 7C 60 :oo 100 6.00 p.m. 23 20 82 65 90 90 80 85 85 92 70 70 90 90 io0 I00 7:OO p.m. 7 2.0 89 60 100 95 90 94 87 94 75 8D 100 95 100 100 8.00 pm 7 20 87 55 100 100 100 96 92 96 90 90 100 100 !OO 100 9:oo p.m. 3 - 61 40 100 10c 100 98 95 98 95 9s loo io0 LOO 100 10:OOpm. 3 - 32 36 90 F5 100 99 96 99 100 100 90 95 50 50 11:oo p.m. - - 13 13 70 85 80 ioc. 98 loa 100 100 70 85 - -
12:OO Mid- - - - - 50 70 70 1OC 100 . 100 100 100 50 70 - -
night
Recommended bibliographic listing: ULI-the Uiom Land Instimre. Shored Parking. Wasllir!gton. D.C.: ULI-the Urbsl Land Institute, 1983.
Accumulation curves are then estimated for each
land use, based on the selected houriy values de-
scribedil terms of the rrercent of maximum design-day
parlung demand expected at everyhour duringthe day.
The parlung demand factor (step 2) multiplied by
quantity of land use (step 1) produces an estimate of
pe& parking demand. This value multiplied by each
hourly percentage produces itl estinate of parlung
demand for every land me component by hour of day
C:~\OFNCE~2004\4501-1-50604-spk. wpd/disk #004501
ATTACHMENT 15
KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES INC.
I660 HOTEL CIRCLE NORTII, SUITE 7 I6
S46 DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92108
PIIONE: 619 718-9500
FAX: 619,738-9508
W\Y\~'.KEYSERhlARSTOli.COhl
MEMORANDUM
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director
City of Carlsbad
From: KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC.
Date: March 18, 2004
Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies
Leg0 Hotel Project
A. Introduction
REAL EST~TE
REDE\'ELOP\fEST
AFFORUAULE HOt SI\G
EC OSOM I C DE \ E L OFbl E \ T
LVS .I.YGELES
Calvin E. Hullis. II
Kathleen H. Head
James A. Kabe
Paul C. Anderson
Grcgury D. Sou-Hou
S.4.V FRI YC'ISCO
A. Jerry Keyser
Timothy C. Kelly
Kate Enrlc Funk
Debbie M. Kern
Robert J. Wetmore
In accordance with our agreement dated February 5, 2004, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc.
(KMA) has conducted a review of lodging market studies prepared by HVS International (HVS)
and PKF Consulting (PKF) for the Leg0 hotel project. As background, Grand Pacific Resorts
(Developer) is proposing to develop a 700-room lodging facility, including both hotel rooms
and timeshare units, on a 57-acre vacant parcel, situated adjacent to and northeast of the
existing Legoland Family Park. The project components are proposed to be built in phases
and will include the following:
0 A full-service, 350-room hotel component of 3-star quality. The hotel compon.ent would be
marketed as the exclusive hotel of Legoland.
A timeshare component including 350 units.
The objective of this assignment has been to conclude on the market support for a hotel
development on the site and' to evaluate the proposed quality and mix of lodging products
(hotel and timeshare). In support of this objective, KMA has undertaken the following tasks:
1. Reviewed the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, market studies prepared by HVS and PKF,
and related documents.
2. Conducted interviews with other hotellresort developers, the project proponent, and PKF
staff.
CELEBBRA TI" 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
04363mm
11060.004.001
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004
Subject: Page 2 Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Leg0 Hotel Project
3. Commented on the methodology and approach used by HVS and PKF, summarized their
major conclusions regarding distribution of demand for lodging units and timeshare units,
and concluded on the validity of the conclusions.
4. Evaluated the potential for the project to support either additional rooms and/or a higher-
quality product if located elsewhere in the City.
This memorandum report has been organized as follows:
Section B presents our principal conclusions.
0 Section C summarizes the key findings of HVS and PKF regarding occupancy, average
rate, and market segmentation.
0 Section D concludes on the validity of the HVS/PKF studies.
0 Section E comments on the site's potential to support a greater quantity of superior-class
hotel rooms, the necessity to include a timeshare component, and the availability of
alternative sites in the City for upper-end hotel development.
0 Section F details assumptions and limiting conditions governing this assignment.
B. Summary of Findings
The following summarizes KMA's key findings:
The proposed development program includes 350 hotel rooms and resort-type amenities,
including restaurant, multiple swimming pools, game room, spa, and fitness center.
With respect to projected performance -- occupancy, average daily rate, and absorption --
both HVS and PKF reached similar conclusions. Absorption occurs over a six-year period
with stabilized occupancy projected at 75%. Projections of achievable Average Daily
Rates (ADRs) are also relatively similar. The ADR projections cited in this report appear to
vary widely, due to the fact that the HVS figures represent constant 2001 dollars.
KMA finds that the methods applied by HVS and PKF in preparation of their studies were
thorough and consistent with standard industry practices.
The subject site's potential for development as a 4- or 5-star lodging property is adversely
impacted by limited view corridors and incompatible adjacent uses.
CELEBRATIA'G 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
04363mm
11060.004.001
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18,2004
Subject: Page 3 Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Leg0 Hotel Project
Several market factors also limit the subject's potential for development at the 4- or 5-star
level. These include: limited availability of financing, existing competitive supply of rooms
in this class, planned increases in room inventory at La Costa Resort & Spa, and the
proposed Encinitas Beach Resort.
It is the KMA view that a 350-room hotel is the appropriate maximum hotel development for
the site, considering a six-year absorption schedule. It should be noted that the timeshare
component of the project represents an additional source of hotel rooms. On average,
25% of timeshare units are typically placed into use as hotel rooms, thus representing
availability of 88 additional hotel rooms on the site at buildout.
The HVS/PKF studies do not address financial feasibility for the proposed hotel
component, i.e., comparison of estimated development costs with supportable investment
based on projected net operating income. Therefore, KMA cannot conclude that the
proponent has demonstrated the necessity to include a timeshare component in the
project. However, it is probable that in today's challenging hotel financing climate, the
inclusion of a timeshare component may be necessary to finance the hotel and its
amenities.
It is unlikely that the City of Carlsbad offers any appropriate sites that could support
development of a new large-scale 4- or 5-star lodging property.
C. Summary of HVS and PKF Market Studies
As part of this assignment, KMA reviewed the documents listed below. The key findings and
assumptions found in the documents are summarized in this section.
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan
Market Study and Forecast of Occupancy and Average Rate, September 1,2000; HVS
International
Market Study and Forecast of Occupancy and Average Rate, May 20,2002; HVS
International
Study of Potential Market Demand and Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results
for the Proposed Carlsbad Resort to be Located in Carlsbad, CA, September 2002; PKF
Consulting
Proposed Legoland Hotel, Carlsbad, CA, March 5, 2003; HVS International
Letter dated March 5, 2003 from PKF Consulting
Letter dated September 9, 2003 from Hilton Hotels
Letter dated June 17, 2003 from Starwood Hotels
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OFSERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
04363rnrn
11060.004.001
I3 7
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004
Subject: Page 4 Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Leg0 Hotel Project
With respect to the market studies prepared by HVS and PKF, KMA finds that the methods
applied were thorough and consistent with standard industry practices. In general, each
document included discussion and analysis of the following key topics:
Neighborhood characteristics
Market penetration analysis
Site characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages
Regional economic and demographic trends
Supply and demand factors, including group segmentation
Profiles of competitive lodging properties
Occupancy and average rate analysis
The market studies prepared to date by HVS and PKF have focused on the hotel component.
Though each of the three market studies acknowledges the inclusion of a timeshare
component in the proposed project, only the studies prepared by HVS factored in any degree
of timeshare influence on the projected hotel performance. Still, neither HVS nor PKF assert
in their reports that construction of the timeshare component is essential to the market or
financial feasibility of the hotel component.
The following exhibit re-states recommended project descriptions and conclusions found in the
market studies.
The earliest market study, prepared by HVS in September 2000, predated the events of 911 1.
Therefore, it is the KMA view that the study's findings should not be considered further as part
of this assignment. The latter two studies were both prepared in 2002 and reflect more recent
market conditions, including the influence of 9/11 on the lodging industry. The updated HVS
study dated May 2002 and the PKF study dated September 2002 forecasted the following
occupancy and average rate performance for the subject hotel:
04363mm
11060.004.001
CELEBRATING 30 YEARSOF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director
Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Leg0 Hotel Project
March 18, 2004
Page 5
Exhibit 2: Conclusions of HVS, May 2002 Study (1)
Rooms On-tine 73 125 1 25 198 250 308 350
Total Room Nights Captured 15,958 31,000 32,276 54,074 69,647 83,458 96,033
Available Room Nights 26,625 45,625 45,625 72,125 91,250 112,450 127,750
Average Rate $133.57 $138.11 $141.80 $147.82 $154.07 $160.79 $166.43
Average Daily Rate (ADR) (1) $1 18.67 $1 19.43 $1 18.76 $120.19 $121.63 $123.23 $123.84
Market Segmentation
Occupancy 60% 68% 71 % 75% 76% 74% 75%
Commercial 44% 42% 43% 42% 43% 44% 43%
Meeting and Group 30% 24% 23% 26% 28% 29% 31 %
Leisure 16% 24% 23% 22% 21 % 21 % 21 Yo
Timeshare 10% 10% 10% 11% 9% 6% 5%
(1) ADR figures in constant 2001 ddlars.
Exhibit 3: Conclusions of PW, September 2002 Study
Rooms On-line 125 1 25 1 25 250 250 250 350
Total Room Nights Captured 27,375 30,569 32,850 63,875 66,613 69,350 95,813
Available Room Nights 45,625 45,625 45,625 91,250 91,250 91,250 127,750
Average Daily Rate (ADR) (1) $133.00 $137.00 $141.00 $145.00 $149.00 $154.00 $159.00
Occupancy 60% 67% 72% 70% 73% 76% 75%
(1)ADRfigures in Mure ddlars.
D. KMA Conclusion Regarding Validity of HVS/PKF Studies
As previously stated, each of the studies was prepared in a fashion consistent with standard
industry practices, using similar approaches. The interpretation of base market trend data
used in market forecasting is always subject to the opinions and experiences of the respective
professional analysts preparing the study. Therefore, the ultimate findings of separately
pr.epared studies will invariably differ.
However, the conclusions reached by the respective firms studying the subject hotel fall within
a relatively narrow and essentially consistent range. The magnitude of variation is not deemed
significant by KMA. Furthermore, KMA does not detect any material flaws in the studies. The
overall findings of the studies indicate that the hotel, as proposed, will meet or exceed
operational benchmarks for like properties and that the phased approach to development will
facilitate proper market introduction and stabilization before subsequent phases are
constructed.
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
04363mm
11060.004.001
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18,2004
Subject: Page 6 Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Leg0 Hotel Project
Relative to the questions raised by the City, what is most lacking in the studies is analysis of
financial feasibility for the proposed hotel component, i.e., comparison of estimated
development costs with supportable investment based on projected net operating income.
Such an analysis would culminate in a determination of financial feasibility for the hotel
component, exclusive of the timeshare component, and establish a basis for the necessity of a
timeshare component to subsidize the cost of hotel improvements.
E. Evaluation of Development Potential for Alternatives
Three key questions to be addressed in this memorandum are re-stated, as follows:
1. Can the site support hotel rooms in excess of the proposed 350 rooms?
2. Is there a demonstrated necessity for inclusion of a timeshare component?
3. If located on a different site in Carlsbad, could the alternative site support more hotel
rooms of a higher quality than the proposed 3-star hotel?
Representatives of both HVS and PKF addressed these issues in correspondence with the
Developer in March 2003. KMA reviewed this correspondence and interviewed the proponent
and PKF staff. The key factors cited by these parties are as follows:
1.
0
2.
0
Site Factors
Proximity to Legoland and Palomar Airport generates noise and traffic impacts that detract
from the site’s appropriateness as a potential 4- or 5-star resort site.
View corridors are limited and include some unappealing views. Not all rooms will offer
ocean views and the site’s panorama will include power lines, power plant, back-of-house
Legoland areas, and commercial buildings. The site’s irregular shape and topography, in
conjunction with the 3-story height limitation, further limit views.
The site cannot provide visitors a sense of seclusion.
The site does not include a high-end, hotel-operated golf course. Although there may be a
municipal course adjacent to the subject site, the course is not anticipated to offer priority
access or tee-times to hotel guests.
Market Factors
Obtaining financing for a 4- or 5-star hotel on the subject site would be extremely difficult
due to current market conditions and the physical constraints (as listed above).
CELEBRATIVG 30 YEARS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
04363rnrn
11 060.004.001
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18,2004
Subject: Page 7 Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Leg0 Hotel Project
0 The inclusion of the timeshare units is necessary to provide cash flow to support the cost
of high-quality, resort-style amenities (e.g., tennis courts, swimming pools, and
landscaping).
0 Competition from existing Carlsbad high-end resort properties, Four Seasons Aviara and
La Costa Resort & Spa, would be strong. Aviara repr.esents the County's only AAA-rated
5-diamond facility and La Costa is planning a 400-room expansion. These properties each
offer a superior range of amenities, including golf, in a true resort atmosphere.
Four Seasons Aviara, La Costa, and the planned 126-room Encinitas Beach Resort will
absorb the demand for high-end rooms in the Carlsbad trade area for the foreseeable
future.
KMA conducted corroborative research to test these assertions, including contacting other
experienced resort developers, evaluating characteristics of existing Southern California 4-
and 5-star resort properties listed by AAA (diamond ratings) and Mobil (star ratings), and
reviewing industry financing trends. Listed below are KMAs findings:
1. Site Factors
0 The site characteristics noted by HVS and PKF are indisputable. Based on KMAs
familiarity with the site, KMA concurs with the assessment of their impact on the site's
potential for development as a 4- or 5-star resort.
2. Market Factors
0 Very few full-service hotels are currently being built. Financing availability is limited
because lenders perceive new hotel developments as exceptionally risky in the post-9/11
market. Lenders, therefore, are requiring substantial equity contributions from prospective
hotel developers. As a result, developers in today's market are pursuing two options, (1)
seek contributions from city governments to achieve financial feasibility, or (b) include
condominiums or timeshares in the project as a way of improving the project's revenue
stream. Alternatively, purchase of an existing, established hotel has become preferable to
either method.
.
0 The inclusion of timeshare units in resort developments is becoming commonplace. The
synergies between timeshare and hotel include sharing of amenities, cost efficiencies, and
co-marketing opportunities, mixing of uses (e.g., timeshare units used as hotel rooms).
The inclusion of timeshare units provides an extra revenue stream to support construction
of more and better on-site amenities than would otherwise be feasible at a hotel-only site.
Financing for projects sponsored by qualified timeshare developers is more readily
accessible than for stand-alone full-service hotels.
CELEBR-lTlNG 30 YEARSOF SERVICE TU OUR CLIEhTS
04363mm
11060.004.001
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18,2004
Subject: Page 8 Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Leg0 Hotel Project
La Costa Resort & Spa has just completed a $55 million renovation of its guest rooms and
facilities. Moreover, La Costa is proposing to add 197 commercial condominium units to its
property (a mix of 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units). Though the condominium units will be sold
as ownership units, owners can voluntarily place the rooms back into a hotel management
pool to be rented as hotel rooms when not in use by the owners. In total, based on the
per-unit bedroom distribution, the 197 condominium units could represent an increase to
La Costa’s existing 474-room hotel inventory of 393 hotel rooms, for a total room count of
867 rooms.
The planned Encinitas Beach Resort, situated immediately south of the Carlsbad
boundary, is anticipated to rank as a 4- or 5-star quality hotel. The 126-room project is
expected to break ground some time between March and September 2005.
The presence in the immediate market area of two existinglestablished high-end resort
hotels, Four Seasons Aviara and La Costa Resort & Spa, as well as a planned third 4-star
property, represents strong competition for a similar facility on the subject site. The
expansion of La Costa and construction of the Encinitas Beach Resort will likely absorb
much of the future growth in market demand at this price point.
Existing 4- and 5-star properties in Southern California rarely contain as many as 700
rooms, unless they are located in sought-after metropolitan areas or established resort
destinations. These facilities are usually situated in metropolitan downtowns or on “one-of-
a-kind’’ exclusive sites.featuring beachfront or golf. They can range in size from 50 to 900
rooms, but 375-400 rooms is a typical range.
The construction of a municipal golf course adjacent to the site would be an amenity that
could be used by guests of the proposed hotel. However, municipal courses tend to be of
a lesser quality than private courses and lack exclusivity and prioritization for hotel guests.
Municipal courses typically accommodate a significantly higher number of golf rounds on
an annual basis, resulting in crowding and a less attractive course.
Legoland, while a premier regional attraction, achieves annual attendance well below other
Southern California attractions. Legoland’s annual attendance is estimated to approximate
1.4 million visitors. By way of contrast, Disneyland’s annual attendance is approximately
17.7 million (1 2.7 million at Disneyland plus 5.0 million at Disney’s California Adventure);
Universal Studios, 5.2 million; Sea World, 4.0 million; Knott’s Berry Farm, 3.6 million; San
Diego Zoo, 3.2 million; Six Flags Magic Mountain, 3.1 million (sources: Amusement
Business, 2002; Legoland).
04363mm
11060:004.001
CELEBRATING 30 YEARS OF SERFICE TO OUR CLIENTS
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004
Subject: Page 9 Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Leg0 Hotel Project
0 In Southern California, only Disneyland has an integrated 4-star lodging facility, the 751-
room Disney Grand California Resort Hotel. Built in 200.1, this hotel capitalizes on
Disney’s worldwide reputation and the very high annual visitation achieved by the adjacent
Disneyland and California Adventure theme parks. A hotel of similar scale and quality on
the subject site would not have annual visitation comparable to Disney’s to support it.
Legoland is better suited to moderately-priced family accommodations.
Exclusive of consideration of the depth of market demand, the potential to develop a 4- or 5-
star resort facility elsewhere in Carlsbad is highly site-dependent. Throughout Southern
California there are few sites that can offer the physical and aesthetic amenities necessary for
construction of high-end lodging product. A golf course would be a key component of such a
project and would require between 40 and 75 acres of land. Large beachfront sites are non-
existent. It may be the case that no such opportunities remain in the City.
Even sites offering superior ocean views and/or lagoon views, such as in the Ponto
Drive/South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area (SCCRA), are not likely to support
construction of a 4-star-or-better lodging facility due to their surroundings and location east of
Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). By way of contrast, the Encinitas Beach Resort is to be located
west of PCH; and by virtue of its location atop the bluff and its unfettered beach access, it will
qualify as a 4-star property.
If the City is desirous of another 4- or 5-star lodging property in the City, then it may be
necessary to re-visit plans to realign Carlsbad Boulevard to, in essence, create a beachfront
site that can meet the criteria for a high-end beach resort.
F. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions
1. The analysis contained in this document is based, in part, on data from secondary sources
such as state and local government, planning agencies, real estate brokers, and other third
parties. While KMA believes that these sources are reliable, we cannot guarantee their
accuracy.
2. The analysis assumes that neither the local nor national economy will experience a major
recession. If an unforeseen change occurs in the economy, the conclusions contained
herein may no longer be valid.
3. The findings are based on economic rather than political considerations. Therefore, they
should be construed neither as a representation nor opinion that government approvals for
development can be secured.
CELEBRATING 30 YE.4RS OF SERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
04363mm
11060.004.001
To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18,2004
Subject: Page 10 Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Lego Hotel Project
4.
5.
6.
7.
Market feasibility is not equivalent to financial feasibility; other factors apart from the level
of demand for a land use are of crucial importance in determining feasibility. These factors
include the cost of acquiring sites, relocation burdens, traffic impacts, remediation of toxics
(if any), and mitigation measures required through the approval process.
Development opportunities are assumed to be achievable during the specified time frame.
A change in development schedule requires that the conclusions contained herein be
reviewed for validity.
The analysis, opinions, recommendations and conclusions of this document are KMA's
informed judgment based on market and economic conditions as of the date of this report.
Due to the volatility of market conditions and complex dynamics influencing the economic
conditions of the building and development industry, conclusions and recommended
actions contained herein should not be relied upon as sole input for final business
decisions regarding current and future development and planning.
KMA assumes no responsibility for matters of a legal, environmental, planning, or
engineering nature.
CELEBRATING30 YEARSOFSERVICE TO OUR CLIENTS
04363mm
11 060.004.001
ATTACHMENT 16
NATIVE AM ERICAN HERITAGE COMM I SS 1 ON
91s CAP17OL MALL ROOM 384
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
(916) 6534082
(916) 657-5300 - Fa
June 16,2004 Ms. Saima Qureshy City of Carlsbad
1635 faraday Ave.
Carlsbad. CA 92008
Re: Draft EIR; Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Resort Site SCH# 2004051 107
Dear Ma. Qureshy:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced Negative Declaration. The
Commission was able to perform a record search of its Sacrad Lands File for the project area. me record
search failed to indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources in the immediate project area;
however, the absence of specific site information in the Sacred Lands File does not guarantee the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites.
with Native American tribes in order to provide thorn with reasonable opportunity to identify (their) concerns
about historic properties, advise on the identification and evaluation of historic properties, including those of
tradiqonal religious and cultural importanca, articulate (their) views on the undertaking's effects on such properties,
and participate in the resolution of adverse effects." Enclosed is a list of Native American individualslorganizations
who may have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. The Commission makes no recommendation or
preferen- of a single individual or group over another. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. I suggest you contact all of those indicated: if they
cannot supply Information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. A minimum of two weeks must
be allowed for responses after notification. If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from any these indivlduals or groups, please now me, With your assistance we aw able to assure that our lists
contain current information. Liick of surface evidence of archeological resources does not pmclude the existence of archeological
resources. Lead agencies should include provisions for accidentally discovered archeological resources during construction per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code 61 5064.5 (0; Health and Safety Code §7050.5; and Public Resources Code g5097.98 mandate the process to be fdlocllwd in the event of an
accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery and should be included in all environmental documents. If you have any questions, please contact me at (Sl0) 653-6251.
Section 800.2 of the Federal Section 106 process (36 CFR PART 800) requlras that agencles consult
~
Sincecely,
Program Ana
cc: State Clearinghouse
- City of Carlsbad
July 12, 2004
Ms. Carol Gaubatz
Program Analyst
Native American Heritage Coinmission
915 Capitol Mall, Room 364
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Project Comments dated June 16,2003
Dear Ms. Gaubatz:
Thank you for your comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Carlsbad
Ranch Planning Area 5 in the City of Carlsbad. A previously recoded archeological site
is located within the project boundary, on the eastern edge of the project, just north of the
existing off-site water storage tank. The project applicant has taken a number of steps to
incorporate mitigation measures into the project design to minimize the impacts to the
archaeological resources.
The mitigation measures are incorporated in the project design in consultation with
Dennis Gallegos of Dennis Gallegos of Gallegos and Associates and Mark Mojado of the
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. Mr. Gallegos was responsible for the preparation
of the original Archaeological Report that was included in the Final Program EIR for
Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Mr. Gallegos and Mr. Mojado agreed to the creation of a
5,000 square foot archaeological preserve site with the completion of a data recovery
program. The archaeological preserve will include an information plaque informing
visitors about the area and the Native American heritage. Also, a reflectinghiewing area
will be provided allowing visitors to view the archaeological site without harming pre-
historic resources. The project will be surveyed and any archaeological artifacts found on
the property would be collected and cataloged. A letter is attached from Mr. Gallegos
detailing his findings.
If you have any additional comments or questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4619.
Sincerely,
G&% &LLb&)
Sairna Qureshy, AICP
Associate Planner
SQ:mh
Attachment
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-731 4 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
’ 5671 Palmer Way, Suite A
Carlsbad. California 9200s
email. gallcgos@aol corn
(760) 929-0055
I GIA L LE G o s
& Associates 04-300-064
April 27,2004
Saima Qureshy
Carlsbad Planning Department
1635 Fmday Avenue
Cadsbad, California 92008
Re: Cultural Resource Open Space Modification for Carlsbad Specific Plan EIR
Dear Ms. Qureshy,
As per the Carlsbad Specific Plan €IR, a portion of CA-SDI-8797 was to be developed
and a portion placed in open space and capped. Planning for the proposed hotel by Grand
Pacific Resorts identified that development of the property was not economically feasible
without encroachment into that prtion of CA-SDI-8797 proposed for open space.
Without this encroachment, the proposed project would lack the necessary view potential
for the hotel units ox conference facilities, and which could result in the creation of higher
man-made slopes and a possible increase in the amount of pdmg required for the
praposed project.
To resolve this issue, a meeting was held with Tim Stripe (Grand Pacific Resorts), Bill
Hohan (Hofman Planning), Don Neu (City of Carlsbad), Mark Mojado (Native
American Representative), and Dennis Gailegos (Gallegos & Associates) to discuss
potential alternatives and/or modifications to the open space proposed fox a portion of
CA-SDI-8797. This meeting resuited in mitigation of development impacts and
protection of the primary site area (45,000 sq. fl.) within an open space casement. This
area, as well as the slope, will contain only native plants, will be assisted in design by the
Native American Representative, wilt provide capping and protection for a portion of
CA-SDI-8797, and will be signed with a plaque discussing Native American history. The
incorporation of the 45,000-sq-ft portion of CA-SDI-8797 into the development plan will,
overall, provide better lmgdenn protectian. Development impacts to the remaining site
area, previously proposed for capping, will be mitigated through the completion of a data
recovery program. As this redesign is not consistent with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (1 992), the redesign with mitigation measures of avoidance and capping, as well as
data recovery, is consistent with CEQA and City of Carlsbad Guidelines. Please call me
should you have questions or comments, or need additional information.
President
Cc: T. Stripe, B. Hofman
UU/ LI/ LUlJ4 10 04 FAA lOU4JlDYUZ US b’lSH AND WILDLIFE --- -.----.--- @I 002
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office
6010 Hidden Valley Road
Carlsbad, California 92009
California Department of Fish & Game
South Coast Regional Ofice
4949 Viewridge Avenue
San Diego, California 92123
(858) 467-4201 (760) 431-9440
FAX (760) 431-5902 FAX (858) 467-4299
In Reply Refer to:
FWS-SDG-4053.1
Ms. Saima Qureshy
City of Carlsbad
Planning Department
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Re: Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5, City of
Carlsbad, California
Dear Ms. Qureshy:
The California Department of Fish and Game (Department) and U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) (collectively, “Wildlife Agencies”) have reviewed the above-referenced Mitigated
Negative Declaration (MND), dated May 21,2004, for the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 in
the City of Carlsbad (City). The comments provided herein are based on the information
provided in the MND, the biological letter report for the project, dated January 10,2003; our files
on the project; and the Wildlife Agencies’ knowledge of sensitive and declining vegetation
communities in San Diego County, and participation in regional conservation planning efforts.
The primary concern and mandate of the Service is the protection of public,fish and wildlife
resources and their habitats. The Service has legal responsibility for the welfare of migratory
birds, anadromous fish, and endangered animals and plants occurring in the United States. The
Service is also responsible for administering the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(Act) (16 U.S.C. 153 1 et seq.). The Department is a Trustee Agency and a Responsible Agency
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Sections 15386 and 15381,
respectively. Pursuant to Section 1802 of the Fish and Game Code, the Department has
jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native plants and
habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. As a Trustee Agency,
the Department must be consulted by the Lead Agency during the preparation and public review
for project-specific CEQA documents if there are potential impacts to biological resources. The
Department also administers the Natural Community Conservation Planning program. The City
is currently participating in the NCCP program through the preparation of a Multiple Habitat
Conservation Program Habitat Management Plan (HMP).
ub/21/2004 18:54 FAX 7604315902 US FISH AND WILDLIFE
I
The Wildlife Agemi? appreciate the opportunity to comment on the MND,
i
Wej&er the
.- . .. 'i I
IC 99
kistant Field Supervisor US, Fish and Wildlife Seryice
cc: StateClearinghousc
Enclosure
Donald R. Chadwick
Senior Environmental ScieatiSt Califhia Department of Firth and Game
a 004
Ms. Saima Qureshy (FWS-SDG4053.1)
ENCLOSURE
3
WLLDLIFE AGENCY COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ON TIIE CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 PROJECT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
1. The MND indicates that 0.16 acre of coastal sage scrub (CSS) on site will be conserved;
however, the biology letter report, dated January 10,2003, states that the project will
impact this habitat, which is contiguous with CSS preserved off site, and along the
northeastern edge of the project. Please clarify this discrepancy. If impacts to CSS are
proposed, the project should be redesigned to avoid such impacts. Any unavoidable
impacts to CSS would need to be authorized by the Wildlife Agencies under the 4(d)
Special Rule of the Act. If the project proposes to impact CSS, we recommend protocol-
level surveys for coastal California gnatcatcher (PoEioptiZa californicu calijomica;
gnatcatcher).
2. The annual grassland and CSS on site have the potential to be inhabited by rare plant
species. The Wiidlife Agencies recommend that rare plant surveys be conducted in the
spring during a year with adequate rainfall to make detection of rare ephemeral plants
likely if they are present.
3. Because the project site is adjacent to existing and proposed hardline conservation areas,
development should be consistent with the adjacency standards in the City's HMP.
4. The Wildlife Agencies recommend that construction activities be scheduled to avoid the
bird breeding season (approximately February 15 through August 31, however raptors
may begin breeding as early as January). Construction activities during the breeding
season may result in the destruction of nests or disruption of nesting success.
Gnatcatchers are known to occupy the CSS in the adjacent preserve and could be
indirectly impacted from construction noise. Therefore, if project construction is
necessary during the bird breeding season, a qualified biologst must conduct a survey for
nesting birds, including ground-nesting birds such as northern harrier, within three days
prior to the work in the area, and ensures no nesting birds on-site, or gnatcatchers in the
adjacent preserve, shall be impacted by the project. If an active nest is identified, a buffer
shall be established between the construction activities and the nest so that nesting
activities are not interrupted. The buffer shall be a minimum width of 300 feet (500 feet
for raptors), shall be delineated by temporary fencing, and shall remain in effect as long
as construction is occurring or until the nest is no longer active. No habitat removal or
any other work shall occur within the fenced nest zone, until the young have fledged, are
no longer being fed by the parents, have left the nest, and will no longer be impacted by
the project. The mapped survey results will be submitted to the Wildlife Agencies for
review and approval prior to vegetation removal to ensure full avoidance measures are in
place.
UUJ
Ms. Saima Qureshy (FWS-SDG4053.1) 4
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
The Wildlife Agencies consider a fuel modification zone to be part of the project's
impacts. Please verify that the fuel modification zone has been included in the
calculation of the project impacts to habitats and species. If fuel modification is required
in the CSS on site andor on the adjacent biological open space, the project should be
redesigned to avoid such impacts. Any unavoidable impacts to CSS due to fuel
modification would need to be authorized by the Wildlife Agencies under the 4(d) Special
Rule of the Act.
A biological monitor should be present during construction and implementation of
mitigation programs to ensure that conservation measures required in the MND, resource
agency permits, and construction documents are performed in'compliance with those
documents and any concurrent or subsequent mitigation plans. Any unauthorized impacts
or acts not in compliance with the required mitigation should be immediately brought to
the attention of the City and Wildlife Agencies.
The limits of impact should be fenced and erosionhiltation should be
controlledlminimized during initial vegetation clearinglgrubbing and project construction
through the use of silt fencing, siltation basins, gravel bags, or other controls necessary to
prevent the spread of soil from the project into the adjacent biological open space.
Fencing and erosion control measures should be placed within the impact footprint in a
manner that avoids impacts to vegetation in the adjacent biological open space. Fencing
and erosion control measures should be installed prior to performing initial vegetation
clearinglgrubbing and kept in place and in good repair until completion of project
construction.
We recommend that permanent fencing (with signs delineating the area as biological
open space) be installed between the impact area and biological open space (on site and
off site, to the east). Fencing should be designed in coordination with the Wildlife
Agencies to minimize intrusion into the sensitive habitats from humans and pets. There
should be no gates between the development and the open space.
The Wildlife Agencies recommend the use of native plants to the greatest extent feasible
in the landscape areas adjacent to and/or near mitigatiodopen space areas andor
wetland/riparian areas. The applicant should not plant, seed or otherwise introduce
invasive exotic plant species to the landscaped areas adjacent andor near the
mitigatiodopen space area and/or wetlandriparian areas. Exotic plant species not to be
used include those species listed on Lists A & B of the California Invasive Plant
Council's list of "Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California as of
October 1999." This list includes such species as: pepper trees, pampas grass, fountain
grass, ice plant, myopomm, black locust, capeweed, tree of heaven, periwinkle, sweet
alyssum, English ivy, French broom, Scotch broom, and Spanish broom. A copy of the
complete list can be obtained by contacting the California Invasive Plant Council at 1442-
A Walnut Street, #462, Berkeley, California 94709, or by accessing their web site at
htto://www . calewc .ore.
006
Ms. Saima Qureshy (FWS-SDG-4053.1) 5
10. We recommend that a resident education program be developed in coordination with the
Wildlife Agencies. The program should advise residents of the potential impacts to state
and federally listed species and the potential penalties for taking such species. The
program should include, but not be limited to, information pamphlets and signage of the
fencing between the development and the biological conservation easement. Pamphlets
should be distributed to all residences. At a minimum, the program shoud include the
following topics: occurrence of listed and sensitive species in the area, their general
ecology, sensitivity of the species to human activities, impacts from free-roaming pets
(particularly domestic and feral cats), legal protection afforded these species, penalties for
violations of Federal and State laws, reporting requirements, and project features
designed to reduce the impacts to these species and promote continued successful
occupation of the preserved areas.
- City of Carlsbad
July 12,2004
Ben Frater
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services
6010 Hidden Valley Road
Carlsbad, CA 92009
RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Project Comments dated June 17,2004
This letter is in response to your comment letter to the City for Carlsbad Ranch Planning
Area 5 - Resort Project. Please see the attached letter from Project Biologist, Merkel &
Associates responding to your comments. Also attached is the addendum to the EIA
which lists additional mitigation measures that are included in response to your
comments.
If you have any additional comments or questions, please contact me at (760) 602-461 9.
Sincerely,
Saima Qureshy, AICP
Associate Planner
SQ:rnh
Attachment
c: Nancy Frost
California Department of Fish & Game
South Coast Regional Office
4949 Viewridge Avenue
San Diego, CA 92123
.@ 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
Merkel & Associates, /nc.
5434 Ruffin Road, San Diego,CA 92123
Tel: 858/560-5465 Fax: 858/560-7779
e-mail: associates @ merkelinc.com
July 5, 2004
M&A #02-096-03
Habitat Type Acres Impacted MND/HMP Mit. Ratio Agricultural Fields 41.23 acres ---
1.98 acres 0.5: I Annual Grassland Disturbed Habitat 8.13 acres _-_
0.00 acres 2: 1 Diegan Sage Scrub
Mr. Bill Hofinan
Hofman Planning Associates
5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 150
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Mitigation
0.99 acres
0.00 acres
RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - MND Comments Biological Response and
Biological Report Addendum
Dear Mr. Hofman:
At your request, we have reviewed the biological information we previously prepared on
January 10, 2003 for the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 relative to joint comment from the
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish & Game (Wildlife Agencies)
submitted to Ms. Saima Qureshy in response to the published Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) for the proposed development and dated June 21, 2004. This letter is to serve both
to address Wildlife Agency comments on the MND and to serve as an addendum to the
biological report previously prepared by Merkel & Associates (M&A). The addendum is
necessary to address the designed reduction in project impacts that occurred after the
completion of the January 10, 2003 report.
Following the issuance of the January 10, 2003 biological report, several impact
minimization recommendations made in the biological report were implemented in project
design changes. Most substantially. the project planners and developer revised the project
footprint to avoid all direct impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub. In addition, the project
proponents worked with the Carlsbad Fire Department to develop a fuel modification
boundary that is completely contained within the development footprint and does not extend
into sage scrub habitat. For purposes of clarification of the project grading limits and fire
protection boundaries, M&A has requested and been provided a current exhibit of the eastern
project boundary in areas adjacent to native habitats and the Hubb Park hardline conservation
area of the City of Carlsbad’s HMP (attachment, provided by Kurt Wilkins, Excel
Engineering, July 2, 2004). M&A has reviewed the project modifications and concurs that
these changes will adequately ensure that the project will not directly result in the loss of
Diegan sage scrub habitat. As such, habitat impacts of the project are revised in this
addendum to be as follows:
The following responses are offered to address the comments provided by the Wildlife
Agencies. Agency comments have been summarized in this response and the reader is
directed to the Wildlife Agency comment letter of June 21, 2004 for full comment text:
Comment I: &rib the discrepanc.v between the MND and January 10, 2003 biological
letter report relative to impacts to 0.16 acres of coastal sage scrub.
Response 1: The MND is correct. No direct impact to Diegan coastal sage scrub would
occur as a result of the proposed project. Modifications to the plan were made
to avoid impacts post January 10,2003 to address recommendations made in
the biological report for impact avoidance.
Comment 2: Wildlife Agencies recommend a spring rare plant survey of the annual
grasslands and CSS on-site during n year with adequate rainfall.
Response 2: Coastal sage scrub impacts have been eliminated by project design
modifications. The grasslands on the site are located in marine loamy coarse
sands and not clay soils. This substantially limits the potential for occurrence
of rare annual or bulbous perennial plants that would not be detectible except
in spring months. In addition, the grasslands on site have been historically
under intense agricultural uses as has the remainder of the disturbed lands.
This historic use further limits potential for rare plants. Finally, the only
ephemeral rare plant that would normally be expected in such habitats is the
Del Mar Mesa Sand Aster (Coretlzrogyne fiZagin$dia var. linzfolia ). This
species is not known to range as far north as the site. Because of these
conditions, a spring rare plant survey is not believed to be necessary for the
grassland habitat proposed to be impacted by the project.
Comment 3: Because the site is udjuceizt to existing lzurdline preserve areas, development
should be consistent with the adjacency standards in the City’s HMP.
Response 3: The proposed project should comply with adjacency standards of the Carlsbad
HMP. Most of these were addressed in previous recommendations of the
January 10, 2004 biological report. However, to clarify, those adjacency
standards applicable to the proposed project are briefly summarized below
along with recommended measures to ensure compliance with these standards.
I. Fire clearing mist be shown to be within the development area and
shall not extend to preserve lands.
The project is designed to achieve this standard.
2. No new surface drainnge shall he directed into the preserve.
The project is designed to drain to the west, away from the preserve
area on the eastern project boundary.
3. No invnsive species shnll be used in landscaping acljacent to the
preserve areas.
The project shall restrict the use of landscape materials on Lists A &
' B of the California Invasive Plant Council's list of "Exotic Pest Plants
of Greatest Ecological Concern in California as of October 1999". In
addition, proposed landscape plant material palettes shall be reviewed
by the City of Carlsbad and a qualified biologist to ensure that
materials to be used do not possess known invasive qualities.
4. Prevent irrigation runqff into the preserve.
The project shall be designed to prevent runoff of irrigation into the
adjacent preserve. This requirement shall be made a part of final
landscape design review and final inspection to be completed by the
City of Carlsbad.
5. Perrnnnent fencing shall br erected along the preserve boundary to
protect the preserve,from adverse edge effects.
The project boundary adjacent to the preserve area shall be fenced
using a fence designed to minimize accessibility of the open space by
both people and domestic animals. Several fences designed for this
purpose are presently being marketed. It is recommended that fence
selection be coordinated with the Wildlife Agencies given recent
exposure to many various fencing designs to address barrier designs.
The City of Carlsbad shall verify fence material selection suitability
and installation as an element of final project review and construction
inspection.
6. Lighting within the project shall be directed nway from the preserve
wherever pructicnl and slzall be shielded in a manner that avoids
illurnination ojpreserve nreus.
A proposed street and security lighting plan shall be submitted for
review and acceptance by the City of Carlsbad. The lighting plan
shall include the use of low-intensity shielded lighting in areas
adjacent to or facing the preserve areas. Lighting shall result in a
predicted increase in illumination at the preserve boundary by no
more than 10% of the ambient levels.
Comment 4: Wildlife Agencies reconiinend that construction nctivities be scheduled to
avoid the bird breeding season (February 15 through August 31). Where
breeding season construction cannot be civoided,, Wildlife Agencies have
reconzmencled that n qualified biologist conduct pre-coizstructioiz surveys jor
breeding birds not iizore thun three duys prior to initiating work and providing
a tein~~omrily,feizced huffer qf'nt least 300,feet between work ureas and nny
occupied avinn nest.
Response 4:
Comment 5:
Response 5:
Comment 6:
Response 6:
Comment 7:
Response 7:
Comment 8:
Response 8:
Comment 9:
Response 9:
This recommended measure should be incorporated into the conditions of
approval for the project.
Wildlife Agencies reqsiest verification that the fuel modzfication zone is
included~fdly within the de.velol3inentfootl3rint and does not extend into CSS..
The project plans incorporate the fuel modification zone completely within the
project footprint and no impacts to CSS would occur as a result of fuel
management activities.
Wildlijc Agencies havci request thut ci biological monitor he present clLiring
construction and implementcition of mitigation progrums to eiwire
conservution measures in the MND, resoLirce agency permits, and
Construction clocLinzents cue in compliance with mitigution mensures.
This recommended measure should be incorporated into the conditions of
approval for the project.
Wildlife Agencies request the iniplementation of construction fencing and silt
rurzofl control nzeusLires prior to initiation of construction and maintennnce of
these measiires thro Lighout construction.
This recommended measure should be incorporated into the conditions of
approval for the project.
Wildlife Agencies recommend permanent fencing and signage to he
constrircted dong the preserve boundary.
See response to Comment 3. This recommended measure should be
incorporated into the conditions of approval for the praject.
Wildlife Agencies recommend the ~ise qf native plnnts to the grentest extent
fensihle within the lnnclsc~ping near the preserve hoiindaries and recommend
avoiding the use of species that Lire known to be invusive to native hahituts..
See response to Comment 3. This recommended measure should be
incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project.
Comment 10: Wildlife Agencies reconzmencl tlze implernerztation oj n resiclent edi.icntion
progrcim to be developed in coordinution with the Wildlije Agencies. The
Progrum should udvise residents of the poterztinl impncts to listed species and
potentinl penalties, for tuke. In addition tlze program shoidd include the
clistribcition of pumplzlets nnd posting of signnge along the preserve ,fence. The
progrcim should citlclress listecl mcl sensitive species in the urea, domestic
aiziinnls, le\qal protertioris ufforded listed species, cind project jeatures
incorporated to mscire continued occiipntion of the preserved ureas.
Response 10: The project should include the preparation of informational material and
signage that specifically addresses the requirements of development occupants.
Materials should be posted along the preserve fence and should also be
provided as pamphlets made a part of the disclosure documentation for all new
occupants. Material shall be developed and approved for use by the City of
Carfsbad Planning Department in coordination with Wildlife Agencies.
I hope this letter clarifies project changes made post-January IO, 2003 and adequately
responds to comments made iii the June 21, 2004 Wildlife Agency letter addressing the MND
for the project. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely ,
Keith W. Merkel
Principal Consultant
Attachment: Vegetation Exhibit - preserve boundary map
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 1 I
P. 0. BOX 85406, MS 50
SAN DIEGO. CA 92 186-5406
PHONE (619) 688-6954
FAX (619) 688-4299 TTY (619) 688-6670
‘. Flex your power!
Be energy eflcient!
June 17,2004
1 1 -SD-005
PM 47.03 (KP 75.7)
SCH 2004051 107
Ms. Saima Qureshy
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314
Dear Ms. Qureshy:
The California Department of Transportation (Department) appreciates the opportunity to
review the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed
Carlsbad Ranch Resort, located east of Interstate 5 (1-5) between the Palomar Airport Road
and Cannon Road Interchanges. The project is estimated to generate 7,167 ADT. We have
the following comments:
TRAFFIC
A Transportation Analysis for the Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan - Zone 13 (of
which the Carlsbad Ranch Resort is a part of) was prepared for the City of Carlsbad in August
1994. The traffic analyses were conducted for the Year 2000 and “Buildout” conditions (201 0).
As stated in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, January 2001,
Section II C - A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) requires updating when the amount or character of
traffic is significantly different from an earlier study. Generally, a TIS requires updating every
two years, and may require updating sooner in rapidly developing areas.
Traffic volumes on Interstate 5 in the vicinity of Palomar Airport Rd. and Cannon Rd. have
increased from 159,000 in 1995 to 208,000 north of Cannon Rd. and 210,000 south of
Palomar Airport Rd. in 2002. The freeway is currently operating at or near capacity during a
large segment of the day and is breaking down in the peak travel hours in both directions at
several locations within the Carlsbad city limits.
Therefore, an updated Traffic Impact Analysis in accordance with the Caltrans Guide for the
Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, dated January 2001 is requested.
The Traffic Impact Analysis must use traffic data from the latest Caltrans District 11 Traffic
Volumes to analyze the Level of Service at all State owned facilities and mainline freeways.
For future traffic data, contact Maurice Eaton, Caltrans Travel Forecasting Branch Chief, to
obtain forecasted freeway traffic volumes.
“Caltrans improves mobility across California” 1-59
Ms. Saima Qureshy
June 17,2004
Page 2
Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target Level of Service (LOS) at the transition between LOS
“C” and LOS “D” (see Appendix “C-3” of the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic
Impact Studies, January 2001) on State owned facilities, including intersections. If an existing
State owned facility is operating at less than the appropriate target LOS, the existing measures
of effectiveness (MOE) should be maintained.
If an intersection is currently below LOS C, any increase in delay from project-generated traffic
must be analyzed and mitigated. Analysis of the intersections shall be done using Intersecting
Lane Vehicle (ILV) calculations as per the Highway Design Manual (HDM), Section 406, page
400-21.
With increasing emphasis on joint involvement with Federal, State, and Public Agencies to
have as their goal providing an adequate transportation network in the year 2030, Caltrans
supports the concept of “fair share” contributions on the part of the developer.
Potential improvements to Interstate 5 include:
0 Widening the southbound ramps (off ramp and on ramp) at Palomar Airport Rd.
0 Constructing an auxiliary lane northbound between Palomar Airport Rd. and Cannon Rd.
and between Cannon Rd. and Tamarack Ave. OC.
0 Traffic channelization over the existing bridge structure at Palomar Airport Rd.
0 Widening of the 1-5 Corridor with High Occupancy Vehicles (HOV) lanes.
0 Constructing a Direct Access Ramp (DAR) at Cannon Rd.
If you should have any questions related to the TIS please contact Julie Carlin at 858-467-
2374.
Close coordination with the Department is encouraged. If you have any other project-
related questions, please contact Vann Hurst, Development Review Branch, at 61 9-688-
6976.
Sincerely,
f
1) MARIO H. ORSO, Chief
Development Review Branch
C: JCarlin (MS 55)
BFigge (MS 50)
EGojuangco (MS 55)
VHurst (MS 50)
Carlsbad Ranch Resort
“Caltrans improves mobility across California”
7/21/0q
City of Carlsbad
July 12,2004
Mario H. Orso, Chief
Development Review Branch
Department of Transportation
District 11
P.O. Box 85406, MS 50
San Diego, CA 92186-5406
RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Project Comments dated June 17,2004
Dear Mr. Orso:
Thank you for your comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Carlsbad
Ranch Planning Area 5 in the City of Carlsbad. Please see the attached report by Urban
Systems Associate, Inc. in response to your comments.
If you have any additional comments or questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4619.
Sincerely,
Saima Qureshy, AICP
Associate Planner
SQ:mh
Attachment
/b/
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
URBAN SYSTEMS ASS0
Ms. Saima Qureshy .€-Mail Address
squre@ci.carlsbad.ca.us
TOTAL PAGES: 6 f- 8 Attachments
JOB NUMBER.’ 004501
4 TO:
COMPANY: City of Carlsbad
FROM:
DATE: July 2, 2004
SUBJECT: CARLSBAD RANCH PA-5 RESORT
TIME .’ 1054 am Sam P. Kab I1 q?
Urban Systems Associates, Inc. has prepared an evaluation of the Interstate 5/Cannon
Road interchange based on both existing 2003 conditions and buildout conditions as
included in the Final Environmental Impact Report for Carlsbad Ranch. This evaluation is
in response to the Caltrans letter dated June 17, 2004, regarding this project.
As a result of our evaluation, it can be concluded that:
The current peak hour operations at the I-5/Cannon Road interchange ramps are
at levels of service “A” or “B” so that adequate reserve capacity would be available
as the Carlsbad Ranch Resort is constructed without the need for interchange
improvements.
The buildout peak hour conditions are expected to be at LOS “D” at the I-5/Cannon
Road ramps without the need for interchange improvements,
At buildout, the peak hour conditions at the I-5/Cannon Road interchange are
expected to be at or slightly greater than the 1,500 ILV/HR value that Caltrans
typically uses for design purposes, so that no additional interchange improvements
should be needed through buildout of the City of Carlsbad, including the Carlsbad
Ranch Resort.
At buildout, the peak hour project trips to Interstate 5 mainlanes will be less than
one percent of peak hour capacity. Therefore, according to Regional Congestion
Management Program guidelines] the project impact to 1-5 is less than significant
and no project freeway mitigation should be needed nor is recommended.
Provided below is a discussion of our evaluation:
BUILDOUT FORECAST COMPARISON
The buildout scenario included in the approved Carlsbad Ranch FEIR was based on volumes
provided from the SANDAG Regional Traffic Model in use at the time of DEIR preparation,
plus a manual addition of project only traffic from LEGOLAND, since the theme park is a
#004501 Page 1 C:\,O FFICE- 2004\450 1 - 70204-spk. wpd/disk
Ms. Saima Qureshy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. .. Ju/y 2, 2004
unique traffic generator. The Regional Traffic Model included the buildout of the City of
Carlsbad General Plan as background traffic. The Year 2020 was assumed as the time
frame for the City of Carlsbad buildout.
The current SANDAG Regional Traffic Model assumes Year 2030 as the design time frame.
However, the previously approved Year 2020 trafic model results are still valid for use in
the evaluation of the Carlsbad Ranch Resort since the recent economic slowdown and slow
growth caused by the economic conditions have extended the design time frame of the
traffic model.
An evaluation of the traffic growth rate from Year 2003 to Year 2030 using the approved
Carlsbad Ranch FEIR peak hour projections for buildout indicate that the total growth in
approach volumes at the I-5/Cannon Road interchange is approximately 3.8% per year in
the AM peak hour and 3.1% per year in the PM peak hour. These growth rates per year
are higher than the approximately 3% growth per year typically assumed when using a
“straight-line growth rate” to predict future traffic volumes. Therefore, the approved FEIR
buildout peak hour volumes are appropriate for use for this evaluation.
1-5 (CANNON ROAD TOTAL APPROACH PEAK HOUR VOLUME COMPARISON
AVERAGE GROWTH RATE” I 3.8% I 3.1% I
* (YEAR 2030 - YEAR 2003)
= AVERAGE GROWTH RATE (27 YEARS) (YEAR 2003)
LAND USE COMPARISON
Attachment 1 includes excerpts from the Carlsbad Ranch Congestion Management Plan
which includes land use, trip generation, and buildout volume assumptions used in the Final
EIR for evaluation of traffic impacts.
#004501 Page 2 C:\OFFICE- 2004\4501-70204-~pk. ~pd/d~~k
Ms. Saima Qureshy
Ju/y 2, 2004
Urban Systems Associates, Inc.
AM
PM
The current proposed resort is within the land use assumptions assumed in the approved
FEIR for the Carlsbad Ranch. The table below shows a comparison of the land use
assumptions to the current project. The golf course is not part of the resort project.
% CAPACITY LOS % CAPACITY LOS
5C% A 58% A
44% A 67% B
3,000 SF SPORTS CENTER
The similarity of land use to the approved FEIR also applies to the traffic assumptions so
that the project traffic contribution to the I-5/Cannon Road interchange will not change.
EXISTING PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE
Attachment 2 includes AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes and levels of service
calculations for the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange ramp intersections for current
conditions.
The levels of service and capacity utilization percentages are summarized below:
EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE I I I SOUTHBOUND RAMPS I NORTHBOUNDRAMPS I
As shown in this table, adequate reserve capacity (up to 90% of capacity equals LOS “0”)
exists for the addition of background traffic plus resort traffic without the need for
interchange improvements.
#004501 Page 3
Ms. Saima Qureshy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. ._
Ju/y 2, 2004
AM
PM
BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE
% CAPACITY LOS % CAPACITY LOS
8 7% D 89% D
78% C 84% D
Attachment 3 includes worksheets used to calculate buildout peak hour levels of
based on the buildout peak hour volumes included for the approved EIR analysis.
service
I I BUILDOUT LEVELS OF SERVICE i I SOUTHBOUND RAMPS 1 NORTHBOUNDRAMPS 1
As indicated above, acceptable levels of service are expected through buildout without the
need for interchange improvements.
CALTRANS INTERCHANGE DESIGN VOLUMES AT BUILDOUT
The Caltrans design volumes at interchange ramps typically are at 1,500 Intersecting Lane
Vehicles Per Hour (ILV/HR). An ILV/HR calculation for the current lane configurations and
current peak hour volumes total 1,084 ILV/HR in the AM peak hour and 1,049 ILV/HR in
the PM Therefore, reserve capacity exists at the interchange that can
accommodate future traffic including project traffic without the need for additional lanes
at the ramp intersections. Attachment 4 shows the existing conditions ILV/HR calculations.
peak hour.
An ILV/HR calculation for buildout peak hour volumes assumed in the approved FEIR
indicates the interchange would accommodate 1,538 ILV/HR in the AM peak hour and
1,528 ILV/HR in the PM peak hour under buildout conditions with no additional lanes at
the ramp intersections, as summarized in Attachment 5.
AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
#004501 Page 4 C:\OFFICE-2004\4501-70204-spk. w,od/disk
Ms. Saima Qureshy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. ..
July2, 2004
INTERSTATE 5 MAINLANE PEAK HOUR EVALUATION
Attachment 6 shows the buildout peak hour assignment of project trips to Interstate 5.
The trip generation and directional distribution percentages were taken from the Carlsbad
Ranch Congestion Management Plan. As shown in this attachment, the highest one
direction peak hour traffic from the project is expected to be only 93 vehicles per hour.
The mainlane capacity per lane is 2,350 vehicles per hour per lane as obtained from
Caltrans’ Guide for the Preparcation of Traffic Imwad Studies, December, 2002 (see
Attachment 7).
The project’s traffic to 1-5 mainlanes, therefore, would be iess than one percent of capacity:
0.99% - 93 VPH -
4 LANES x 2,350 PC/HR/LANE
According to SANDAG’s Regional Congestion Management Program’s Measure of Significant
Project Impacts (Attachment 8), the allowable change of volume to capacity (V/C) ratio
due to a project impact to fr.eeways is a one percent change.
Therefore] since the project peak hour change in V/C ratio will be less than one percent,
the project’s traffic impacts to 1-5 mainlanes should be considered less than significant.
No project freeway mitigation nor contribution to mitigation should be needed nor is
recommended.
CONCLUSIONS
Existinn Conditions
The current I-5/Cannon Road ramp intersections operate acceptably and with reserve
capacity by both City of Carlsbad and Caltrans criteria so that project traffic can be added
with no interchange improvements needed.
Buildout Interchanne Ramp Levels of Service
At buildout, using peak hour volumes contained in the approved Carlsbad Ranch FEIR, the
1-5jCannon Road interchange ramps are expected to operate acceptably and within the City
#004501 Page 5
Ms. Sairna Qureshy Urban Sysfems Associates, Inc. .-
July 2, 2004
of Carlsbad Growth Management Program requirements of no worse than LO5 “0” during
peak hours, with no additional lanes needed at the interchange.
B u i 1 do ut Ca It r a n s’ ILV /H R Eva I u a t i on
At buildout, the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange is expected to operate at or near the
Caltrans design volume for a tight diamond interchange without the need for additional
lanes at the intersection.
Buildout 1-5 Mainlane Evaluation
At buildout, the project’s peak hour contribution to 1-5 mainlanes is expected to be less
than one percent of mainlane capacity so that the project impact is considered less than
significant and no mitigation is needed.
Please let me know ifyou have questions or need additional information.
Attachment 1:
Attachment 2:
Attachment 3:
Attachment 4:
Attachment 5:
Attachment 6:
Attachment 7:
Attachment 8:
Congestion Management Plan for the Carlsbad Ranch Excerpts
Existing AM and PM Traffic Counts at I-5/Canon Road, LOS Calculations
Buildout LO5 Worksheets
Existing ILV/HR
Buildout ILV/HR
Resort Buildout Peak Hour Assignment to 1-5
Basic Freeway Segments Capacity
Freeway Segment Measure of Significant Impacts
cc: Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning
Tim Stripe, Grand Pacific Resorts
#004501 Page 6 C:\OFFICE-Z004\4501- 7020+spk.wpd/disk
f% 7
-2.
CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR TidE
CARSSAD RANCH
Carisbad, California
May 23, 1995
Prepared for:
CITY OF CARLSBAD
Prepared by:
KAKU ASSOCIATES, INC.
1453 Third Street, Suite 403
Santa Monica, California 40401
(31 0) 458-391 6
Ref: 828
1 I"
I
ix
lb9
36
rn w I 3
0 w
Y
LL LL
U oz L
c =J
3 -
x 4 w a
n k.
n L
a
-a
2
S-z- \
/73
L I
ATTACHMENT 4
Si g n a I ized I n te rsectio n
CAPACITY
INTERSECTION:
ALTERNATIVE: Existing 2003
Route 5 & Cannon Rood
\\ I
LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HR)a
I1 I :
Page 1 of 2
TIGHT DIAMOND
AN A LY S I S
DIST. CO. RTE. 1 1 -SD-5
PA.- 47.98
BY DATE 6/02/Q4
TIME PEAK @ P.M.
DEMAND TRAFFIC FLOWS
A
-1 81 rg6
396-
607
B
L 87 -207
118 J
1317-
I-
it’
CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES (ILVMRh ~~lxrl~~
198-
TOTAL OPERATING LEVEL (ILV/HRh
I c @>1200 BUT < 1500 ILV/HR
!J >I so0 ILV/HR (CAPACITY)
CD-5 450 1-Attachmen’s.drvg
/ 73-
ATTACHMENT 4
Signalized Intersection
Page 2 of 2
TIGHT DIAMOND
CAPACITY
INTERSECTION:
ALTERNATIVE
Route 5 & Connon Rood
Existing 2003
I \
DIAGRAM ‘\W/k 4
DIAGRAM
LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HRh
%-
ANALYSIS
DIST. CO. RTE. ’ 1-SD-5
P.M. 47.98
BY DATE 6/02/04
TIME PEAK A.M. 0
DEMAND TRAFFIC FLOWS
-560
/-456
463-
B
30 52-
PHASE 4
CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HRt I,,:;dJi~,PH/i5E3,~~
232-
TOTAL QPERATING LEVEL (ILV/HRb
DAFFIC CONDI-
EXISTING 2003
<1200 ILV/HR c] >1200 BUT < 1500 ILV/HR
>1500 ILV/HR (CAPACITY)
CD-S 450 1-Attachrnentsdwg
ATACHMENT 5
Sig n a I ized I nte rse ctio n
Page 1 of 2
TIGHT DIAMOND
CAPACITY
INTERSECTION:
ALTERNATIVE: Buildout
Route 5 & Cannon Road
/ \
DIAGRAM \ \ I
LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HR):
ANA LY S I S
DIST. CO. RTE. ’’ -SD--5
P.M. -
BY DATE 6/02/04
TIME PEAK HOUR @ P.M.
47.98
DEMAND TRAFFIC FLOWS
PHASE 2 /hc1
-500
r40
67- ST
195 J
1365-
Nf 000
(00 “0,
PHASE 4 rn
FIC CONOUKR&
BUILDOUT
0 (1200 ILV/HR
0>1200 BUT < l5DO ILV/HR
>i500 IW/HR (CAPACITY)
CD-T 45 0 1-Attachmentsilhg
ATACHMENT 5
Sig n a 1 ized I nte rsecfio n
CAPACITY
INTERSECTION: Route 5 & Cannon Road
ALTERNATIVE: Buildout
LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HRh
PHASE 2
Page 2 of2
TIGHT DIAMOND
AN A LY S I S
DIST. CO. RTE. '
P-M.
BY DATE 6/02/04
TIME PEAK HOUR A.M. @
47.98
DEMAND TRAFFIC FLOWS,
40 0 -
ra50
78+
12?
PHASE 3
-I -
\-I 550 -1 090
355 J
129-
>It 000
wv .-b
PHASE 4 7qq-3g
Y El-$
CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HRh r,,,,:;,y,,,,,,I!
390-
TOTAL OPERATING LEVEL (ILV/HRh
TRAFFIC CONDlI.&ZfS
BUILDOUT
0 <1200 rJ >1200
@ >1500
1LV/HR
BUT 4
ILV/HR
1500 ILV/HR
(CAPACIM)
CD-S 450 I-Attachmerrtsdwg
CARLSBAD RANCH TFUP GENEIU'TION
303.000 SF
500,000 SF
N m
20 per 1000 SF
a par 1000 SF
I---- DEVELOPMENT
ISpeclallly Roiall
Olllce
JR6D
jLeoo Family Park
Total
LAND USE GENERATION UATE
campus
325.WO SF
700 Rooms
6.000 SF Commarcial [2
24.000 SFMealinp I21
I f31
BUILDOW
DAILY
TRIPS
4.700
16,250
6,000
4.000
2.800
800
3.600
5.600
1.300
-%E 6.100
6.162
50.832
NO~BS - I11 Per 'Cdrlsbal Ranch Speclfic Plan' (Urban Syslems Associalas. lnc. June 1992)
[PI Supponlng uses 01 holel.
PM PEAK HOUR AM PEAKHOUR
IN OUT TOTAL 1 IN Om TOTAL I I I I I
101 67 168 90 224
, 72 115 77 192 170 126 296
168 112 280. 157 2% 392
36 14 10 24
/ - - -..I. 7.
c 8
49- +-- .*- .a- .a-
. , _---- y'\ w
19 106 46 152
- - - 206 127 335 279 319
152 0 152 150 726
2.585 510 3.095 1.675 1 3.556 5.
- ?,' 131 Trlp generallon oer 'Tralllc Sludy lor the Carlsbad EGO Family Park' (Kaku Aamlalas. Inc. Aprll 1994).
A-7
Transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" Criteria
(Reference Highway Capacity Manual)
.... ...
'LOS Maximum Minimum Maximum 1 Maximum ' i Density Speed VlC Service j 1 (pc/mi/ln) tmph) Flow Rate 1
(pc/hr/ln) d
AI 11 65.0 I 0.30 I 710
B 1 18 65.0 0.50 1170
C 1 26 64.6 0 71 1680
_______11.__, .... h ........... DI -, 35 J@Q-
El 45 52.2
......
LOS 1 ControlD
I (secheh)
A 5 10
B > 10 - 20
C >20-35
I) > 35 - 55
E > 55 - 80
F > 80
per Vehicle
I-- .....
LOS Maximum Minimum Maximum Maximum Density Speed v/c Service
tpc/mi/ln) I (mph) Flow Rate
(pdhrh)
A 11 55 .O 0.29 600
B 18 55.0 0.47 990 c 26 54.9 0.68 1430
_1__________* ..... # D 35 18.52
!El 41 51.2 1 .oo 2 100
J
.......
Appendix D -Traffic Impact Studies Guidelines
Table D-I
ramp meter
delays above
15 rnin.)
-asore of Significant Project Traffic fmpacts
1 p.02 1 2 2 o.ol
Allowable Change due to Project Impact** , 1 Ramp*** I -,
1
Level of KOaclWay
Service with Segments Intersections Metering Freeways cy
Project* VK Speed Vf c Speed Delay Delay hph) (mph) (sec.) (min.)
D, E, & F (or I
Notes: * All level of service measurements are based upon HCM procedures for peak-hour conditions.
However, V/C ratios for Roadway Segments may be estimated on an ADTR4-hour traffic volume
basis (using Table D-2 or a similar LOS chart for each jurisdiction). The acceptable LOS for
freeways, roadways, and intersections is generally “D” (“C“ for undeveloped or not densely
develcped locations per jurisdiction definitions). For metered freeway ramps, LOS does not
apply. However, ramp meter delays above 15 minutes are considered excessive.
**If a proposed project’s traffic causes the values shown in the table to.be exceeded, the impacts
are determined to be significant. These impact changes may be measured from appropriate
computer programs or expanded manual spreadsheets. The project applicant shall then identify
feasible mitigation (within the Traffic Impact Study report) that will maintain the traffic facility at
an acceptable LOS. If the LOS with the proposed project becomes unacceptable (see above *
note), or if :he project adds a significant amount of peak-hour trips to cause any traffic queues to
exceed on- or off-ramp storage capacities, the project applicant shall be responsible for mitigating significant irnpac: changes.
*** See Exhibit 3-2 for ramp metering analysis.
KEY: V/C = Volume to Capacity ratio
Speed = Speed measured in miIes per hour
Delay
!.OS = Leve! ofservice
= Average stopped delay per vehicle measured in seconds for intersections, or
minutes for ramp meters
lanuary, 2003 S&WE ; Final Draft2DOZ SANDAG Congestion Management Program
Mario H. Orso, Chief
Development Review Branch
Department of Transportation, District 11
P.O. Box 85406, MS 50
San Diego CA 92186-5406
RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Project Comments dated August 3,2004
Dear Mr. Orso:
Thank you for your comments on the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Resort Site, located on the
south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday Avenue in the City of
Carlsbad. Following are city's responses to your comments:
1. Peak Hour Level of Service: Traffic impact studies are typically conducted during the morning
and afternoon peak hours, the highest volumes of commuter traffic. The existing counts at the ramps
provided by Caltrans are the highest volume for one hour throughout the entire day, not during the
morning and afternoon commute peak hour. The attached Caltrans count summary shows the counts
done by Caltrans were at noon and 2 p.m., not at 8 a.m. or 4 p.m., typically the commute hours. Also,
the existing conditions counts we provided were taken from the city's 2003 traffic monitoring report.
Therefore, the traffic counts evaluated for existing conditions are considered to be appropriate, and no
revisions should be needed.
2. Caltrans lnterchanse Desiqn Volumes at Build out: The Caltrans ILV/HR capacity of 1,500
ILV/HR will not be reached at build out since on-ramp meters restrict the flow onto the freeway. As an
example, the existing p.m. peak hour northbound on-ramp with the ramp meter operating is
approximately 1,100 VPH, while the Year 2030 p.m. peak hour demand volume is estimated at 1,905
VPH. This future volume would be restricted by the ramp meter flow rate of 1,100 VPH or lower, so
that the ILV/HR value would not exceed 1,500 in the future.
Also, the Cannon Road interchange was rebuilt specifically for Carlsbad Ranch, including all future
build out projects using these same build out volumes from the Carlsbad Ranch Program EIR.
Caltrans reviewed and approved the geometrics prior to the reconstruction.
3.
evaluation that included build out of Carlsbad plus all of the Carlsbad Ranch and LEGOLAND.
Cumulative Analvsis: The Carlsbad Ranch Program EIR Traffic Study was a cumulative
4. Updated Traffic Impact Analvsis: The build out volumes used in the Carlsbad Ranch EIR and
our updated traffic evaluation are higher than both the Year 2020 and Year 2030 traffic models.
These volumes were also used in the Cannon Court traffic report reviewed by Caltrans, that resulted
in the recent restriping at the northbound on-ramp, for a WB shared-throughhight lane at the
northbound on-ramp. Therefore, the updated traffic evaluation confirms the volumes previously used
for the interchange design and indicates no additional cumulative impacts are expected beyond those
previously identified in the Carlsbad Ranch Program EIR.
5. 1-5 Improvements: The City of Carlsbad has cooperatively worked as a partner with
Caltrans to design/build and fund the following 1-5 freeway interchange projects within the past 10
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us
Mario Orso - Dept of Transportation
Carlsbad Ranch PA 5 Comment
August 20,2004
Paqe 2
..
WLa Costa Avenue Interchange;
WPoinsettia Lane Interchange;
I-5/Palomar Airport Road Interchange, a full interchange project which included widening the
southbound off and on-ramps, and constructing auxiliary lanes between Palomar Airport Road
and Cannon Road;
I-5Kannon Road Interchange, a project that was completed in March 1999, and was designed
to accommodate all of the Carlsbad Ranch development, including LEGOLAND and the PA-5
Resort, as well as cumulative traffic from the future build out of Carlsbad (see the attached
project description fact sheet from Caltrans).
With those projects, the City of Carlsbad has provided freeway improvements designed to
accommodate the build out of the City. These projects were partially funded by traffic fees paid by
developers as well as other city generated funds. The City of Carlsbad has paid its fair share towards
freeway improvements in the past. The City currently has no other freeway related projects in its
Capital Improvement Program, and therefore would not have the ability to collect additional “fair . share” contributions from developers beyond our currently established Traffic Impact Fee Program.
Please note that while the City may agree with your suggestion that new projects should pay their fair
share contribution towards freeway improvements, at this time neither the City nor Caltrans has an
adopted fee program or studies to quantify the amount each developer would need to pay as their fair
share. If in the future, Caltrans conducts such studies to establish a fee program to pay towards freeway improvements, the City might be supportive of such a program. Exactions imposed on
developments need to be reasonably related to the project and the extent and the degree of the
exaction should be in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project. At this time, since
there is no adopted fee program, the City cannot establish a nexus between the proposed
development and contribution towards freeway improvements and cannot reasonable exact such a
“fair share” contribution.
If you have any additional comments or questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4619.
Sincerely,
Saima Qureshy, AlCP
Associate Planner
SQ:vd
c: Gary Barberio, Team Leader
Don Neu, Assistant Planning Director
Clyde Wickham, Project Engineer
File Copyr,
Attachment
/x 3
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSWESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING
District 11, P.O. Box 85406, San Dicgo. CA 92186-5406 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 3
FACT SHEET
INTERSTATE WANNON ROAD INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS
*** PROJECT COMPLETED MARCH 1999 ***
PROJECT PROPOSAL
The District is currently preparing plans for a joint fimded project to modify the Interstate S/Cannon
Road interchange. This project has been requested by the City of Carlsbad to accommodate the proposed construction of LEGOLAND Carlsbad as part of the Carlsbad Ranch Development.
PROJECT FEATURES
\
The proposed improvements will consist of widening the existing interchange ramps, metering the
entrance ramps, signalizing and channelizing the local street and ramp termini intersections, and
constructing a northbound merge lane on Interstate 5 north of the Cannon Road interchange.
INCENTIVE PROPOSAL / HISTORY
Governor Pete Wilson, through the California Trade and Commerce Agency, committed to provide infrastructure improvements, human resources benefits, and develop the Cannon Road Interchange project if LEG0 chose to locate in Carlsbad. Caltrans and various other state agencies, as part of the
Team California LEGOPointe Working Committee, plan to deliver the proposed project by 1999 to
coincide with the City of Carlsbad development projects, including LEGOLAND Carlsbad. Caltrans
provide improvements and other benefits estimated up to $3,950,000, including 50% of the design and
construction costs in partnership with the City of Carlsbad, enhanced landscaping, additional freeway
signs, funds for ramp metering local interchanges, and 100% of the support costs for environmental
approval of the interchange improvements.
FUNDING
The project will be joint funded (50150) between the City of Carlsbad and Caltrans with the Caltrm
portion using state and federal funds.
COST / SCHEDULE
The total cost of this project is estimated to be $2.5 million. The project is scheduled to begin
construction in the early spring 1998.
Return to Fact Sheet Home Page
http://www.dot.ca.gov/distI 1 /facts/5cannon.htm 8/5/2004
Aw
P
._
SD-5
interchange Ramp
San Mams UC (Endnitrr Blvd.)
NB Off
NB On
SB off
'SB On
Leocadia Blvd. UC (Woodley Rd.)
NB Ofl
'NB On
SB m
'SB On
La Costa Avenue OC
NB Off
'NB On
SB Off 'SB On
Poinsettia Lane OC
NB Mf
'NB On
SB MT
'SB On
Palomar Airport Rd. OC
NB 011
'NB On
SB Off
'SB On from WE
'SB On from EB
Cannon Rd. UC
Tamarack Ave. OC
NB Off
'SB On
SB Off
NE On
P.M.
R41.509
R41.330
R41.663
R41.739
R41.376
R42.712
R42.542
R42.838
R42.866
R42.591
R44.071
R43.911
R44.210
R14.290
R43.885
R45.571
R45.410
R45.724
R45.754
R45.409
R47.032
R46.826
R47.144
R47.269
R47.097
R46.889
R47.975
R47.&43
R48.138
R48.118
R47.834
R49.278
R49.117
R49.169
R49.464
~49.386
Dates
03M0102
03/27/02
03R0102
03/27/02
03R0/02
03/27/02
03/13/02
03/20/02
03/20/02
03/27/02
03/27/02
03/20/02
03/27/02
03/27/02
03/27/02
03/20/02
MI1 7/02
0411 7102
04/17/02
04124102
0411 7/02
0511 5/02
04/17/02
0411 7/02
04/17/02
04/17/02
04117102
04/17/02
04/17/02
Days
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
24Hr V
9,802
10.158
9.356
9,117
10,938
7.290
8,683
9,124
9,509
7,287
7.760
8.747
9,198
6.388
6,916
8.129
16.640
12.978
16,559
28.868
2.884
3,484
9,525
8,998
2,868
8,291
8,212
5,168
5,474
670
61 9
659
654
528
553
827
648
596
541
743
814
622
518
481
569
1,446
725
2.604
3,918
247
519
3%
507
818
274
519
1200
1200
1 OW
1 200
1200
1200
0700
1200
0800
0900
0800
0700
0900
OB00
0800
lo00
0900
1200
0700
0700
1200
oaw
728
875
885
71 8
926
5?6
69(1
IS2
832
661
806
89
742
484
542
682
1,167
1,360
1.013
4.041
281
253
1200rr4+ 1.042
1200pd 473
0800
0800 713
0800 594
0800 390
1200 438
1300
1800
1800
1800
1800
1500
1 BOO
1600
1900
1800
1800 law
1900
1500
1800
1 800
1400
1800
1600
1700
1800
1700
1700
1400 -9f'- iaoo
1700
1500
1800
1500
Planning Commission Minutes September 1,2004 DRAFT JiiA'ABIT
I. SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-011CUP 03-OI/HDP
03-01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - Request for
approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment,
Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-
Residential Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Hillside
Development Permit for the development of a full service hoteVtimeshare resort. At
buildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms, 350 timeshare units, two
restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants, and
recreational amenities including pools, tennis courts and a sports center. The subject site
is 56.52 acres in area and is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada
Drive and west of Faraday Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 13.
Mr. Neu introduced Item 1 and stated Associate Planner Saima Qureshy would make the staff
presentation.
Commissioner Cardosa removed himself from the dias due to a potential conflict regarding Item 1
Chairperson Whitton asked the applicant if he wished to continue with only 6 Commissioners present.
The applicant stated he would like to continue.
Chairperson Whitton opened the public hearing on Item 1
Ms. Qureshy stated Item 1 is a request for the approval of the necessary permits to develop a full service
hoteVtimeshare resort. The subject site is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada
Drive, west of Faraday Avenue and west and north of Hidden Valley Road. Land uses surrounding the
subject site include open space and the future City Golf Course to the east, Cannon Road and agricultural
uses to the north, LEGOLAND to the south, and a vacant property to the west. The site is currently being
used for agricultural purposes. Primary access to the site will be taken from Cannon Road and a second
access will be provided from Hidden Valley Road. The subject site is part of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific
Plan which was adopted by the City Council in 1995. The land uses in the Specific Plan area are a mix of
non-residential uses. When the Specific Plan was approved, it was assumed, that the golf course on PA
8 would be developed concurrently with the hotel project on PA 5 and by the same developer. The 9
holes of the golf course were to be located within these 2 parcels of PA 8 and a portion of the SDG&E
property located north of Cannon Road, which is not part of the specific plan. It is now necessary for the
applicant to amend the Specific Plan to develop PA 5 as a stand-alone project without concurrently
developing PA 8 as a golf course. This is because the two planning areas are under separate ownership
and the SDG&E parcel is no longer available to provide any golf holes.
The subject site is 56.57 acres in size and will be directly accessible from Cannon Road and also from
Hidden Valley Road. The internal circulation for the project is provided by a number of private streets.
There is a proposed conference facility/resort building which is to be one story high and will provide
33,000 square feet of meeting room space. There are two restaurants proposed: a 3,000 sq. ft.
restaurant is proposed to be located in the main conference building and a 7,000 square foot stand-alone
restaurant is proposed adjacent to Cannon Road. Three separate hotel buildings are proposed for a total
of 350 hotel rooms. Each building is 3 stories high with a maximum 35 feet in height. Buildings 1 and 2
will contain 125 rooms, while hotel building 3 will contain 100 rooms.
The project is proposed to be developed with 350 timeshare units, located in 27 different villa buildings
throughout the site. Twenty-two of the villa buildings are 3 stories and a maximum of 35 feet in height,
while 5 buildings are 2 stories and a maximum of 27 feet high. There are 5 different villa layouts
proposed. A total of 178 units will be lock-off units. Parking for the lock-off units is calculated at a higher
rate of 1.5 spaces per unit as compared to 1.2 spaces per unit for regular timeshare and hotel rooms.
There are 4 recreation areas proposed at various locations throughout the project. All recreation areas
are connected to hotel and timeshare buildings by a pedestrian walkway system.
The project is proposed to be developed in a maximum of 10 phases. Parking, landscaping and other
amenities will be provided with each phase as required.
Planning Commission Minutes September 1,2004 Page 4
To be consistent with the specific plan the architectural theme for the project is proposed to be in a
Mediterranean style. Proposed building materials include earth tone stucco walls, s-tile roofs, simulated
stone columns and trim, metal railings, trellis and clear glass. The applicant’s presentation will elaborate
more on the architecture.
The project will provide approximately 1,300 parking spaces - 94% of those will be surface parking and
6% are located in an underground parking structure located below hotel buildings 1 and 2. The project is
proposing a 9% reduction in parking. Staff is supportive of the shared parking program since it will meet
the parking needs of various uses at the peak parking demands.
The project is subject to Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and with the exception of the requested
amendment to develop the resort without concurrently developing PA 8 as a golf course; the project is
consistent with relevant policies and development standards. The site’s general plan designation is
travehecreation commercial, and its zoning designation is C-T. The proposed use of hotel and
timeshares is consistent with those designations. The project is also subject to the hillside regulations,
site development plan Q Overlay Zone, subdivision ordinance, and non-residential planned unit
development regulations, and the project was found to be consistent with all those standards.
A portion of the site is also located within the influence area of the airport land use plan and within the 60
CNEL noise contour. The project is required to attenuate interior noise levels to 45 CNEL to be
consistent with the CLUP. The project is also consistent with the Local Coastal Program.
A program EIR was certified by the City in 1995 for Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and impacts associated
with implementation of PA 5 were evaluated at that time. The initial study, conducted for this project
focused on the changes from the approved Specific Plan and PA 5 as it was contemplated in the previous
EIR. The EIR identified an archeologically significant site located partially on the subject site. Per the
EIR, a part of this site was to be placed in open space and capped. However, the site design is such that
5,000 sq. ft. of this area will have to be mitigated through data recovery. A portion of the site will be set-
aside as an open space area. This amended mitigation measure is part of the mitigation monitoring
program. The mitigation plan reduces impacts to less than significant.
Ms. Qureshy concluded her presentation.
Chairperson Whitton stated the Commission had received 2 letters, one from the Chamber of Commerce
and one from the Carlsbad Convention and Visitors Bureau, supporting the project. He stated there is
also an errata sheet for the item.
Chairperson Whitton asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Montgomery asked if there is any possibility of having the golf course go through the
SDG&E property. Mrs. Qureshy stated the SDG&E parcel is not a part of the Specific Plan for the site.
Commissioner Montgomery asked if the City knows for sure if that parcel is not available to be part of the
golf course. Ms. Qureshy stated that because the SDG&E parcel is under separate ownership, the City is
unaware of the plans for the development of the site.
Commissioner Montgomery stated his concerns regarding the future development of the golf course.
Assistant City Attorney Jane Mobaldi commented that the Planning Commission cannot mandate the
development of a golf course on Planning Area 8, which has a separate owner than the project before the
Commission at tonight’s meeting. She stated that the Commission can decide on whether or not to
separate the two Planning Areas (5 and 8).
Commissioner Baker asked if the parcels are separated, what will the zoning designation for the
remainder parcel be. Ms. Qureshy stated it will be zoned as open space and in the specific plan it states
it will be developed as a golf course. If a developer comes forward at a later date to develop the site with
something other than a golf course, which currently is the only allowed use on that parcel, another
specific plan amendment will need to be processed.
Chairperson Whitton asked if the applicant wished to make a presentation.
Planning Commission Minutes September 1,2004 Page 5
Timothy Stripe, Grand Pacific Resorts, 5900 Pasteur Court Suite 200, Carlsbad, stated the project is an
excellent fit for the site and the community. He commented that Grand Pacific Resorts and LEGOLAND
have spent considerable time and effort in the design of the resort to ensure good integration for both
properties. The project is projected to generate $600,000 in tax revenue in its first year of operation in
2006 and over $2,500,000 in revenue once the last phase is completed.
Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning Associates, 5900 Pasteur Court Suite 150, Carlsbad, gave a detailed
presentation regarding the project.
Chairperson Whitton asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Segall asked the applicant how the project compares to the Four Seasons at Aviara, the
La Costa Resort and Spa, or some of the other resorts in Carlsbad. Mr. Hofman stated the resort would
be a small step down from the Four Seasons Resort.
Commissioner Baker asked if the applicant had any concerns regarding the remainder parcel which is
currently designated as open space and what can ultimately be developed on that property. Mr. Hofman
stated he does have concerns about the future development of the property particularly if the land use
designation were to change to something other than open space. Commissioner Baker also inquired
about the mitigation requirement for the noise level for the interior and how it will work. Mr. Hofman
stated it would be done through the design architectural construction, and it is a normal requirement
under the UBC (Universal Building Code).
Commissioner Dominquez inquired why there is only 8% of the parking as subterranean and the rest is
surface parking. Mr. Hofman stated the space was available for surface parking and because it is so
costly to build underground parking, they felt the money would be better spent in the amenities for the
resort.
Chairperson Whitton asked if there were any further questions of the applicant. Seeing none, he opened
public testimony on the item.
The following 4 speakers stated their support of the project:
Kurt Burkhart, Carlsbad Convention and Visitors Bureau, 400 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad
Ted Owen, Chamber of Commerce, 5934 Priestly Drive, Carlsbad
John Jacobsen, LEGOLAND, 3726 Saddle Drive, Carlsbad
Steve Tague, 381 9 Skyline Drive, Carlsbad
Socorro Rodriguez-Anderson, 3222 Roosevelt Street, Carlsbad, supports the project; however, while the
project meets the needs of the business and visitor communities, it does not meet the needs of the
families of Carlsbad particularly the low-income families. She also commented that the project would
impact the traffic in the City.
Chairperson Whitton closed public testimony on the item. He asked if there were any other questions of
the applicant.
Commissioner Baker asked what the anticipated build-out date is for the resort. Mr. Stripe stated that
from the date of opening, the final building permit would be pulled in eight years. He stated that if the
market conditions continue as they currently are, it could be as early as five to seven years.
Assistant City Attorney Jane Mobaldi stated that in response to the comments made by Ms. Rodriguez-
Anderson, there is a condition for a non-residential affordable housing linkage fee, which states that if the
Council adopts that fee in the future, this development can be so conditioned. It is not happening
currently, but the door is open if the Council does adopt that policy.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Baker, and duly seconded, that the Planning
Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 5685, recommending
adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation
Planning Commission Minutes September 1,2004 Page 6
Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions
No. 5693, 5692, 5686, 5687, 5688, 5689, 5690 and 5691 recommending
approval of Specific Plan Amendment (SP 207(E)), Local Coastal Program
Amendment (LCPA 90-08(D)), Tentative Tract Map (CT 03-02), Site
Development Plan (SDP 03-02), Coastal Development Plan (CDP 03-04), Non-
Residential Planned Unit Development Plan (PUD 03-01), Conditional Use
Permit (CUP 03-01) and Hillside Development Permit (HDP 03-01) including the
errata sheet, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained
therein.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Segall stated he was not involved in any of the discussions from the Chamber of
Commerce prior to tonight’s meeting. He also disclosed that he and Timothy Stripe both serve on the
Board of Directors of the Chamber of Commerce, and again, the project was not discussed amongst
them. He further stated that he is very much in favor of the project.
Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Montgomery, Dominguez, Heineman and Baker all stated they
support the project.
VOTE: 6-0
AYES: Chairperson Whitton, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez, Heineman,
NOES: None
ABSENT: Cardosa
Montgomery and Segall
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING COMPLETE DATE: January 14,2004
Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Hillside Development Permit for the development of a full service hotel/timeshare resort. At buildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms, 350 timeshare units, two restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants, and recreational amenities including pools, tennis courts and a sports center. The subject site is 56.52 acres.
This project is within the City of Carlsbad's Coastal Zone located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 13.
DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION :
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
211-100-14
Timothy Stripe 5900 Pasteur Court, Ste. 200 Carlsbad, CA 92008
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the City Council in the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on October 12, 2004 at 6:OO p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described and an staff recommendation given, followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on or after October 8, 2004.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Saima Qureshy at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 530 p.m., Friday 8:OO a.m. to 500 p.m. at
1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008, (760) 602-4619.
APPEALS
The time within which you may judicially challenge this Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit and/or Hillside Development Permit, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit and/or Hillside Development Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, prior to the public hearing.
Coastal Commission Appealable Project: This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the Coastal Commission within ten (IO) working days after the Coastal Commission has received a Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the Coastal Commission is located at 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, California 921 08-4402.
CASE FILE: SP 207(E)/LCPA 09-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-01
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 RESORT SITE
PUBLISH: October 1, 2004
SITE
CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08( D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/
CDP 03-04/PUD 03-0l/CUP 03-0l/HDP 03-01
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
October 12,2004
Mayor Bud Lewis
Carlsbad City Council
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Mayor Lewis:
Carlsbad has become a world-renowned destination with tourist attractions overlooking
some of the nation’s best natural settings. Presently, Carlsbad has an overabundance of
high-end luxury and limited service rooms. Consequently, the region is in need of a new
full service upscale resort. The Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce supports Grand Pacific
Resort’s proposed facility for the economic benefits it provides the city.
Bringing a balance to the region, the resort would provide valuable assets for tourists and
residents. Currently, only 8% of Carlsbad’s hotel rooms are full service; the proposed
resort would increase this number to 16%. Conveniently located close to Legoland,
California, the Flower Fields, and the Business Park, the hotel will be a home for visiting
families and corporate guests. Bringing unity in community, local organizations and
residents will utilize the many amenities including restaurants, meeting and conference
rooms, and recreational facilities.
The construction of the $150 million complex will create more than 800 construction
jobs. Upon completion the facility will have an economical impact on the city of more
than $66 million annually and create 530 permanent jobs.
In the interests of our economy and community, the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce
urges you to approve Grand Pacific Resorts latest addition.
PresidenKEO
Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce
ACCREDITED
5934 Priestly Drive Carlsbad, California 92008
Phone: (760) 931-8400 Fax: (760) 931-91 53 E-mail: chamber@carlsbad.org Web: wwur.carlsbad.org
October 12,2004
The Honorable Bud Lewis
Mayor, City of Carlsbad
Carlsbad City Hall
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Dear Mayor Lewis:
The Carlsbad Convention and Visitors Bureau reiterates its support for the Grand Pacific
Resorts, Inc. Hotel and Timeshare Project that is before council tonight. For the reasons
stated in comments presented before the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission on
September 1, 2004, the CW believes that this project provides both economic vitality
and enhanced destination value for Carlsbad.
On behalf of the Carlsbad CVB Board of Directors and the Carlsbad Convention and
Visitors Bureau, we ask for full council support this evening.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Kurt Burkhart, Executive Director
Carlsbad Convention & Visitors Bureau
Cc: Council Members
CVB Board of Directors
Carlsbad Convention &Visitors Bureau
400 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California 92008
(760) 434.6093 FAX (760) 434.6056 www.visitcarlsbad.com info@visitcarkbad.com
7
Remarks by Kurt Burkhart
Executive Director
Carlsbad Convention & Visitors Bureau
Before the Carlsbad Planning Commission
September 1,2004
Mr. Chairman and members of the Carlsbad Planning Commissioners, my name is Kurt Burkhart
and my address is 400 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad 92008.
Tonight I am here in my capacity as the Executive Director of the Carlsbad Convention and
Visitors Bureau, a non-profit destination marketing organization.
Our mission is to successfully promote Carlsbad as a preferred year-round leisure travel
destination, with the primary emphasis on increasing travel spending within the City, generating
additional tax revenues and expanding travel and tourism-related employment within the City of
Carlsbad.
And so, in the context of our mission, it goes without saying that this project, as proposed by the
Grand Pacific Resort is precisely the kind of full service, upscale property that is needed right now
in Carlsbad.
Notice, please, that I use the words, full service and upscale to describe the proposed Grand
Pacific Resort at the LEGOLAND site.
As Carlsbad has grown over these last half-dozen years or so, an interesting phenomena has
also occurred with respect to room inventory, and that is, the development of more limited-service
properties, or those that are generally described as having guestrooms, 24-hour front desk
service and a complimentary breakfast.
Currently, the limited service property commands some forty-five percent of total room inventory in Carlsbad, with high-end luxury representing another twenty-eight percent of the marketplace.
Combined, this represents some twenty-one hundred rooms or seventy-three percent of the
current room inventory in Carlsbad.
Travel is as much about value as it is about the experiences that are had and enjoyed by those
who visit. In a recent survey of Carlsbad lodging properties, the results show that only eight
percent of current room inventory, or about 228 rooms now meet the criteria for full service
upscale.
That criterion generally includes, in addition to guestrooms, at least one 3-meal restaurant,
meeting space, room service, doorman and 24-hour front desk service.
This proposed project would include the elements that I have just mentioned and certainly more.
With added amenities such as a gym, health spa, tennis courts and swimming pool, together with
an on site restaurant and bar, this would be more than what a limited service property provides and goes beyond what is typically provided for with focused service and extended stay properties.
If approved, this project will also include concierge services, a business center, and technology
upgrades in the rooms. All of this will provide both convenience and added enjoyment for the
guests of this new resort.
Perhaps what makes this property all the more appealing is the inclusion of a facility for meetings
and conventions. Having a venue that is conveniently located in the heart of Carlsbad, together
with the ability to accommodate 2000 people, will certainly add to the total product mix that has
already made Carlsbad a preferred leisure and business travel destination.
This would mark the first time in Carlsbad that a non-luxury property will have the ability to tap
into this lucrative segment of travel. With that comes added revenues through facilities fees, food
and beverage, and, of course, the collection of the much coveted Transient Occupancy Tax for
groups and individuals who overnight at the resort.
Did I mention LEGOLAND? No doubt there will be a natural synergy created with having this
resort in close proximity to Lego’s only North American theme park. I’m a huge fan of co-
operative marketing, and I can only imagine the excitement that will follow when travel packages
are offered that can meet the needs of groups in search of what Carlsbad has to offer, especially
when meetings and conventions can be combined with fun time at LEGOLAND.
Let me also say that before the first phase of this resort is completed and the door opens for
business, there will be a lot of local businesses to have benefited through vendor and various
other contracted services in the building and eventual completion of this property. Again, this is
an economic plus for Carlsbad and for the region.
It is also our understanding that at full build out, this project will support between 550 to 600 jobs.
The direct economic impact to Carlsbad will be sudden and dramatic. These jobs will be good for Carlsbad, for the wages and salaries earned by employees of this new property will significantly
help to support our local economy.
Over the years, Grand Pacific Resorts has earned a solid reputation for being both a first-class
community partner and excellent corporate citizen.
Therefore, the Carlsbad CVB would like to go on record by joining others who have asked the
Carlsbad Planning Commission to approve the application that is before you tonight as presented
by Grand Pacific Resorts.
Thank you very much.
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2010 6% 2011 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of
the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen
years and not a party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the
printer of
North County Times
Formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudicated newspapers of general circulation by
the Superior Court of the County of San Diego,
State of California, for the City of Oceanside and
the City of Escondido, Court Decree number
171349, for the County of San Diego, that the
notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set
in type not smaller than nonpariel), has been
published in each regular and entire issue of said
newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on
the following dates, to-wit:
October Ol", 2004
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated ai §AN MARCOS California
This Olst Day of October, 2004
, j Signature
.- Jane Olson \
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
acres.
This project is within the Clty of Carlsbail's LOCATION:
Coastal Zone located on the south side Of Carl8lwi Road east of Armada Drive and west of Farada AVC- nue hhin Local Facilitles Marla ement &ne 12 ASSESSOR'S 211-100-14 PARCEL NUMBER:
APPLICANT: Timothy Stripe 5900 Pasteur Court Ste 200 Carlsbad. CA 92008
A held public by the hearing City Council on the above in the C!ourouncil roposed Chambers. pro ect will 1200 be
Carlsbad Villa e Drive, Carlsbad. Callfornla 011 OCtC- her 12. 2004 a? 6:OO p.m I Persons are cordially invlted to attend the public hear- ing and provide the decislon makers with ally Oral Or written comments they m,ay have regardlng the proisct The project wil! be descrbed and a staff recommenda- tion given followled by public testimony. uestions and a declsio;. Copes o he agenda bill wj be available on or after October 8, 2004.
I APPEALS I
Coastal Commission Appealable Pro eLt
Dealable Area Th,s srte not located mt\m tile Lastai Zone AP
CASE FILE SP 207 E /LCPA 09-08 D /~~$~pO~f~~ 03-02iCDP 03 0dUb 03-011C"Pbd CASE NAME CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 RESORT SITE NCT 1699255 October 01 2004
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING COMPLETE DATE: January 14,2004
DESCRIPTION:
Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Hillside Development Permit for the development of a full service hotelhimeshare resort. At buildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms, 350 timeshare units, two restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants, and recreational amenities
including pools, tennis courts and a sports center. The subject site is 56.52 acres.
This project is within the City of Carlsbad’s Coastal Zone located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 13.
LOCATION:
ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
21 1-100-14
Timothy Stripe 5900 Pasteur Court, Ste. 200 Carlsbad, CA 92008
A public hearing on the above proposed project will be held by the City Council in the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, on October 12, 2004 at 6:OO p.m.
Persons are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. The project will be described and a staff recommendation given,
followed by public testimony, questions and a decision. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on or afler
October 8, 2004.
If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Saima Qureshy at the City of
Carlsbad Planning Department, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Friday 8:OO a.m. to 5:OO p.m. at
1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008, (760) 602-4619.
APPEALS
The time within which you may judicially challenge this Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit andlor Hillside Development Permit, if approved, is established by state law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract
Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit andlor Hillside Development Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues
you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, prior to the public hearing.
Coastal Commission Appealable Project:
This site is not located within the Coastal Zone Appealable Area.
Where the decision is appealable to the Coastal Commission, appeals must be filed with the Coastal Commission within ten (10) working days afler the Coastal Commission has received a Notice of Final Action from the City of Carlsbad. Applicants will be notified by the Coastal Commission of the date that their appeal period will conclude. The San Diego office of the Coastal Commission is located at 7575 Metropolitan Drive, Suite 103, San Diego, California 921 08-4402.
CASE FILE: SP 207(E)/LCPA 09-08(D)/CT 03-0ZSDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01lCUP 03-01/HDP 03-01
CASE NAME:
PUBLISH: October 1,2004
CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 RESORT SITE
SITE
CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5 - RESORT SITE
SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/
CDP 03-04/PUD 03-0l/CUP 03-0l/HDP 03-01
Jam Free Printing Use Ave@ TEMPLATE 5160@ www.avery.com
1-8oo-CO-AWRY
CARLSBAD UNlF SCHOOL DlST
6225 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009 ENClNlTAS CA 92024
CITY OF ENClNlTAS
505 S VULCAN AVE
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NORTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054 VISTA CA 92085
CITY OF VISTA
PO BOX 1988
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STE 100 STE B
9174 SKY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340 SAN DIEGO CA 92123
SD COUNTY PLANNING
5201 RUFFIN RD
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DlST
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
U.S. FISH &WILDLIFE
6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009 7575 METROPOLITAN DR
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
STE 103
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
TIM STRIPE
STE 200
5900 PASTEUR CT
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF CARLSBAD
RECREATION ADMIN
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT
BILL HOFMAN
HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOC
STE 150
5900 PASTEUR CT
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
4949 VIEWRIDGE AVE
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
SANDAG
STE 800
401 BSTREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
I.P. U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND
URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
ATTN TED ANASIS
SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY
PO BOX 82776
t
SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/ENG I NEERl NG
DEPT- PROJECT ENGINEER SAIMA QURESHY
CLYDE W ICKHAM
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
SAN DIEGO
CALIFORNIA ST
CARLSBAD RANCH COMPANY
#loo
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CARLSBAD RANCH MAINT.
#loo
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF CA /
CARLSBAD OCEAN TERRACES
43529 RIDGE PARK DR
TEMECULA CA 92590
LEGOLAND ESTATES AG
1 LEGODR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ACES
LEGOLAND ESTATES AG
130
5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ASSESSED PU
AGRI P
OCCUPANT
OCCUPANT
5740 FLEET ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
OCCUPANT
5760 FLEET ST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BROOKS
P 0 BOX 1041
CARLSBAD CA 92018-1041
JOHN BURHAM & CO
RETAIL COMM
STE 1
1901 CAMINO VlDA ROBLE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
MAR BRISAS HOA
GRG MGMT INC
P 0 BOX 1186
CARLSBAD CA 92018-1 186
CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
TED OWEN
5934 PRIESTLY DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CALTRANS DISTRICT 11
BILL FIGGE
MAIL ST 50
P 0 BOX 85406
SAN DIEGO CA 92186-5406
STANDARD PAC1 FI C
GREGG LINOFF
9335 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-101
BLUE LAGOON HOA
TRANSCONTINENTAL MGMT
STE 111
3355 MISSION AV
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
RANCHO CARLSBAD HOA
RUSS KOHL
5200 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
ANTHONY & DICKY BONS
25709 HILLCREST AV
ESCONDIDO CA 92026-8650
REG WATER QUALITY CONTROL BD
STE 100
9174 SKY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340
Laser 5163@
Smooth Feed sheet^'^\^
U S FISH &WILDLIFE SERVICE
LEE ANN CARRANZA
6010 HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009-
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
RONALD M JAEGER
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK
SUPERINTENDENT
1901 SPINNAKER DR
SAN BUENA VENTURA CA 93001
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
STE 400
61 1 RYAN PLAZA DR
ARLINGTON TX 7601 1-4005
DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME
ENVl RON MENTAL SE RVI CES D IV
P 0 BOX 944246
SACRAMENTO CA 94244-2460
@!AVERY@ Shipping Labels
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMIN WESTERN REG
PO BOX 92007
LOSANGELES CA 90009
BARRY BRAYER, AWP-8
BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION & HSG AGENCY
PATRICIA W NEAL DEPUTY SEC HOUSING
STE 2450
980 NINTH ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
LOS ANGELES DlST ENGINEER
PO BOX 271 1
LOSANGELES CA 90053
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
CLIFFORD EMMERLING, DIR
STE 350
901 MARKETST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD &AGRICULTURE
STEVE SHAFFER, AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
RM 100
1220 N ST
SACRAMENTO CA 958A4
Laser 5 163@
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
DOUG WICKIZER, ENVlR COORD
P 0 BOX 944246
SACRAMENTO CA 94244-2460
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
RM 700
110 WESTA ST
SANDIEGO CA 92101
MARINE RESOURCES REGION, DR & G
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, SPR
STE J
4665 LAMPSON AVE
LOS ALAMITOS CA 90720-51 39
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION &
DEVMT COMMISSION
BILL TRAVIS
STE 2600
50 CALIFORNIA ST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 941 11-4704
U S BUREAU OF LAND MGMT
STE RM W 1834
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEVE
DUNCAN LENT HOWARD, REG ADMIN
450 GOLDEN GATE AV
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
RM 5504
1120 N ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
OFFICE OF PLANNING & RESEARCH
OFFICE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AFFAIRS
PO BOX 3044
SACRAMENTO CA 95812-3044
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
DWIGHT SANDERS
STE 1005
100 HOW E AV
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
U S BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
MID-PACIFIC REGION
Shippine; Labels Laser 5 169
U S FISH &WILDLIFE SERVICE
2800 COTTAGE WAY
STE W-2605
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-1 888
USDA - RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPT 41 69
430 "G" ST
DAVIS CA 95616
CITY OF ENCINITAS
COMDEV DEPT
505 S VULCAN AV
ENCINITAS CA 92024
SANDAG-EXEC DIRECTOR
GARY GALLEGOS
STE 800
1ST INT'L PLAZA 401 "B" ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
U S ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
LILY ALYEA
STE 702
333 MARKET ST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 941 05-21 97
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BD
PO BOX I00
SACRAMENTO CA 95801
TABATA FARMS
PO BOX 1338
CARLSBAD CA 92018-1338
LESLIE ESPOSITO
1893 AMELFI DR
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CYRl UMARY GIBSON
12142 ARGYLE DR
LOS ALAMITOS CA 90702
Shipping Labels
LAKESHORE GARDENS
TOM BENSON
7201 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
Laser 5 l63@
LANlKAl LANE PARK
SHARP SPACE3
6550 PONTO DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC
BEVERLY BLESSANT
831 5 CENTURY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-
COUNTY OF SD SUPERVISOR BILL HORN
ART DANELL
RM 335
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SANDIEGO CA 92101
S D CO PLANNING & LAND USE DEPT
JAON VOKAC
5201 RUFFIN ROAD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
STE B-5
FLOYD ASHBY
P 0 BOX 232580
ENClNlTAS CA 92023-2580
~AVERYB Shipping Labels
JOHN LAMB
1446 DEVLIN DR
LOSANGELES CA 90069
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
MARY GRIGGS
STE 100 S
100 HOWEAV
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
PERRY A LAMB
890 MERE POINT RD
BRUNSWICK ME 04011
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
RICHARD RETECKI
STE 1100
1330 BROADWAY
OAKLAND CA 94612
DALE/DONNA SCHREIBER
7163 ARGONAUTA WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
Laser 5 163@
GEORGE BOLTON
6583 BLACKRAIL RD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SANDAG-LAND USE COMMISS
NAN VALERIO
STE 800
401 "B STREET
SANDIEGO CA 92101
BATIQUITOS LAGOON FOUNDATION
JOHN BURNS
P 0 BOX 130491
CARLSBAD CA 92009-
WAVERY~ Shipping Labels
CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCIES
STE 1311
1416 9TH ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
LENNAR HOMES
CLEMENS LARRY
STE 300
1525 FARADAY AV
CARLSBAD CA 92008-73 19
Laser 5 l63@