Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-09-22; City Council; 22094; Certification Environmental Impact Report Draft General, Climate Action Plans; Approval General Plan; and Amendments to Zoning, Map, Local Coastal, Citywide Facilities,General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan September 22, 2015 Page2of4 On July 24, 2015, the Planning Commission voted unanimously (7-0) to recommend to the City Council approval of the project, including: a) General Plan update, b) Climate Action Plan, c) and associated amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Local Coastal Program and Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan. The commission also voted 7-0 to recommend, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, certification of the project Environmental Impact Report and adoption of findings of fact, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. While the commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the project as a whole, there were some project components that were supported by a majority of commissioners, but not all. Exhibit 10 provides a summary of the commission's vote and recommendation on each component of the project. A full description ofthe project is provided in the City Council Agenda Bill dated July 18, 2015, which was previously distributed to the City Council. The Planning Commission's recommendations include revisions to the project described in the July 18, 2015 agenda bill. The commission's recommended revisions are identified in the Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan" (Exhibit 9). As shown in Exhibit 10, the commission's recommended revisions include revisions to the proposed land use map changes; Exhibit 11 describes the residential land use changes recommended by the Planning Commission. For a detailed analysis of the proposed land use changes, please see Attachment 8 of the Report to the Planning Commission, dated July 18, 2015 (Exhibit 1 of the City Council Agenda Bill, dated July 18, 2015). In addition to the land use changes, Exhibit 10 also identifies the commission's recommended revisions to the Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element, Sustainability Element and Mobility Element. Regarding the Mobility Element, the commission did not unanimously agree on the recommended revisions. Some commissioners expressed concerns about certain aspects of the Mobility Element. Exhibit 12 summarizes those concerns and identifies additional revisions to the element, as recommended by staff, that the City Council may consider as a means to address the concerns raised during the Planning Commission discussion on the Mobility Element. Additional public comment letters and emails were received at and after the July 18, 2015 joint public hearing; copies of those comment letters/emails are attached to this agenda bill (Exhibit 13). The minutes from the three Planning Commission meetings are also attached (Exhibit 15). FISCAL IMPACT: The project consists of the adoption of city policies and regulations; no fiscal impact will result from the council's adoption of such policies and regulations. The city's implementation of the policies and regulations may require future funding; however, such funding will be evaluated and determined in relation to future projects. General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan September 22, 2015 Page3of4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Protection Procedures (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, a program environmental impact report (EIR) was prepared for the General Plan, Climate Action Plan, and associated actions for consistency with said documents. The EIR addresses the environmental impacts associated with all discretionary actions for the proposed project, including estimated build-out of the General Plan. On April 4, 2014, the Draft EIR, and on March 20, 2015, the Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR, were published and made available for public review in accordance with CEQA. A total of 303 comment letters and emails (pertaining to the draft General Plan, Climate Action Plan and/or EIR) were submitted. Responses were prepared for each comment and are included in Chapter 3 of the Final EIR. Pursuant to CEQA, responses were mailed to the public agencies that submitted comments. All commenters were notified of the availability of the Final EIR. The EIR analyzed the following areas of potential environmental impact: POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ANALYZED BY EIR Aesthetics Air Quality Biological Resources Energy, Greenhouse Gases and Climate Change Geology, Soils and Seismicity Hazardous Materials, Airport Safety and Wildfires Historical, Archaeological, and Paleontological Hydrology and Flooding/Water Quality Resources Land Use, Housing and Population Noise Public Facilities and Services Public Utilities and Infrastructure Transportation Agricultural Resources The analysis contained in the EIR concluded that the project would result in a less than significant impact, with the exception of five significant and unavoidable impacts: 1. Air quality (see Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR for Impacts 3.2-1, 3.2-2, 3.2-3 and 3.2-4) 2. Transportation (see Draft EIR for Impact 3.13-1) In compliance with CEQA, findings of fact, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program are recommended for adoption to address the significant and unavoidable impacts. Pursuant to CEQA, before a project, which is determined to have significant, unmitigated environmental effects, can be approved, the public agency must consider and adopt a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" per CEQA Guidelines 15043 and 15093. The primary purpose of CEQA is to fully inform the decision makers and the public of the environmental effects of a proposed project and to include feasible mitigation measures and alternatives to reduce any such adverse effects below a level of General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan September 22, 2015 Page4of4 significance. However, CEQA recognizes and authorizes the approval of projects where not all adverse impacts can be fully lessened or avoided. The Lead Agency must explain and justify its conclusion to approve such a project through a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the proposed project's general sociat economic, policy or other public benefits that support the agency's informed conclusion to approve the project. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the CEQA findings of fact, a statement of overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring and reporting program for impacts to air quality and transportation, per Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111 (Exhibit 5}. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION: Information regarding public notifications of this item such as mailings, public hearing notices posted in the newspaper and on the City website are available in the Office of the City Clerk. EXHIBITS: 1. City Council Resolution No. 2 015-242 , certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR 13- 02} and adopting Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the General Plan update, Climate Action Plan and associated amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Local Coastal Program land use and zoning maps, and Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan 2. City Council Resolution No. 2015-243 , approving a General Plan Amendment (GPA 07-02} to comprehensively update the General Plan, including the Housing Element, and associated amendments to the Local Coastal Program land use map (LCPA 07-02} and Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (SS 15-06L and an allocation from the city's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank 3. City Council Ordinance No. CS-287 , approving a Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZCA 07-01}, Zone Change (ZC 15-02} and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 07-02} to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map and Local Coastal Program Implementing Ordinance and Zoning Map for consistency with the draft General Plan; and 4. City Council Resolution No. 2015-244 , approving a Climate Action Plan (SS 15-05} 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111 6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112 7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7113 8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7114 9. Memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan" 10. Summary of Planning Commission Recommendations on the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 11. Planning Commission recommendations-category 1 residential land use changes 12. Staff proposed revisions to the Mobility Element to address Planning Commission concerns A. Strikeout/underline of proposed revisions to the Draft Mobility Element B. Strikeout/underline of proposed revisions to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan 13. Public comment letters and emails received at and after the July 18, 2015 joint public hearing 14. Report to the Planning Commission dated July 18, 2015 (incorporated by referenceL previously distributed to the City Council as Exhibit 1 to the City Council Agenda Bill dated July 18, 2015 15. Minutes from the July, 22, 23 and 24, 2015 Planning Commission meetings 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 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2015-242 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR 13-02) AND ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT, A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR A COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE {INCLUDING A HOUSING ELEMENT UPDATE), A CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ZONING MAP, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, AND CITYWIDE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS PLAN. CASE NAME: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CASE NO.: EIR 13-02 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq., and its implementing regulations r'CEQA Guidelines"), 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000, et seq., the City of Carlsbad prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2011011004) {"Draft EIR") for the project which was made available for public review and comment as required by law beginning on April4, 2014 and ending on June 20, 2014; and WHEREAS, in response to comments on the Draft EIR, the City of Carlsbad prepared a Recirculated Portions of Draft Environmental Impact Report ("Recirculated Draft EIR") for the project which was made available for public review and comment as required by law beginning on March 20, 2015 and ending on May 4, 2015; and WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad received comments concerning the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR from public agencies, organizations and individuals, and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15088, the City of Carlsbad prepared responses to all written comments received on the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR which raised environmental issues; and WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has determined that the comments received on the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR did not contain any significant new information within 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 meaning of CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 and, therefore, recirculation of the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR is not required; and WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR 13-02") which contains the information required by CEQA Guidelines section 15132, including the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR and the revisions and additions thereto, the technical appendices and referenced documents, and the public comments and the city's responses thereto, and which has been filed with the Clerk of the City of Carlsbad; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15091, 15093 and 15097, the City of Carlsbad has prepared Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which have been filed with the Clerk of the City of Carlsbad; and WHEREAS, all materials with regard to the project were made available to the Planning Commission and City Council ofthe City of Carlsbad for review and consideration ofthe project including, but not limited to: the Final EIR 13-02, Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; all reports, applications, memoranda, maps, letters and other planning documents prepared by the planning consultant, the environmental consultants, and the City of Carlsbad that are before the city decision makers; all documents submitted by members of the public and public agencies in connection with the EIR 13-02; minutes of all public meetings and public hearings; and matters of common knowledge to the City of Carlsbad which they may consider, including but not limited to, the Carlsbad General Plan, Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, Carlsbad Local Coastal Program, Carlsbad Growth Management Plan, Carlsbad Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, and Carlsbad Climate Action Plan; and -2- 1 WHEREAS, the City Council did on July 18, 2015 hold a duly noticed joint public 2 hearing with the Planning Commission, as prescribed by law to receive a staff presentation and 3 4 public testimony regarding the Final EIR 13-02 and said project; and 5 WHEREAS, the City Council adjourned their public hearing on July 18, 2015 and 6 the Planning Commission continued their public hearing on July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, as 7 prescribed by law to consider the Final EIR 13-02 and said project; and 8 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution 9 No. 7111 recommending that the City Council certify Final EIR 13-02, and adopted Planning 10 Commission Resolutions No. 7112, 7113 and 7114 recommending approval of said project; and 11 12 WHEREAS, the City Council did on September 22, 2015 hold a duly noticed public 13 hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation to certify 14 Final EIR 13-02 and approve said project; and 15 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and 16 arguments and examining the Final EIR 13-02 {Exhibit 1A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 17 7111, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference), Findings of Fact and 18 Statement of Overriding Considerations {Exhibit 1B of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111, 19 20 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference), and a Mitigation Monitoring and 21 Reporting Program {Exhibit 1C of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111, on file with the City 22 Clerk and incorporated by this reference), analyzing the information submitted by staff and 23 considering any written and oral comments received, the City Council considered all factors 24 relating to the Final EIR 13-02. 25 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of 26 Carlsbad, as follows: 27 28 -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 1. The foregoing recitations are true and correct. 2. Final EIR 13-02 consists ofthe EIR, technical appendices, written comments and responses to comments, revisions to the Draft EIR and Recirculated Portions ofthe Draft EIR, revisions to the draft General Plan, and revisions to the draft Climate Action Plan, as amended to include the comments and documents of those testifying at the public hearing and responses thereto, and is hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a copy of the minutes of said public hearing into the Final EIR 13-02, all on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference. 3. Chapters 4 and 5 of Final EIR 13-02 are amended to incorporate the recommendations of the Planning Commission, as identified in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. 4. Final EIR 13-02 is adequate and provides reasonable information on the project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project. 5. The findings of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings ofthe City Council. 6. Final EIR 13-02 (Exhibit 1A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference), amended and evaluated as stated above, is certified; and the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibits 1B and 1C, respectively, of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference), are adopted. -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 7. This action is final on the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: "NOTICE" The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA, 92008. Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill -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 RESOLUTION NO.. 2015-243 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVELY UPDATE THE GENERAL PLAN, INCLUDING THE HOUSING ELEMENT, AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND CITYWIDE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, AND AN ALLOCATION FROM THE EXCESS DWELLING UNIT BANK. CASE NAME: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CASE NO.: GPA 07-02/LCPA 07-02/SS 15-06 EXHIBIT 2 The City Council ofthe City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the City Council accepted the Carlsbad Community Vision in January 2010 and achievement of said vision is supported by the General Plan Amendment and associated Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment; and WHEREAS, per City Council direction on September 11, 2012 and on November 5, 2013, staff utilized the Preferred Plan in the preparation of the General Plan update; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends revisions to the project as identified in the Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan", on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Final Environmental Impact Report {SCH # 2011011004) relative to the proposed project -General Plan Amendment, Climate Action Plan, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment-has been prepared and the City Council has certified it per City Council Resolution No. 2015-242; and I \ \ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, the City Council did on July 18, 2015 hold a duly noticed joint public hearing with the Planning Commission, as prescribed by law to receive a staff presentation and public testimony regarding said project; and WHEREAS, the City Council adjourned their public hearing on July 18, 2015 and the Planning Commission continued their public hearing on July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, as prescribed by law to consider said project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolutions No. 7112, 7113 and 7114 recommending approval of said project with revisions identified in the Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan", on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference; and WHEREAS, in addition to the revisions recommended by the Planning Commission in the "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan/' the Planning Commission identified concerns regarding the draft General Plan Mobility Element, as identified in the minutes for the July 22, 23 and 24, 2015 Planning Commission meetings, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference; and WHEREAS, to address said Planning Commission concerns, city staff recommends revisions to the draft General Plan Mobility Element and the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, as identified in Exhibit 12A and Exhibit 12B, respectively, of the City Council Agenda Bill for this project, dated September 22, 2015, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference; and -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 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors relating to: a} the draft General Plan GPA 07-02 (Exhibits 2A and 2B of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference}; b) the Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 07-02 (Exhibit 2B of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference}; c) the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment SS 15-06 (Exhibit 2C of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference}; d) the request for an allocation from the city's excess dwelling unit bank (per Planning Commission Resolution No. 7114, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference}; e) Planning Commission recommended revisions to the draft General Plan and Local Coastal Program, pursuant to the memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan" (on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference}; and f) staff recommended revisions to address Planning Commission concerns regarding the draft General Plan Mobility Element, pursuant to Exhibit 12A and Exhibit 12B of the City Council Agenda Bill for this project, dated September 22, 2015 (on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference}; and WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six-week public review period for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program; and WHEREAS, on August 25, 2015, the City Council approved the Agua Hedionda South Shore Specific Plan, which includes revisions to the General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, as follows: 1. The foregoing recitations are true and correct. -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. The state-mandated six-week review period for the Local Coastal Program Amendment {LCPA 07-02) started on March 27, 2015 and ended on May 8, 2015; no comments were received in response to the LCPA notice. 3. The draft General Plan is amended to incorporate: a) the recommendations of the Planning Commission, as identified in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, and b) the recommendations of staff, as identified in Exhibit 12A of the City Council Agenda Bill for this project, dated September 22, 2015, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. 4. The findings of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings of the City Council. 5. General Plan Amendment GPA 07-02 {Exhibits 2A and 2B of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference), amended as stated above, is approved. 6. Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 07-02 (Exhibit 2B of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference), amended as stated above, is approved. 7. The draft Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment 55 15-06 {Exhibit 2C of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference), is amended to incorporate the recommendations of staff, as identified in Exhibit 12B of the City Council Agenda Bill for this project, dated September 22, 2015, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. -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 8. Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment 55 15-06 (Exhibit 2C of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this referenceL amended as stated above, is approved. 9. The City Planner is directed to revise General Plan data and figures, as necessary, to be consistent with the approved land use map and other approved revisions to the plan. 10. The City Planner is directed to revise the General Plan data and figures, as necessary, to be consistent with the approved Agua Hedionda Specific Plan. 11. This action is final on the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: "NOTICE" The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA, 92008. II II II II II -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 ORDINANCE NO. CS-287 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH THE UPDATED GENERAL PLAN BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP, AMENDING THE MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY FOR MIXED USE, REMOVING THE REFERENCES TO "RHNA BASE" DENSITY, AND AMENDING THE OFFICE ZONE TO CONDITIONALLY PERMIT PROFESSIONAL CARE FACILITIES. CASE NAME: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CASE NO.: ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows: EXHIBIT 3 WHEREAS, the City Council did on July 18, 2015 hold a duly noticed joint public hearing with the Planning Commission, as prescribed by law to receive a staff presentation and public testimony regarding said request; and WHEREAS, the City Council adjourned their public hearing on July 18, 2015 and the Planning Commission continued their public hearing on July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, as prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, the City Council did on September 22, 2015 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation on said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said City Council considered all factors relating to ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02-GENERAL PLAN UPDATE; and WHEREAS, on August 25, 2015, the City Council approved the Agua Hedionda South Shore Specific Plan, which includes revisions to the Zoning Map. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: That Section 21.05.030 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, being the Zoning Map and the Local Coastal Program Zoning Map are amended as shown on map marked "Exhibit X1-ZONING MAP (ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02)" dated July 18, 2015, and as revised by Planning Commission "Errata Exhibit E", attached hereto and made a part hereof, and as revised per the Agua Hedionda South Shore Specific Plan, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. 1 SECTION II: That Section 21.26.015.C (Residential Uses in the C-1 Zone) is amended to read 2 as follows: 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 c. Residential uses shall be constructed at a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre, per Table 2-4 of the general plan land use and community design element, subject to approval of a site development plan processed in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of this title. 1. Density and yield of residential uses shall be determined consistent with the residential density calculations and residential development restrictions in Section 21.53.230 of this title and shall be based on twenty-five percent of the developable area. Unit yield in excess of the minimum shall be subject to the finding in subsection 2 below. In no case shall the calculation preclude the development of at least one dwelling unit in a mixed use development. 2. Residential uses shall be secondary and accessory to the primary commercial use of the site. Compliance with this provision shall be evaluated as part of the site development plan. SECTION Ill: That Section 21.28.015.C (Residential Uses in the C-2 Zone) is amended to read as follows: c. Residential uses shall be constructed at a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre, per Table 2-4 of the general plan land use and community design element, subject to approval of a site development plan processed in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of this title. 1. Density and yield of residential uses shall be determined consistent with the residential density calculations and residential development restrictions in Section 21.53.230 of this title and shall be based on twenty-five percent of the developable area. Unit yield in excess of the minimum shall be subject to the finding in subsection 2 below. In no case shall the calculation preclude the development of at least one dwelling unit in a mixed use development. 2. Residential uses shall be secondary and accessory to the primary commercial use of the site. Compliance with this provision shall be evaluated as part of the site development plan. -2- 1 SECTION IV: That Section 21.29.030 (Permitted uses) is amended by the addition of the 2 following use: 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ·. USE ........ p CUR Ace Residential uses (subject to Section 21.29.035 of this title) X SECTION V: That Section 21.29.035 (Residential uses in the C-T Zone) is added as follows: 21.29.035 Residential uses in the C-T zone. Mixed use developments that propose residential uses in combination with commercial uses shall comply with the following requirements. A. Residential uses shall be located above the ground floor of a multi-storied commercial building with one or more of the non-residential uses permitted by Section 21.29.030 of this title located on the ground floor. B. Residential uses shall be subject to the requirements of the chapters of this title, which include but are not limited to, Chapter 21.29, Chapter 21.44, and in the case of airspace subdivisions, Chapter 21.47. c. Residential uses shall be constructed at a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre, per 17 Table 2-4 of the general plan land use and community design element, subject to approval of a site 18 development plan processed in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of this title. 19 1. Density and yield of residential uses shall be determined consistent with the 20 residential density calculations and residential development restrictions in Section 21.53.230 ofthis title and 21 shall be based on twenty-five percent of the developable area. Unit yield in excess of the minimum shall be 22 subject to the finding in subsection 2 below. In no case shall the calculation preclude the development of at 23 least one dwelling unit in a mixed use development. 24 2. Residential uses shall be secondary and accessory to the primary visitor-serving 25 commercial use ofthe site. Compliance with this provision shall be evaluated as part ofthe site development 26 plan. 27 28 -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 SECTION VI: That Section 21.31.065.C (Residential Uses in the C-L Zone) is amended to read as follows: c. Residential uses shall be constructed at a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre, per Table 2-4 of the general plan land use and community design element, subject to approval of a site development plan processed in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of this title. 1. Density and yield of residential uses shall be determined consistent with the residential density calculations and residential development restrictions in Section 21.53.230 of this title and shall be based on twenty-five percent of the developable area. Unit yield in excess of the minimum shall be subject to the finding in subsection 2 below. In no case shall the calculation preclude the development of at least one dwelling unit in a mixed use development. 2. Residential uses shall be secondary and accessory to the primary commercial use of the site. Compliance with this provision shall be evaluated as part of the site development plan. SECTION VII: That Section 21.53.230(e) (Residential density calculations, residential 15 development restrictions on open space and environmentally sensitive lands) is amended to read as follows: 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (e) The potential unit yield for a property, based on the minimum, growth management control point (GMCP), or maximum density of the applicable general plan land use designation, shall be subject to the following: (1) Equation used to determine unit yield: developable lot area (in acres) x density = unit yield. (A) "Density" used in this calculation is the minimum, GMCP, or maximum density of the applicable general plan land use designation; (B) The resulting unit yield shall be subject to Table A, below. (2) For purposes of this section: (A) "Rounded-up" means rounding the fractional unit yield up to the next whole unit; and -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 EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption; and the city clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and cause the full text of the ordinance or a summary of the ordinance prepared by the City Attorney to be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within fifteen days after its adoption. (Notwithstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be effective within the Coastal Zone until LCPA 07-02 is approved by the California Coastal Commission.) INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council on the day of ______ 2015, and thereafter. Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill -6- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the _______ day of ______ 2015, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY CELIA A. BREWER, City Attorney -7- MATI HALL, Mayor ATIEST: BARBARA ENGLESON, City Clerk (SEAL) 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. 2015-244 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE CARLSBAD CLIMATE ACTION PLAN. CASE NAME: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CASE NO.: SS 15-05 EXHIBIT 4 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the City Council accepted the Carlsbad Community Vision in January 2010 and said vision identifies environmental sustainability as a core community value, and the Draft General Plan includes goals and policies that promote environmental sustainability, including transportation demand management, energy efficiency, waste reduction, and resource conservation and recycling, and the proposed Climate Action Plan supports these community values, goals and policies by identifying how the city can reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs}; and WHEREAS, state laws require the reduction of GHGs and recommend that reduction targets be established, and the proposed Climate Action Plan identifies how Carlsbad can meet the GHG reduction targets; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommends revisions to the Climate Action Plan as identified in the Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan", on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2011011004} for the proposed Climate Action Plan has been prepared and the City Council has certified it per City Council Resolution No. 2015-242; and WHEREAS, the City Council did on July 18, 2015 hold a duly noticed joint public hearing with the Planning Commission, as prescribed by law to receive a staff presentation and public testimony regarding the General Plan update and Climate Action Plan; and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, the City Council adjourned their public hearing on July 18, 2015 and the Planning Commission continued their public hearing on July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, as prescribed by law to consider said project; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 7113 recommending approval of the Climate Action Plan with revisions identified in the Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan", on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference; and WHEREAS, the City Council did on September 22, 2015 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the Climate Action Plan; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors relating to: a) the Climate Action Plan (Exhibit 3A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7113, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference) and b) Planning Commission recommended revisions to the draft Climate Action Plan, pursuant to the memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet forth~ General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan" (on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, as follows: 1. The foregoing recitations are true and correct. -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. The draft Climate Action Plan is amended to incorporate the recommendations of the Planning Commission, as identified in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. 3. The findings of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7113, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings of the City Council. 4. Climate Action Plan SS 15-05 (Exhibit 3A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7113, on file with the City Clerk and incorporated by this reference), amended as stated above, is approved. 5. This action is final on the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply: "NOTICE" The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA, 92008. Ill Ill Ill Ill -3- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has determined that the comments received on the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR did not contain any significant new information within the meaning of CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 and, therefore, recirculation of the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR is not required; and WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has prepared a Final Environmental Impact Report ("Final EIR 13-02") which contains the information required by CEQA Guidelines section 15132, including the Draft EIR and Recirculated Draft EIR and the revisions and additions thereto, the technical appendices and referenced documents, and the public comments and the city's responses thereto, and which has been filed with the Clerk of the City of Carlsbad; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15091, 15093 and 15097, the City of Carlsbad has prepared Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which have been filed with the Clerk of the City of Carlsbad; and WHEREAS, all materials with regard to the project were made available to the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad ("Planning Commission") for its review, consideration and recommendation to the City Council of the project including, but not limited to: the Final EIR 13-02, Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; all reports, applications, memoranda, maps, letters and other planning documents prepared by the planning consultant, the environmental consultants, and the City of Carlsbad that are before the city decision makers; all documents submitted by members of the public and public agencies in connection with the EIR 13-02; minutes of all public meetings and public hearings; and matters of common knowledge to the City of Carlsbad which they may consider, including but not limited to, the Carlsbad General Plan, Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, Carlsbad Local Coastal Program, Carlsbad Growth Management Plan, Carlsbad Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, and Carlsbad Climate Action Plan; and PC RESO NO. 7111 -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 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on July 18, 2015, hold a duly noticed public hearing and received public testimony and thereafter continued said public hearing to July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, as prescribed by law to consider the Final EIR 13-02 and the project; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments and examining the Final EIR 13-02 (Exhibit 1A on file in the Planning Division and incorporated by this reference), Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit 18, attached hereto), and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit 1C, attached hereto), analyzing the information submitted by staff and considering any written and oral comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Final EIR 13-02. Carlsbad that: A) B) C) D) E) NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of The foregoing recitations are true and correct. The Final EIR 13-02 consists of the EIR, technical appendices, written comments and responses to comments, revisions to the Draft EIR and Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR, revisions to the draft General Plan, and revisions to the draft Climate Action Plan, as amended to include the comments and documents of those testifying at the public hearing and responses thereto, and is hereby found to be in good faith and reason by incorporating a copy oft he minutes of said public hearing into the Final EIR 13-02 (Exhibit 1A), all on file in the Planning Division and incorporated by this reference. The Planning Commission recommends amendments to Chapters 4 and 5 ofthe Final EIR 13-02 (Exhibit 1A), as shown in the memorandum to the Planning Commission, dated July 24, 2015, titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan", on file in the Planning Division and incorporated by this reference. The Final EIR 13-02 (Exhibit 1A), as so amended and evaluated, is recommended for acceptance and certification as the Final Environmental Impact Report for the project and, as recommended is adequate and provides reasonable information on the project and all reasonable and feasible alternatives thereto, including no project. Based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission RECOMMENDS CERTIFICATION of the Final EIR 13-02 (Exhibit 1A), for the GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, CLIMATE ACTION PLAN, AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORIDNANCE, ZONING MAP, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM, AND CITYWIDE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS PLAN, and the Planning Commission RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit 18), and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit 1C), based on the following findings. PC RESO NO. 7111 -3- 1 Findings: 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 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The Planning Commission has reviewed, analyzed, and considered Final EIR 13-02 (Exhibit 1A), the environmental impacts therein identified for this project, the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit 18), and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit 1C), prior to recommending approval of this project. The Planning Commission finds that the Final EIR 13-02 reflects the City of Carlsbad's independent judgment and analysis, the Final EIR 13-02, Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are complete and adequate in scope and have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Carlsbad and, therefore, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the Final EIR 13-02 be certified in relation to the project. The Planning Commission does accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the Findings of Fact (Exhibit 18), including feasibility of mitigation measures pursuant to Public Resources Code 21081 and CEQA Guidelines 15091, and infeasibility of project alternatives. The Planning Commission hereby finds and recommends to the City Council that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit 1C) is designed to ensure that during project implementation, any responsible parties will implement the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The Planning Commission hereby finds that although certain environmental effects caused by the project will remain significant or potentially significant even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, there are specific economic, social, and other considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable, as set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit 18) and recommends its adoption to the City Council. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.6(a)(2) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(e), the documents and other materials which constitute the record of proceedings on which this resolution are located in the City of Carlsbad, at 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive in the custody of the City Clerk, and 1635 Faraday Avenue in the custody ofthe City Planner. PC RESO NO. 7111 -4- Exhibit 1B July 18, 2015 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan SCH #2011011004 Prepared by: City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Table of Contents Exhibit 1B July 18, 2015 1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 1 2 Project Description .......................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Project Location ................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Project Components ............................................................................................................ 2 2.3 Project Objectives ................................................................................................................ 3 3 Environmental Procedures ............................................................................................... 5 3.1 Lead Agency ......................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Environmental Impact Report ............................................................................................. 5 3.3 Public Participation .............................................................................................................. 5 3.4 Record of Proceedings ......................................................................................................... 6 4 Overview and General Findings ........................................................................................ 7 5 Findings and Recommendations Regarding Significant Impacts ......................................... 9 5.1 Air Quality .......................................................................................................................... 10 5.2 Transportation ................................................................................................................... 36 6 Project Alternatives ....................................................................................................... 41 6.1 Alternative Analysis ........................................................................................................... 41 7 Statement of Overriding Consideration .......................................................................... 52 8 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 55 Carlsbad General Plan Update This page intentionally left blank. ii I Introduction Exhibit 1B July 18, 2015 f( The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the City of Carlsbad (city) as the CEQA lead agency to: (1) make written findings when it approves a project for which an environmental impact report (EIR) was certified, and (2) identify overriding considerations for significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR. These findings explain how the city approaches the significant and potentially significant impacts identified in the EIR prepared for: the City of Carlsbad General Plan update, including other related plans and programs to implement the broad direction ofthe General Plan; the Climate Action Plan (CAP); amendments to the city's Zoning Map and Local Coastal Program land use and zoning maps; and amendment of the circulation level of service standard in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to ensure consistency with the updated General Plan. These plans and amendments will be collectively referred to herein as the 1/proposed Plan" or the 11 proposed General Plan". The statement of overriding considerations identifies economic, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed General Plan that override any significant environmental impacts that would result from the proposed Plan. As required under CEQA, the Final EIR includes the Draft EIR, the Recirculated Portions ofthe Draft EIR, comments and responses to comments on the Draft EIR and Recirculated Portions ofthe Draft EIR, and revisions to the Draft EIR, proposed Plan and CAP. In addition to analyzing potential environmental effects and identifying necessary mitigation measures, the Final EIR examined five alternatives to the proposed Plan-namely Alternative 1 (Centers Concept), Alternative 2 (Active Waterfront Concept), Alternative 3 (Core Focus Concept), the Reduced Density Alternative, and the No Project Alternative (representing a continuation of the existing General Plan). The Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations set forth below (11 Findings") are presented for adoption by the City Council (Council) as the city's findings under CEQA (Public Resources Code, §21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §15000 et seq.) relating to the proposed Plan and CAP. The Findings provide the written analysis and conclusions of this Council regarding the proposed Plan's environmental impacts, mitigating policies, alternatives to the proposed Plan, and the overriding considerations, which in this Council's view, justify approval of the proposed Plan, despite its environmental effects. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 2 Project Description 2. I Project Location The proposed Plan boundaries coincide with Carlsbad's city limits. Carlsbad is located on the coast of the Pacific Ocean in northwest San Diego County. In addition to the Pacific Ocean coastline along its western boundary, Carlsbad is surrounded by the cities of Oceanside to the north, Encinitas to the south, and Vista and San Marcos and unincorporated areas of San Diego County to the east. Along Carlsbad's northern edge, urban development abuts Highway 78, with the highway and Buena Vista Lagoon acting as a boundary between Carlsbad and Oceanside. Similarly, Batiquitos Lagoon along the city's southern edge acts as a boundary between Carlsbad and Encinitas. To the east, city boundaries are less distinctive, as a mix of hillsides and urban development are located adjacent to the cities of Vista and San Marcos and unincorporated county lands. 2.2 Project Components GENERAL PLAN UPDATE The proposed General Plan is intended to respond directly to changes experienced in Carlsbad since the preparation ofthe current General Plan (last comprehensively updated in 1994}, and to plan for city growth projected in coming decades. The proposed General Plan, which establishes a long-range planning framework and policies, including a Housing Element update for the 2013 to 2021 planning period, would fully supplant the city's existing General Plan when adopted by the City Council. The General Plan update was initiated to comprehensively examine the existing city and to create a vision for its future. Although the proposed General Plan does not specify or anticipate when buildout of the city will occur, a horizon of year 2035 is assumed for planning purposes. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN In addition to the proposed General Plan, a Climate Action Plan (CAP) is also proposed. The CAP is designed to reduce Carlsbad's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and streamline environmental review offuture development projects in the city in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The CAP includes goals, policies, and actions for Carlsbad to reduce GHG emissions and address climate change and includes: 2 • An inventory of Carlsbad's citywide and local government GHG emissions; • Forecasts of future citywide and local government GHG emissions; • A comprehensive, citywide strategy and actions to manage and reduce GHG emissions, with emission targets through year 2035; and • Actions that demonstrate Carlsbad's commitment to achieve state GHG reduction targets by creating enforceable measures, and monitoring and reporting processes to ensure targets are met. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan The timeframe for the CAP extends from the date of adoption through 2035. The proposed General Plan and the CAP are anticipated to be adopted concurrently, and both are evaluated in the EIR. ZONING MAP AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM LAND USE AND ZONING MAPS The proposed General Plan includes revisions to the General Plan Land Use Map; the city's Zoning Map and Local Coastal Program land use and zoning maps are proposed to be amended to ensure consistency with the proposed General Plan Land Use Map. ZONING ORDINANCE/LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM IMPLEMENTING PLAN AMENDMENT The regulations of the Zoning Ordinance are proposed to be amended to ensure consistency with the General Plan. The minimum residential density for commercial mixed use is proposed to be amended and references to "RHNA Base" density are proposed to be deleted. Also, professional care facilities are proposed to be added as a permitted use in the Office Zone. CITYWIDE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS PLAN (CFIP) The proposed General Plan includes a provision to update the CFIP in order to ensure that the two documents are consistent with one another. Policy 3-P.lO in the proposed General Plan Mobility Element requires that the CFIP methodology for circulation level of service standards be updated to reflect the multi-modal approach established in the proposed General Plan. 2.3 Project Objectives The objectives of the proposed General Plan (as stated in Section 1.3 of the proposed General Plan) are: • To outline a vision for Carlsbad's long-term physical and economic development and community enhancement; • To provide strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow this vision to be accomplished; • To establish a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with General Plan policies and standards, (such as those for density, parks, and mobility); • To allow city departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance important environmental resources, and minimize hazards; and • To provide the basis for establishing priorities for implementing plans and programs, such as the Zoning Ordinance, the Capital Improvements Program, facilities plans, and specific and area plans. 3 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan The vision of the proposed General Plan is based on the core values identified in the "Carlsbad Community Vision" (Section 1.2 of the proposed General Plan), as follows: 4 1. Small town feel, beach community character and connectedness. Enhance Carlsbad's defining attributes-its sm,~ll-town feel and beach community character. Build on the city's culture of civic engagement, volunteerism and philanthropy. 2. Open space and the natural environment. Prioritize protection and enhancement of open space and the natural environment. Support and protect Carlsbad's unique open space and agricultural heritage. 3. Access to recreation and active, healthy lifestyles. Promote active lifestyles and community health by furthering access to trails, parks, beaches and other recreation opportunities. 4. The local economy, business diversity and tourism. Strengthen the city's strong and diverse economy and its position as an employment hub in north San Diego County. Promote business diversity, increased specialty retail and dining opportunities, and Carlsbad's tourism. 5. Walking, biking, public transportation and connectivity. Increase travel options through enhanced walking, bicycling and public transportation systems. Enhance mobility through increased connectivity and intelligent transportation management. 6. Sustainability. Build on the city's sustainability initiatives to emerge as a leader in green development and sustainability. Pursue public/ private partnerships, particularly on sustainable water, energy, recycling and foods. 7. History, the arts and cultural resources. Emphasize the arts by promoting a multitude of events and productions year-round, cutting-edge venues to host world-class performances, and celebrate Carlsbad's cultural heritage in dedicated facilities and programs. 8. High quality education and community services. Support quality, comprehensive education and life-long learning opportunities, provide housing and community services for a changing population, and maintain a high standard for citywide public safety. 9. Neighborhood revitalization, community design and livability. Revitalize neighborhoods and enhance citywide community design and livability. Promote a greater mix of uses citywide, more activities along the coastline, and link density to public transportation. Revitalize the downtown Village as a community focal point and a unique and memorable center for visitors, and rejuvenate the historic Barrio neighborhood. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 3 Environmental Procedures 3.1 Lead Agency Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15367, the city is the "lead agency" for the purpose of preparing the environmental review required by CEQA. The environmental review prepared by the city will be used by the Council and the Planning Commission in their respective decisions regarding the certification of the EIR and the adoption ofthe proposed General Plan. Other public agencies that may have an interest in the project or resources affected by the project include the California Coastal Commission, the California Department of Transportation, the California Environmental Protection Agency, and the County of San Diego. 3.2 Environmental Impact Report Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15080, et seq., the city prepared an EIR to analyze the potential impacts of the proposed Plan on the environment. The Final EIR contains all of the information required by CEQA Guidelines §15132, including the Draft EIR and the appendices to the Draft EIR, the recirculated Draft EIR and its appendices, all comment letters received, written responses to all comments, and revisions to the EIR, General Plan and Climate Action Plan. 3.3 Public Participation In 2008, the city initiated "Envision Carlsbad", a community-wide outreach and visioning process that helped define a set of widely-shared community values. Eight thousand members of the Carlsbad community participated in the city-sponsored program to create a community vision for Carlsbad's future. The core values that emerged from this process are identified in the "Carlsbad Community Vision," which was accepted by the City Council in January 2010 and serves as a guide for city leaders, staff, and community members as they implement this vision. The NOP for the draft EIR was published on December 29, 2010. The NOP and public comment period were advertised and a public scoping meeting was held January 17, 2011 to gather agency and public input on the scope and content of the EIR. One community member attended the scoping meeting. Written comments were also received during the public comment period. In accordance with CEQA, the Draft EIR was distributed for a 45-day public review and comment period beginning on April4, 2015 through May 19, 2014; and on May 14, 2014, the public review and comment period was extended to June 20, 2014. Copies of the Draft EIR or notice of availability of the Draft EIR were sent to various state, regional, and local agencies, as well as interested organizations and individuals. In total, 291 comment letters were received from public agencies, organizations, and individuals. Based on comments on the Draft EIR, the city revised portions ofthe Draft EIR concerning Chapter 3.2, Air Quality and Chapter 4.0, Alternatives. The revisions to the Draft EIR include a revised air quality analysis, which concludes Impacts 3.2-1, 3.2-2, 3.2-3, and 3.2-4 will be significant and 5 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan unavoidable, and a revised alternatives analysis which evaluates a reduced density alternative that reduces impacts to air quality and transportation. The other environmental issues raised in public comments on the Draft EIR are addressed in the written responses to comments and other revisions that are included in the Final EIR. cc The revised chapters of the Draft EIR were recirculated for a 45-day public review and comment period beginning on March 20, 2015 through May 4, 2015. Twelve written comment letters were submitted on the Recirculated Portions ofthe Draft EIR. These comments and the city's responses to them are included in the Final EIR as required by CEQA Guidelines sections 15088 and 15132. The Final EIR was completed and the city's comments were made available for review on July 1, 2015. A public hearing concerning certification of the Final EIR was held by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission and City Council on July 18, 2015, at which interested agencies, organizations, and persons were given an opportunity to comment on the Final EIR and the proposed Plan. 3.4 Record of Proceedings For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth below, the administrative record of the city's decision concerning certification of the Final EIR for the proposed Plan include the following: • The Draft EIR (April 2014) • The Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR (March 2015) • The Final EIR (July 2015) • The appendices to the Draft EIR, Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR and Final EIR; • All documents and other materials listed as references and/or incorporated by reference in the Draft EIR, Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR, and Final EIR, including but not limited to the materials identified in Chapters 6 (Bibliography), 7 (Organizations Consulted), and 8 (Report Authors) of the EIR. • All reports, maps, letters, and other documents prepared by the city's staff and consultants for the proposed Plan which are before the City Council as determined by the Clerk; • All documents or other materials submitted by interested persons and public agencies in connection with the Draft EIR, Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR, and the Final EIR; and • The minutes, tape recordings, and verbatim transcripts, if any, ofthe public hearings held by the city concerning certification of the Final EIR and approval of the proposed Plan. All records and materials constituting the record of the proceedings upon which these Findings are based are available at the offices of the City of Carlsbad, located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 (Public Resources Code§ 21081.6(a)(2)). 6 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 4 Overview and General Findings The proposed Plan includes policies and programs that are designed to avoid or to minimize the potential environmental effects offuture development. If significant impacts would occur despite conformance with the policies and programs of the proposed Plan, CEQA requires the city to identify feasible mitigation measures that would avoid or substantially lessen a project's potential significant impacts. Table ES-3 of the Draft EIR lists a summary of potential impacts and proposed General Plan policies that reduce the impacts. The Draft EIR and recirculated Draft EIR identify significant effects on the environment that may occur as a result of implementation of the proposed General Plan in the areas of air quality and transportation, which are described in detail below. Public Resources Code Section 21002 provides that "public agencies should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects" (Emphasis added). The same statute states that the procedures required by CEQA "are intended to assist public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen such significant effects" (Emphasis added). Section 21002 goes on to state that "in the event [that] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more significant effects thereof." The mandate and principles set forth in Public Resources Code Section 21002 are implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings concerning significant impacts before approving projects for which EIRs are required. (See Pub. Resources Code Section 21081, subd. (a); CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, subd. (a)). Specifically, Section 15091, subdivision (a) of the CEQA Guidelines establishes the following requirements for findings: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation ofthe rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1)). This finding shall be referred to as "Finding (1)." 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(2)). This finding shall be referred to as "Finding (2)." 7 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3)). This finding shall be referred to as "Finding (3)." Thus, for each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding making one or more of the three permissible findings described above. These findings constitute the city's best efforts to set forth the evidentiary and other bases for its decision to approve the proposed Plan in a manner consistent with the requirements of CEQA. The Facts in Support of Findings, as set forth in the following sections, state the city's reasons for making each finding and the evidence in support of the findings. 8 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 5 Findings and Recommendations Regarding Significant Impacts The Final EIR examined the environmental impacts of the proposed General Plan in the areas of aesthetics; air quality; biological resources; energy, greenhouse gases, and climate change; geology, soils and seismicity; hazardous materials, airport safety, and wildfires; historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources; hydrology and flooding/water quality; land use, housing, and population; noise; public facilities and services; public utilities and infrastructure; transportation; agricultural resources; growth-inducing impacts; significant irreversible environmental changes; and cumulative impacts. The Final EIR found potentially significant impacts in the areas of air quality and transportation. Despite identifying policies and mitigation measures that would reduce the potentially significant impacts, each o( these significant impacts was considered significant and unavoidable. In determining the significance of the environmental effects, it is important to emphasize that in issue areas when uncertainty surrounds impacts at a program level, the EIR analysis uses a conservative approach to both assessment and conclusions. For instance, in the air quality analysis, traffic data and trip generation include residential development that exceeds the city's Growth Management Program dwelling unit limitation in the northeast quadrant by 327 units (which will be modified during the public hearing process to ensure compliance with the Growth Management dwelling limit). In addition, the air quality analysis utilized the URBEMIS 2007 model, Version 9.2.4, which used conservative default data for all inputs, including temperature, trip characteristics, variable start information, emissions factors, and trip distances. Due to the program level of analysis in the EIR and lack of project-specific development plans, it is not possible at this time to define the exact extent of potential impacts, so it is not possible to ascertain with certainty whether the identified General Plan policies and mitigation measures will reduce impacts to levels considered "less than significant." Future development proposals will be subject to site-specific, project-level environmental analysis pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168. The following subsections list each significant or potentially significant environmental impact by issue area in the order it appears in the Draft EIR, and includes proposed General Plan policies which reduce the impact for each significant impact identified in the EIR; the availability of mitigation measures; findings; and overriding considerations. A full documentation of the environmental analysis and conclusions is in the Final EIR, which is incorporated by reference. 9 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 5.1 Air Quality Impact 3.2-1 Finding: Development under the proposed General Plan will conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable air quality plan. (Significant and Unavoidable) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Plan which could avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR as Impact 3.2-1; and, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15091(a)(2), such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction ofthe San Diego Air Pollution Control District ("SDAPCD"), not the city, and such changes can and should be adopted by the SDAPCD. Facts in Support of Finding: As mentioned in the recirculated Draft EIR analysis, the SDAPCD and SANDAG are responsible for developing and implementing the clean air plan (RAQS) for attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS and CAAQS in the SDAB. The RAQS was initially adopted in 1991 and is updated on a triennial basis (most recently in 2009). The 2009 update to the RAQS remains the most up-to-date regional air quality plan for the SDAB. The RAQS is the primary document that accounts for regional emission levels in the SDAB and serves as the long-term guidance tool for bringing into attainment and maintaining adequate air emission levels in the region. The RAQS outlines the SDAPCD's plans and control measures designed to attain the state air quality standards, particularly for 03 and its precursor pollutants. The RAQS relies on information from CARB and SANDAG, including mobile and area source emissions, as well as information regarding projected growth in San Diego County and the cities in the county, to project future emissions and then determine from that the strategies necessary for the reduction of emissions through regulatory controls. CARB mobile source emission projections and SANDAG growth projections are based on population, vehicle trends, and land use plans developed by San Diego County and the cities in the county as part of the development of their general plans. If a project proposes development that is greater than that anticipated in the local general plan and SANDAG's growth projections, the project might be in conflict with the RAQS and may contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact on air quality. Future land uses and development projects that occur consistent with the proposed General Plan would generate vehicle trips and area source emissions that would result in ozone precursor emissions and particulate matter. However, the overall premise of the proposed General Plan is to plan for future growth in Carlsbad, which would include the efficient reconfiguration of land uses to reduce vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) including development of compact, mixed- use and transit-oriented development; increase non-motorized modes of travel; improve transit corridors; and implement long-term sustainable development measures city-wide. The numerous policies delineated in the proposed General Plan support these goals and objectives to reduce criteria pollutant emissions. Moreover, the Climate Action Plan (CAP) is proposed concurrent with the proposed General Plan; the CAP would further implement sustainability measures to reduce emissions resulting from motor vehicles, electricity, solid waste generation, and water use. 10 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Additionally, although the proposed General Plan would be designed to accommodate future growth, the proposed General Plan and CAP have been developed to effectively and sustainably accommodate growth while creating a more efficient, sustainable land use and transportation profile that would be consistent with the control measures and regional air quality planning strategies as outlined in the RAQS. Moreover, individual projects under the proposed General Plan would be required to undergo subsequent, individual environmental review pursuant to CEQA, and as part ofthis review effort, projects requiring discretionary approval would be required to demonstrate compliance with the RAQS and SIP. Individual projects would also be required to demonstrate compliance with SDAPCD rules and regulations governing air quality, specifically particulate matter. While numerous measures would be taken under the proposed General Plan and CAP to support the goals and policies of the RAQS and SIP, population projections, as anticipated under the proposed General Plan, would not be consistent with the growth projections as assumed by SANDAG in 2009, the year the RAQS was last updated. Therefore, because future growth anticipated under the proposed General Plan would not be consistent with the underlying growth projections of the RAQS, the proposed General Plan would not be consistent with the applicable air quality plan for the region. Until the RAQS undergoes a future update to incorporate growth projections consistent with the proposed General Plan, impacts would be considered significant. Mitigation Measures To ensure the proposed General Plan growth projections would be consistent with the underlying growth projections on which the RAQS is based, the following mitigation is proposed. MM AQ-1: The city shall request that SDAPCD revise the RAQS to include the growth projections of the proposed General Plan in SDAPCD's next triennial update of the RAQS. Findings Based upon the Final EIR and the entire record before the City Council, the council finds that: Effects of Mitigating Policies and Remaining Impacts As described above in the discussion of Impact 3.2-1, although the city would recommend that SDAPCD can and should update the RAQS to include the proposed General Plan's growth projections, implementation of the proposed mitigation is within SDAPCD's jurisdiction and control, and the city cannot guarantee the timing and implementation ofthe proposed mitigation. Therefore, this would represent a significant and unavoidable impact of the proposed Plan (Finding (1); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1) and Finding (2); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(2) ). Overriding Considerations The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the proposed General Plan, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 1.7, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the proposed General Plan associated with impacts to air quality. II Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Impact 3.2-2 Finding: Development under the proposed General Plan would violate air quality standards or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. (Significant and Unavoidable) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15091{a)(l}, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Plan which could avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR as Impact 3.2-2. Facts in Support of Finding: As stated previously, in San Diego County, 03 and particulate matter are the pollutants of main concern, since exceedances of CAAQS for those pollutants are experienced here in most years. For this reason, the SDAB has been designated as a nonattainment area for the state PM10, PM2.5, and 03 {1-hour and 8-hour) standards. The SDAB is also a federal 03 marginal nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour NAAQS and a CO maintenance area. Construction Future construction allowed under the proposed General Plan would result in a temporary addition of pollutants to the local airshed caused by soil disturbance, fugitive dust emissions, and combustion pollutants from on-site construction equipment, as well as from off-site trucks hauling construction materials. Construction emissions can vary substantially from day to day, depending on the level of activity, the specific type of operation and, for dust, the prevailing weather conditions. Construction activities under the proposed General Plan would occur during future residential, commercial, industrial, and open space development. Specific project development schedules under the proposed General Plan are not known at this time; however, build-out would occur over an extended period of time, depending on unknown factors such as local economic conditions, market demand, and other financing considerations. As such, it is not possible to accurately estimate construction emissions at the plan level. To accurately quantify construction emissions requires project-level information including size and scale of the project to be constructed, construction schedule, equipment fleet, construction worker crew estimates, grading quantities, etc. This level of detail is not available at the program level, and the proposed General Plan, by nature, does not propose specific development projects. Subsequent project- level environmental review, including quantification of construction criteria pollutant emissions, would be required during the processing of individual applications for future projects. Therefore, such emission levels can only be approximately estimated with a corresponding uncertainty in precise ambient air quality impacts. Fugitive dust {PM1o and PM2s) emissions would primarily result from grading and site preparation activities. NOx and CO emissions would primarily result from the use of construction equipment and motor vehicles. In an effort to quantify construction emissions, total proposed General Plan development was averaged over the 20-year build-out period, and a single construction year from this scenario was analyzed as a representative year of construction under the proposed General Plan. Emissions from construction were estimated through the use ofthe URBEMIS 2007, Version 9.2.4, land use 12 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan and air emissions model (Jones & Stokes 2007). For the analysis, it was generally assumed that heavy construction equipment would be operating at the site for approximately 8 hours per day, 5 days per week (22 days per month), during project construction. Additionally, URBEMIS model assumptions for construction equipment were u~ed in calculating construction emissions. The equipment mix is meant to represent a reasonably conservative estimate of construction activity. Future development allowed under the proposed General Plan is subject to SDAPCD Rule 55- Fugitive Dust Control. This requires that the project take steps to restrict visible emissions of fugitive dust beyond the property line. Compliance with Rule 55 would limit any fugitive dust (PM1o and PMz.s) that may be generated during grading and construction activities. To account for dust control measures in the calculations, it was assumed that the active sites would be watered at least two times daily, resulting in an approximately 55% reduction of particulate matter. Future development allowed under the proposed General Plan is also subject to SDAPCD Rule 67.0 - Architectural Coatings. This rule requires manufacturers, distributors, and end users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce VOC emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the VOC content of various coating categories. Table 1.5-1, Construction Assumptions for General Plan Development Through 2035, shows the net increase in new development that would occur under the proposed General Plan. For the purposes of modeling, it was assumed that development under the proposed General Plan would occur over a 20-year period between 2015 and 2035, with an equal amount of construction occurring each year. To estimate construction emissions associated within ongoing demolition that would occur as part of redevelopment efforts under the proposed General Plan, a plan-wide average of 15% of existing development is assumed to be demolished over the build-out time period. Annual average development under these assumptions is presented in Table 1.5-2. Table 1.5-1: Construction Assumptions for General Plan Development Through 2035 Category Total New Development Housing Units Commercial (sf) Office Space (sf) Industrial (sf) Hotel Rooms Total Demolition Assumption 7,880 (394 units per year) 2,132,200 (106,610 sf/year) 778,500 (38,925 sf/year) 4,600,400 (230,020 sf/year) 2,360 (118 rooms/year) 15% of existing development Source: Land uses and associated trip generation-Fehr and Peers 2013 Table 1.5-2 shows the estimated average maximum daily construction emissions associated with one year of development under the proposed General Plan. 13 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Table 1.5-2: Estimated Annual Average Maximum Daily Construction Emissions (pounds/day) Emissions by Phase voc NOx co SOx PM1o PM2.s Demolition 8.87 92.89 44.15 0.14 117.33 27.10 '< Grading 4.09 30.45 22.04 0.00 184.38 39.64 Trenching 1.41 10.38 8.52 0.00 0.47 0.43 Building Construction 5.06 30.34 71.45 0.11 2.09 1.61 Paving 4.17 15.53 10.87 0.01 1.17 1.05 Architectural Coating 217.70 0.10 1.95 0.00 0.02 0.01 Maximum Daily Emissions 1 222.76 92.89 73.40 0.14 184.38 39.64 Emission Threshold 137 250 550 250 100 55 Threshold Exceeded? Yes No No No Yes No Source: Appendix B of the Draft EIR. 1 Maximum Doily Emissions including emissions of overlapping construction phases. For the purposes of modeling, it was assumed an equal amount of construction activity would occur each year; however, in some cases, greater amounts of construction activity would occur at any given time, and construction schedules for multiple projects may overlap resulting in greater emissions than those presented in Table 1.5-2. Similarly, over the course of the 20-year build-out period, some years may result in fewer construction activities and thus, fewer emissions than that presented in Table 1.5-2. Although specific construction schedules, equipment fleets, construction phasing and development intensity of projects that would be implemented under the proposed General Plan are not known at this time, construction emissions generated during construction of future development would potentially exceed SDAPCD thresholds. As shown in Table 1.5-2, construction emissions would exceed the SDAPCD thresholds for VOC and PM10; therefore, impacts would be considered significant. Proposed General Plan Policy 4-P.55, listed below, would aid in reducing emissions associated with construction activities. For example, the policy requires compliance with the city's storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) requirements, which include implementation of best management practices (BMPs) such as dust control measures and other construction-related measures during grading and construction activities that would reduce criteria pollutant emissions.1 Additionally, Section 4.504 of the city's California Green Building Standards Code (adopted by reference as part of the city's building code) includes measures related to pollutant control for dust debris and architectural coating that would reduce fugitive dust and VOC content during coating applications for new projects. 2 In addition, construction-related mitigation measures are available that can be implemented on a project-by-project basis, as needed to 1 City of Carlsbad. Construction SWPPP Standards and Requirements. June 2008. http://www.carlsbadca.gov I civicaxjfilebank/blobdload.aspx?Blo b!D=24 2 7 7. 2 CBSC (California Building Standards Commission). 2010. California Green Building Standards Code (Ca!Green). California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11. June 2010. 14 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan further reduce impacts associated with construction activities below SDAPCD thresholds. Nonetheless, because the extent to which these mitigation measures would reduce project-level construction emissions cannot be accurately determined at this time, impacts would be considered sigQificant and unavoidable during construction. Operation Following the completion of construction activities over the course of build-out of the proposed General Plan, operational activities would generate VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PMw, and PMz.s emissions from mobile and stationary sources, including vehicular traffic, area sources (space heating, water heating, landscaping), and other larger stationary sources (the Encina Power Station (EPS) is the only existing and the replacement Carlsbad Energy Center Project (CECP) is the only anticipated large stationary source in the city). The net new operational emissions generated by the proposed General Plan are estimated in Table 1.5-3. The net new operational emissions from motor vehicles, area sources, and stationary sources were estimated for year 2035 based on the net change in criteria pollutant emissions between development of land uses without the proposed General Plan and development of land uses with the proposed General Plan. Under both of these scenarios, it is assumed that EPS would be decommissioned and the CECP would replace that stationary source. As a result, there is no net change in stationary source emissions as a result of the proposed General Plan. Should any future stationary sources be constructed, these projects would be subject to permitting review by the SDAPCD to ensure violations of current air quality standards would not occur, as well as independent environmental review under CEQA. Therefore, because future stationary source projects that would occur under the proposed General Plan would be required to obtain permits issued by the SDAPCD, and would be subject to independent environmental review, stationary source emissions other than the CECP are not provided. The proposed General Plan would allow for future residential, commercial, office, hotel, and industrial development; and increases in land use densities and development intensities. Similar to construction emissions, operational emissions were estimated using the URBEMIS 2007, Version 9.2.4, land use and air emissions model.3 Mobile Emissions Implementation of the proposed General Plan would impact air quality through the vehicular traffic generated by future development. According to the project's traffic analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers, the net change in trips that can be attributed to build-out (2035) of the proposed General Plan is 225,746 trips. The URBEMIS 2007 model was utilized to estimate daily emissions from proposed vehicular sources (refer to Appendix B ofthe Draft EIR). URBEMIS 2007 default data, including temperature, trip characteristics, variable start information, emissions factors, and trip distances, were conservatively used for the model inputs. 3 Jones & Stokes Associates. Software User's GuMe: URBEM/52007 for mndows; £mjssjons Estjmatjon for Land Use Development Projects. IS Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Proposed General Plan-related traffic was assumed to be comprised of a mixture of vehicles in accordance with the model outputs for traffic. Emission factors representing the vehicle mix and emissions for 2035 (full build-out) were used to estimate emissions associated with development under the proposed General Plan. Area Sources In addition to estimating mobile source emissions, the URBEMIS 2007 model was also used to estimate emissions from the proposed General Plan's area sources, which include other natural gas combustion, landscaping, and architectural coatings for maintenance. Refer to Appendix B of the Draft EIR for additional information. Summary of Operational Emissions Table 1.5-3, General Plan Build-out (2035) Estimated Daily Maximum Operational Emissions, shows the resulting net new operational emissions from build-out of the proposed General Plan (2035). The values shown in Table 1.5-3 for motor vehicles and area sources are the maximum summer or winter daily emissions. Complete details ofthe emissions calculations are provided in Appendix B ofthe recirculated Draft EIR. 16 rc Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Table 1.5-3: General Plan Build-out (2035) Estimated Daily Maximum Operational Emissions (pounds/day) Emission voc NOx co SOx PM1o PM2.s Source Estimated Emissions without Proposed General Plan (2035) Motor Vehicles 2,219.98 2,663.21 23,268.40 63.13 10,884.72 2,077.60 Area Sources 11,478.33 1,521.53 46,295.37 143.53 7,400.75 7,123.59 Stationary Sources 1 110.14 395.12 1,190.68 30.68 213.70 N/A Total 13,808.45 4,579.86 70,754.45 237.34 18,499.17 9,201.19 Estimated Emissions with Proposed General Plan (2035) Motor Vehicles 2,841.93 3,410.65 29,763.92 80.77 13,935.46 2,659.66 Area Sources 13,261.85 1,736.31 53,308.52 165.26 8,522.32 8,203.14 Stationary Sources 1 110.14 395.12 1,190.68 30.68 213.70 N/A Total 16,213.92 5,542.08 84,263.12 276.71 22,671.48 10,862.80 Net New Emissions at General Plan Build-out (2035) Motor Vehicles 621.95 747.44 6,495.52 17.64 3,050.74 582.06 Area Sources 1,783.52 214.78 7,013.15 21.73 1,121.57 1,079.55 Stationary Sources 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A Total Net New 2,405.47 962.22 13,508.67 39.37 4,172.31 1,661.61 Emissions Emission Threshold 75 250 550 250 100 55 Threshold Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Exceeded? Emissions represent maximum of summer and winter. "Summer" emissions are representative of the conditions that may occur during the ozone season (May 1 to October 31), and "winter" emissions are representative of the conditions that may occur during the balance of the year (November 1 to April 30). Source: Appendix B of the Draft EIR. 1. Stationary sources include the upgrade of the Carlsbad Energy Center. Source: California Energy Commission (CEC}. 2012. Carlsbad Energy Center Project: Commission Decision. Due to the increase anticipated in average daily traffic (ADT) as a result of development under the proposed General Plan and growth in area source emissions, emissions ofVOC, NOx, CO, PM1o, and PM2.swould exceed the SDAPCD's project-level, daily thresholds. Measures in the goals and policies ofthe proposed General Plan, the Climate Action Plan, the city's SWPPP requirements and Green Building Standards Code (listed below) would reduce impacts associated with construction and operational emissions. However, in the absence of specific information regarding the size, location, timing and other characteristics of future development allowed under the General Plan, it is not possible at this time to determine whether these measures would reduce project-level 17 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan operational emissions below SDAPCD thresholds. Therefore, impacts due to increased emissions from future development would remain significant and unavoidable during operation. Proposed General Plan Policies that Reduce the Impacts Land Use and Community Design Element 2-G.3 2-G.6 2-G.7 2-G.ll 2-P.S 2-P.13 2-P.31 2-P.45 18 Promote infill development that makes efficient use of limited land supply, while ensuring compatibility and integration with existing uses. Ensure that infill properties develop with uses and development intensities supporting a cohesive development pattern. Allow a range of mixed-use centers in strategic locations that maximize access to commercial services from transit and residential areas. Ensure that neighborhood serving shopping and mixed-use centers include shopping as a pedestrian-oriented focus for the surrounding neighborhood, are physically integrated with the surroundings, and contain neighborhood-serving stores and small offices. Where appropriate, include in the centers high and medium density housing surrounding the retail core or integrated in mixed-use buildings. Provide industrial lands that can accommodate a wide range of pollution-free industrial establishments, including those of relatively high intensity; research and development and related uses set in campus or park-like settings; as well as moderate to low intensity establishments capable of being located adjacent to residential areas with minimal buffering and attenuation measures. Work with SANDAG through participation in its various standing committees on regional plans and initiatives. Adopt local implementing policies and programs when found to be consistent with the General Plan and in the best interests of Carlsbad's residents and businesses. Encourage medium to higher density residential uses located in close proximity to commercial services, employment opportunities and major transportation corridors. Regulate industrial land uses on the basis of performance standards, including, but not limited to noise, air quality, odor, and glare. Evaluate each discretionary application for development of property with regard to the following specific criteria [only applicable criteria listed below]: g. Compliance with the performance standards of the Growth Management Plan. h. Development proposals which are designed to provide safe, easy pedestrian and bicycle linkages to nearby transportation corridors. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Mobility Element Policies 3-P.l Implement a comprehensive livable streets network. This network, as outlined in Table 3-1 and shown on Figure 3-1, prioritizes transportation modes by street typology and accessibility to users of the system. 3-P.3 Apply and update the city's multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) methodology and guidelines that reflect the core values of the Carlsbad Community Vision related to transportation and connectivity. Utilize the MMLOS methodology to evaluate impacts of individual development projects and amendments to the General Plan on the city's transportation system. 3-P.4 Implement the city's MMLOS methodology by evaluating level of service (LOS) for prioritized modes. Maintain LOS D or better only for the prioritized modes of travel by street typology as outlined in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1. 3-P.S Utilize transportation demand management strategies, non-automotive enhancements (bicycle, pedestrian, transit, train, trails, and connectivity), and traffic signal management techniques as long-term transportation solutions and traffic mitigation measures to carry out the Carlsbad Community Vision. 3-P.9 Develop and maintain a list of LOS exempt intersections and streets approved by the City Council. For LOS exempt intersections and streets, the city will not implement motor vehicle capacity improvements to maintain the LOS standard outlined in Policy 3-P.4 if such improvements are beyond what is identified as appropriate at build out of the General Plan; however, other non-vehicle capac- ity-building improvements may be required to improve mobility, to the extent feasible, and/or to implement the livable streets goals and policies of this Mobility Element. To be considered LOS exempt, an intersection or street must be identified as built-out by the City Council because: 3-P.ll a. acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or b. the proposed improvements would significantly impact the environment in an unacceptable way and mitigation would not contribute to the nine core values of the Carlsbad Community Vision; or c. the proposed improvements would result in unacceptable impacts to other community values or General Plan policies; or d. the proposed improvements would require more than three through travel lanes in each direction. Require new development that adds traffic to LOS-exempt locations (consistent with 3-P.7) to implement transportation demand management strategies that reduce the reliance on the automobile and assist in achieving the city's livable streets vision. 19 <c Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 3-P.12 3-P.l3 3-P.l4 3-P.lS 3-P.lG 3-P.22 3-P.26 3-P.27 20 Update the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to ensure consistency with the General Plan. This includes updating the circulation LOS standards methodologies to reflect a more balanced/multi-modal approach. Evaluate implementing a road diet to three lanes or fewer for existing four-lane streets currently carrying or projected to carry 25,000 average daily traffic volumes or less in order to promote biking, walking, safer street crossings, and attractive streetscapes. Before implementing a road diet, the city shall solicit and consider public input, and evaluate the trade-offs between safety, auto service levels, bicycle/pedestrian/transit service levels. Design new streets, and explore funding opportunities for existing streets, to minimize traffic volumes and/or speed, as appropriate, within residential neighborhoods without compromising connectivity for emergency first responders, bicycles, and pedestrians consistent with the city's Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategies. This should be accomplished through management and implementation of livable streets strategies and such programs like the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Plan. Consider innovative design and program solutions to improve the mobility, efficiency, connectivity, and safety of the transportation system. Innovative design solutions include, but are not limited to, traffic calming devices, roundabouts, traffic circles, curb extensions, separated bicycle infrastructure, pedestrian scramble intersections, high visibility pedestrian treatments and infrastructure, and traffic signal coordination. Innovative program solutions include, but are not limited to, webpages with travel demand and traffic signal management information, car and bike share programs, active transportation campaigns, and intergenerational programs around schools to enhance safe routes to schools. Other innovative solutions include bicycle friendly business districts, electric and solar power energy transportation systems, intelligent transportation systems, semi-or full autonomous vehicles, trams, and shuttles. Support pedestrian and bicycle facilities at all Interstate-S and State Route 78 interchanges. Update the pedestrian, trails and bicycle master plans, as necessary, to reflect changes in needs, opportunities and priorities. Improve and enhance parking, connectivity, access, and utilization for pedestrians and bicycles to COASTER stations, utility corridors, and open spaces consistent with city planning documents. Evaluate incorporating pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure within the city as part of any planning or engineering study, private development, or capital project where bicyclists or pedestrians are a prioritized or non-prioritized mode. 3-P.28 3-P.30 3-P.31 3-P.32 3-P.33 3-P.34 3-P.37 3-P.39 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Complete the Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategies to assist in identifying livable street implementation parameters within the city. Require developers to improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity consistent with the city's bicycle and pedestrian master plans and trails m'~ster planning efforts. In addition, new residential developments should demonstrate that a safe route to school and transit is provided to nearby schools and transit stations within a half mile walking distance. Work with existing neighborhoods and businesses to improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity and safety consistent with the city's pedestrian and bicycle master plans and trails master planning efforts. Actively pursue grant programs such as SANDAG's Active Transportation Grant Program and Smart Growth Incentive Program to improve non-automotive connectivity throughout the city. The emphasis of grant-funded projects shall be on implementation, which includes planning documents that guide and prioritize implementation, programs that encourage the use of active transportation modes, education for the use of active transportation modes, or physical improvements themselves. Partner with other agencies and/or developers to improve transit connectivity within Carlsbad. As part of a comprehensive transportation demand management (TDM) strategy and/or with transit oriented development (TOD), a shuttle system could be established that connects destinations and employment centers like LEGOLAND, hotels, the Village, McClellan-Palomar Airport, business parks, the COASTER and Breeze transit stations, public activity centers (such as senior centers, city hall, libraries, etc.), and key destinations along the coast. The system could incorporate shuttle service in adjacent cities to maximize connectivity. Encourage NCTD, SANDAG and other transit providers to provide accessibility for all modes of travel to the McClellan-Palomar Airport area. Require new employment development to provide secure bicycle parking on-site. Major employers should provide shower and changing rooms for employees as appropriate. Consider supporting new development and existing businesses with various incentives (such as parking standards modifications) for implementing TDM programs that minimize the reliance on single-occupant automotive travel during peak commute hours. Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element Policies 4-G.13 Protect air quality within the city and support efforts for enhanced regional air quality. 21 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 4-P.25 4-P.Sl 4-P.S2 4-P.S3 4-P.S4 4-P.SS Locate new parks, plazas, or alternative parks (such as greenways) in existing infill neighborhoods-the Village and Barrio-where new residential development is contemplated. Participate in the implementation of transpGrtation demand management programs on a regional basis. To the extent practical and feasible, maintain a system of air quality alerts (such as through the city website, internet, email to city employees, and other tools) based on San Diego Air Pollution Control District forecasts. Consider providing incentives to city employees to use alternative transportation modes during alert days. Provide, whenever possible, incentives for carpooling, flex-time, shortened work weeks, and telecommunications and other means of reducing vehicular miles traveled. Cooperate with the ongoing efforts of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the San Diego Air Pollution Control District, and the State of California Air Resources Board in improving air quality in the regional air basin. Ensure that construction and grading projects minimize short-term impacts to air quality. a. Require grading projects to provide a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) in compliance with city requirements, which include standards for best management practices that control pollutants from dust generated by construction activities and those related to vehicle and equipment cleaning, fueling and maintenance; b. Require grading projects to undertake measures to minimize mono-nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from vehicle and equipment operations; and c. Monitor all construction to ensure that proper steps are implemented. Climate Action Plan Goals and Actions that Reduce the Impacts Measure K: Promote Transportation Demand Management Strategies 22 • Goal: Promote Transportation Demand Management Strategies with a goal of achieving a 10 percent increase in alternative mode use by workers in Carlsbad, for a total of 32 percent alternative mode use. • Actions: K-1: Adopt a citywide transportation demand management (TDM) plan, as described in the General Plan Mobility Element, detailing a mix of strategies to reduce travel demand, specifically of single occupancy vehicles. SANDAG's 2012 "Integrating Transportation Demand Management Into the Planning and Development Process" provides a guide to designing and implementing a TDM plan and will be used as a reference document to develop the city's TDM plan. TDM strategies evaluated in the plan include parking ordinances, subsidized or discounted transit programs, transit marketing and promotion, car sharing, parking pricing, and bike parking. (Short-term) Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan K-2: Adopt a TOM ordinance, defining a minimum trip generation threshold for nonresidential development projects. The city will set performance requirements for minimum alternative mode use based on project type. All projects above the threshold shall submit a TOM plan, which includes a description of how the minimum alternative mode use wil'l be achieved and maintained over the life oft he project. Potential TOM trip reduction measures can include carpool and vanpool ride matching services; designated employees as contacts for trip reduction programs; providing a direct route to transit in coordination with NCTO; developing public-private transit partnerships; passenger loading zones; pedestrian connections; showers and clothes lockers; long-term bicycle parking and shuttle programs. (Mid-term) Measure L: Promote an Increase in the Amount of Zero-Emissions Vehicle Travel • Goal: Promote an increase in the amount of ZEV43 miles traveled from a projected 15 percent to 25 percent of total vehicle miles traveled by 2035. • Actions: L-1: Working with industry partners, construct a "PV to EV" pilot project to install a PV charging station at a city facility (such as the Faraday Center), to charge city ZEVs. The purpose of the pilot project would be to evaluate the feasibility of incorporating more ZEV into the city's fleet. (Short-term) L-2: Prepare a community-wide charging station siting plan, which evaluates site visibility and exposure, EV driving ranges, high volume destinations, locations with high ownership or interest in EVs, and cost of construction. (Short-term) L-3: Construct ZEV charging stations based on the community-wide charging station siting plan described in L-1 above. The ZEV charging stations will be funded by grant funds when available, and the city will post signage directing ZEVs to charging stations. (Mid-term) L-4: Offer dedicated ZEV parking, and provide charging stations adjacent to ZEV parking as identified in the community-wide charging station siting plan. (Mid-term) L-5: Adopt requirements for ZEV parking for new developments. (Short-term) L-6: Adopt a residential energy conservation ordinance, similar to Palo Alto, requiring the installation of EV chargers or pre-wiring in new residential construction and major renovations. (Short-term) L-7: Update the city's Fleet Management Program to include a low and zero- emissions vehicle replacement/purchasing policy. Increase the proportion of fleet low and zero-emissions vehicle miles traveled to 25 percent of all city-related VMT by 2035. (Short-term) Green Building Standards and Measures that Reduce the Impacts Title 24 also includes Part 11, known as California's Green Building Standards (CALGreen). The most recent version of the CALGreen standards took effect in January 2014, and instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up, new construction of commercial, low-rise residential and state-owned buildings, as well as schools and hospitals. The mandatory standards require a 20% mandatory reduction in indoor water use as well as 50% of construction and demolition waste must be diverted from landfills. Nonresidential mandatory 23 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan measures also include provision of bicycle parking and designated parking for low-emitting, fuel- efficient, and carpool/van pool vehicles that would reduce criteria air pollutant emissions due to decreased VMT. cc Mandatory Co/Green Measures That Reduce Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Chapter 4: Residential Mandatory Measures DIVISION 4.5-ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Section 4.503 Fire Places • Any installed woodstove or pellet stove shall comply with U.S. EPA Phase II emission limits where applicable and any applicable local ordinances. Section 4.54 Pollutant Control • Adhesives, sealants, and caulks meet SCAQMD Rule 1168 for VOC limits and prohibition on the use of certain toxic compounds. • Paints and coatings will comply with VOC limits specified by CARB Architectural Suggested Control Measure. • Aerosol paints and coatings will meet MIR limits for ROCs and prohibitions on certain toxic compounds and ozone depleting substances. o Actual limits for each of these are specified on page 28 of CaiGreen • Carpets and flooring will meet low VOC and air quality standards from California Department of Public Health • Composite wood products will meet CARB Air Taxies Control Measure for Composite Wood for formaldehyde emissions. Chapter 5: Nonresidential Mandatory Measures DIVISION 5.1-PLANNING AND DESIGN Section 5.106 Site Development • Projects with less than one acre of disturbance will implement BMPs to prevent loss of soil through wind and water erosion (reduced fugitive dust). Division 5.4-Material Conservation and Resource Efficiency 24 • Same measures as for residential in addition to the following: Finish materials VOC limits Refrigerant leak protections Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan SWPPP Air Quality Reduction Measures that Reduce the Impacts City of Carlsbad Standard Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP) and Engineering Standards for Stormwater Best Management Practices l<C CONSTRUCTION SWPPP STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS: • Implementation of erosion control BMPs including hydroseeding, soil binders, geotextiles, mats, fiber rolls, etc. • Implementation of tracking control BM Ps including stabilized construction ingress/egress, stabilized construction roadway, and ingress/egress tire washing. • Implementation of waste management and materials pollution control BMPs including material delivery and storage, and stockpile management (enclosing or covering stored materials). • Compliance with all "Dry Season Site Management Requirements" as delineated in the Engineering Standards, Storm Water Standards Manual. • Minimize site disturbance including sloped areas that are susceptible to wind and water erosion. • Landscape design to reduce wind and water erosion including vegetation stabilization. Mitigation Measures The goals and policies of the proposed General Plan, the Climate Action Plan, measures contained in the Green Building Code, the city's SWPPP requirements, and applicable federal, state, and local air quality regulations, provide a framework for developing project-level air quality protection measures for future development projects. The city's process for the evaluation of future development projects includes site-specific environmental review and documentation pursuant to CEQA, as well as an analysis of those projects for consistency with the goals, policies, and recommendations of the proposed General Plan. In addition to the measures identified in the goals and policies of the proposed General Plan, the Climate Action Plan, the city's SWPPP requirements and the Green Building Code described above, implementation of the mitigation measures identified below would avoid or reduce impacts resulting from the construction and operations emissions of future development allowed under the proposed General Plan. During project-level environmental review, if potential impacts are determined to be significant despite conformance with the measures described above, the mitigation measures provided below would be implemented as needed to reduce project-specific impacts to below SDAPCD thresholds. Mitigation measures may include, but would not be limited to, the following: MM AQ-2: During the project-level environmental review of future development projects allowed under the proposed General Plan, the project applicant shall prepare an air quality technical report that analyzes all phases of project construction and operations. The technical report shall analyze construction and operational emissions and determine whether emissions would exceed SDAPCD thresholds. If a project's air quality technical report determines that construction or operations emissions exceed the SDAPCD threshold(s), site-specific mitigation measures shall be implemented to avoid or reduce emissions to SDAPCD thresholds. Where mitigation measures 25 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan are required, the city will identify these measures in the project-level environmental document and include them in a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) for the individual development project. MM AQ-3: For projects that exceed daily construction emissions thresholds established by the SDAPCD, the following measures may be required as needed to reduce project-level impacts. These measures may be updated, expanded, and refined when applied to specific future projects based on project-specific design and changes in existing conditions, and local, state, and federal laws. Measures may include but are not limited to: 26 A. Fugitive dust generated by grading and construction activities shall be minimized and retained on the project site by complying with SDAPCD Rule 55, as applicable, and the following dust control measures: 1. Prevent dust from leaving the site during construction, clearing, grading, earthmoving, excavation, or transportation of cut or fill materials by applying water (with water trucks or sprinkler systems) to all active disturbed soil areas and all on-site areas of vehicle movement at least twice daily (later in the morning and after work is completed for the day) and whenever winds exceed 15 miles per hour. 2. Soil stockpiled for more than 2 days shall be covered, kept moist, or treated with soil binders to prevent dust generation. 3. Speeds on unpaved roads shall be reduced to less than 15 miles per hour. 4. All grading and excavation operations shall be halted when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour. 5. Prevent tracking and erosion of soil onto paved streets by utilizing any of the following or other equally effective measures, as determined necessary by the city: track-out grates or gravel beds at each egress point, wheel-washing at each egress, soil binders/stabilizers, geotextiles, mulching, seeding, sandbags, etc. Dirt and debris spilled onto paved surfaces at the project site and on the adjacent roadways shall be swept, vacuumed, and/or washed at the end of each workday. 6. The cargo of all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose material to and from the construction site shall be covered and/or a minimum 2 feet offreeboard shall be maintained. B. The following measures may be required during project grading and construction to reduce emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) from construction equipment: Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 1. The engine size of construction equipment shall be the minimum size required for its intended use. 2. Construction equipment shall be maintained in tune per the manufacturer's specifications. 3. Catalytic converters shall be installed on gasoline-powered equipment over 50 horsepower. 4. Electric equipment or alternative fueled vehicles, such as compressed natural gas or liquefied natural gas, shall be utilized in lieu of diesel-powered equipment, where feasible. 5. Comply with SDAPCD Rule 67 (Architectural Coatings). MM AQ-4: For projects that exceed daily operational emissions thresholds established by the SDAPCD, the following measures may be required as needed to reduce project-level impacts. These measures may be updated, expanded, and refined when applied to specific future projects based on project-specific design and changes in existing conditions, and local, state, and federal laws. Measures may include but are not limited to: A. Implement CALGreen's voluntary Tier 1 or Tier 2 standards. Tier 1 standards call for a 15% improvement in energy requirements, more strict water conservation, 65% diversion of construction and demolition waste, 10% recycled content in building materials, 20% permeable paving, 20% cement reduction, and cool/solar reflective roofs. CALGreen's more rigorous Tier 2 standards call for a 30% improvement in energy requirements, more strict water conservation, 75% diversion of construction and demolition waste, 15% recycled content in building materials, 30% permeable paving, 25% cement reduction, and cool/solar reflective roofs. B. Include project features that encourage alternate transportation modes. 1. For pedestrians: sidewalks; safe street and parking lot crossings; shade trees; off-street breezeways, alleys, and over crossings; placement of parking lots and building entrances to favor pedestrians rather than cars; shower and locker facilities. 2. For transit riders: all of the above plus safe, sheltered transit stops with convenient access to building entrances. 3. For bicyclists: theft proof and well-lighted bicycle storage facilities with convenient access to building entrance; on-site bikeways between buildings or uses; shower and locker facilities. 4. For carpools and van pools: preferential parking. C. Use electric equipment for landscaping and property maintenance. D. Plant shade trees in parking lots. E. Install solar cooling/heating. 27 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan MM AQ-5: To reduce ozone precursors, architectural coatings used for building maintenance shall comply with SDAPCD Rule 67 (Architectural Coatings}. MM AQ-6: If required, new stationary sources such as diesel generators shall obtain appropriate permits from the SDAPCD. Additional health-related mitigation measures are provided under Impact 3.2-4. Findings Based upon the Final EIR and the entire record before the City Council, the council finds that: Effects of Mitigating Policies and Remaining Impacts As described above in the Impact 3.2-2 discussion, the proposed General Plan, the Climate Action Plan, the city's SWPPP requirements and the Green Building Standards Code, and implementation of the mitigation measures identified above would reduce the severity oft he impact to air quality to the extent feasible. For impacts to air quality from construction, because the extent to which construction-related mitigation measures would reduce project-level construction emissions cannot be accurately determined at this time, impacts are considered significant and unavoidable during construction. For impacts to air quality from operations, because the absence of specific information regarding the size, location, timing and other characteristics of future development allowed under the General Plan, it is not possible at this time to determine whether these measures would reduce project-level operational emissions below SDAPCD thresholds. Thus, even with implementation of policies, standards and mitigation measures listed above that would reduce impacts to air quality, the potential remains for new development under the proposed General Plan to exceed thresholds for emissions of PMw and PM2.s. Therefore, impacts to air quality resulting from construction and operations emissions would be considered significant and unavoidable (Finding (1}; CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(l)}. Overriding Considerations The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits ofthe proposed General Plan, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 1.7, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the proposed General Plan associated with impact to air quality. 28 Impact 3.2-3 Finding: Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Development under the proposed General Plan will result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the General Plan region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for 03 precursors). (Significant and Unavoidable) Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15091(a)(l), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Plan which could avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR as Impact 3.2-3. Facts in Support of Finding: In analyzing cumulative impacts from the proposed General Plan, the analysis must specifically evaluate a project's contribution to the cumulative increase in pollutants for which the SDAB is designated as nonattainment for the CAAQS and NAAQS. The proposed General Plan would contribute to a significant cumulative impact on air quality if the emissions from the proposed General Plan, in combination with the emissions from other proposed or reasonably foreseeable future projects, are in excess of established thresholds. The SDAB is currently in federal nonattainment for criteria pollutant 03 (VOC and NOx are the precursors of 03) and state nonattainment area criteria pollutants 03, PM1o, and PMz.s from past and present development. Construction activities associated with future development under the proposed General Plan would result in the temporary generation of construction emissions. PM1o and PMz.s emissions associated with construction generally result in localized impacts; therefore, construction emissions could be considered cumulatively considerable if different construction projects within the same vicinity are occurring simultaneously and the emissions combine to exceed SDAPCD thresholds. Table 1.5-3 shows that operational emissions from buildout ofthe proposed General Plan would result in a net increase of: 2,405.47 pounds per day of VOC; 962.22 pounds per day of NOx; 4,172.31 pounds per day of PM10; and 1,661.87 pounds per day of PMz.s, all of which exceed SDAPCD project-level thresholds. Although numerous measures would be taken under the proposed General Plan and Climate Action Plan to reduce air quality impacts, buildout of the proposed General Plan would result in operational emissions of VOC, NOx, PM1o and PMz.s that exceed SDAPCD project-level, daily thresholds. Therefore, the proposed General Plan would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in VOC and NOx (precursors of 03), for which the SDAB is in nonattainment under state (CAAQS) and federal (NAAQS) ambient air quality standards, and for PM1o and PMz.s, for which the SDAB is in nonattainment under state (CAAQS) ambient air quality standards. The impacts would be considered significant and unavoidable. 29 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Proposed General Plan Policies and Other Measures that Reduce the Impacts The General Plan policies, Climate Action Plan provisions, SWPPP requirements, Green Building Standards Code provisions and mitigation measures MM AQ-2 through MM AQ-61isted above for Impact 3.2-2 shall apply. rc Mitigation Measures The mitigation measures listed above for Impact 3.2-2 shall apply. Findings Based upon the Final EIR and the entire record before the City Council, the council finds that: Effeas of Mitigating Policies and Remaining lmpaas Conformance with the goals and policies of the proposed General Plan, the Climate Action Plan, the city's SWPPP requirements, and the Green Building Standards Code listed above, and implementation of the mitigation measures identified above would reduce the proposed General Plan's net increase in emissions for which the SDAB is in nonattainment status. However, in the absence of specific information regarding the size, location, timing and other characteristics of future development allowed under the proposed General Plan, it is not possible at this time to quantify that these measures would result in no net increase in nonattainment pollutant emissions. Therefore, impacts would be considered significant and unavoidable (Finding {1); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091{a){l)). Overriding Considerations The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the proposed General Plan, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 1.7, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the proposed General Plan associated with impacts to air quality. 30 Impact 3.2-4 Finding: Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Development under the proposed General Plan will expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (Significant and Unavoidable) ·iC Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15091{a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Plan which could avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR as Impact 3.2-4. Facts in Support of Finding: Construction In addition to impacts from criteria pollutants, project impacts may include em1ss1ons of pollutants identified by the state and federal governments as toxic air contaminants (TACs) or hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). State law has established the framework for California's TAC identification and control program, which is generally more stringent than the federal program and is aimed at HAPs that are a problem in California. The state has formally identified more than 200 substances as TACs, including the federal HAPs, and is adopting appropriate control measures for sources of these TACs. As examples, TACs include acetaldehyde, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, carbon tetrachloride, hexavalent chromium, para-dichlorobenzene, formaldehyde, methylene chloride, perchloroethylene, and DPM. Some of the TACs are groups of compounds that contain many individual substances (for example, copper compounds and polycyclic organic matter). The greatest potential for TAC emissions during construction would be DPM emissions from heavy equipment operations and heavy-duty trucks and the associated health impacts to sensitive receptors. Sensitive receptors include residences, schools, playgrounds, child care centers, athletic facilities, long-term health care facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes. Health effects from carcinogenic air toxics are usually described in terms of cancer risk. SDAPCD Rule 1210 indicates that an incremental cancer risk threshold of 10 in 1 million or greater warrants public notification. 4 "Incremental Cancer Risk" is the likelihood that a person continuously exposed to concentrations of TACs resulting from a project over a 70-year lifetime will contract cancer quantified using standard risk-assessment methodology. The proposed General Plan construction activities would be dispersed intermittently over an approximately 20-year period. Off-road diesel construction equipment and heavy-duty diesel trucks (e.g., concrete trucks, building materials delivery trucks), which are sources of DPM, are regulated under three airborne toxic control measures (ATCMs) adopted by CARB. The ATCM for diesel construction equipment specifies particulate matter emission standards for equipment fleets, which become increasingly stringent over time. Furthermore, most newly-purchased construction equipment introduced into construction fleets after 2013-2015, depending on the engine horsepower rating, would be equipped with high-efficiency diesel particulate filters. One of ATCMs for heavy-duty diesel trucks 4 SDAPCD. Rules and Regulations, Regulation XII, Toxic Air Contaminants, Rule 1210, Toxic Air Contaminant Public Health Risks-Public Notification and Risk Reduction. Effective June 12, 1996. 31 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan specifies that commercial trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating over 10,000 pounds are prohibited from idling for more than 5 minutes unless the engines are idling while queuing or involved in operational activities. In addition, starting in model year 2008, new heavy-duty trucks must be equipped with an automatic shutoff device to prevegt excessive idling or meet stringent NOx requirements. Lastly, fleets of diesel trucks with a gross vehicle weight rating greater than 14,000 pounds are subject to another ATCM. This ATCM requires truck fleet operators to replace older vehicles and/or equip them with diesel particulate filters, depending on the age of the truck. Thus, over the life of the project, the DPM emissions from off-road construction equipment and trucks would be controlled substantially. Accordingly, implementation of the proposed General Plan is not anticipated to result in a long-term exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial concentration of construction-related TACs. Impacts would be less than significant. Operation STATIONARY SOURCES Following construction activities, stationary sources such as boilers, diesel generators, and dry cleaning establishments would result in TAC emissions. In San Diego County, SDAPCD Rule 1200 establishes acceptable risk levels and emission control requirements for new and modified stationary sources that may emit additional TACs. Some stationary sources would require permits from the SDAPCD under Rule 1200. Under Rule 1200, permits to operate may not be issued when emissions of TACs result in an incremental cancer risk greater than 1 in 1 million without application ofT-BACT, or an incremental cancer risk greater than 10 in 1 million with application ofT-BACT, or a health hazard index {chronic and acute) greater than 1. The human health risk analysis is based on the time, duration, and exposures expected. T-BACT would be determined on a case-by-case basis; however, examples of T-BACT include diesel particulate filters, catalytic converters, and selective catalytic reduction technology. In accordance with SDAPCD Rule 20, the SDAPCD cannot issue a permit if compliance with Rule 1200 {Toxic Air Contaminants-New Source Review) and all other applicable air quality rules and regulations is not demonstrated. The proposed General Plan does not propose any new stationary sources within the plan area that have not been previously operating within the area {the Encina Power Station/Carlsbad Energy Center Project is considered an existing stationary source, the emissions from which are calculated in Table 1.5-2).Accordingly, the incremental cancer risk to nearby sensitive receptors from new and modified stationary sources would be at acceptable levels, and the impact to sensitive receptors would be less than significant. Additionally, the proposed General Plan includes policies that would reduce impacts to sensitive receptors as listed below. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. EXPOSURE TO TOXIC AIR CONTAMINANTS FROM ROADWAYS TACs are also generated from mobile sources, such as diesel trucks. Ten TACs have been identified through ambient air quality data as posing the greatest health risks in California. Adverse health effects of TACs can be carcinogenic {cancer-causing), short-term {acute) non-carcinogenic, and long-term {chronic) non-carcinogenic. Direct exposure to these pollutants has been shown to cause cancer, birth defects, damage to the brain and nervous system, and respiratory disorders. The risk from DPM is by far the largest, representing about 70 percent of the known statewide cancer risk from outdoor air toxics. On a typical urban freeway, DPM also represents about 70 percent of the potential cancer risk from vehicle traffic. DPMs are also of special concern because health studies show an association between particulate matter and premature mortality in those 32 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan with existing cardiovascular disease (CARB 2005). Therefore, health risk studies associated with freeway proximity are primarily concerned with DPM because it comprises most of the associated health risk. In addition to the length of the exposure p~riod, the location of potential emissions sources and exposed sensitive receptors are major factors in determining the health risk of diesel exhaust. In general, diesel exhaust has a greater potential to harm people when the source of emissions is closer to sensitive populations (CARB 2005). However, even though sensitive receptors are at an increased risk to diesel exhaust, exposure can adversely affect all members of the population. CARB recommends avoiding siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles per day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles per day. In general, concentrations of pollutant emissions are typically higher near transportation corridors and decline as distance increases from the source. The distance from the roadway and truck traffic densities are key factors affecting the strength of the association with adverse health effects (CARB 2005). The association of traffic-related emissions with adverse health effects has been noted within 1,000 feet of transportation corridors and is strongest within 300 feet (Zhu et al. 2002). There is growing evidence that proximity to heavily traveled roadways increases the potential for adverse health effects such as child lung function and asthma, and increases medical visits (Brunekreef 1997, Lin et al. 2000, Venn et al. 2001, Kim 2004, and English et al. 1999). Generally, cancer risk will drop off with distance from a ground level pollution source, such as a freeway. Freeways and busy traffic corridors are defined as having traffic volumes of over 100,000 vehicles per day in urban areas and 50,000 vehicles per day in rural areas (Education Code Section 17312). CARB studies show that air pollution levels can be significantly higher within 500 feet (150 meters) of freeways or busy traffic corridors and then diminish rapidly (CARB 2005). Actual concentrations of DPM will vary at a particular location depending on traffic volume, vehicle mix, prevailing winds, and other variables. A downwind distance of 328 feet (100 meters) will reduce cancer risk by over 60 percent. If the physical downwind distance is increased to 984 feet (300 meters), the relative concentration is reduced over 80 percent (SCAQMD 2005). There are two freeways that traverse through Carlsbad. SR-78 presently carries an estimated 123,000-134,000 vehicles per day along the northern boundary of the city, about 6,300 of which are trucks. The 1-5 freeway carries approximately 192,000-200,000 vehicles per day in a north- south direction through the city, about 9,000 of which are trucks. Under the proposed General Plan, new development, including residential and commercial uses, could be constructed within proximity of these freeways; therefore there is the potential to expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Although the proposed General Plan has the potential to expose sensitive receptors to toxic air contaminants from roadways, neither the SDAPCD nor the State of California has identified a methodology to correlate an exposure to such contaminants with an increase in specific health risks. The inability to quantify any potential increase in health risks was noted recently in the Air Quality section of its Final EIR/EIS for the 1-5 Coast Corridor Project, where CaiTrans summarized the credible scientific evidence relevant to evaluation of the impacts of mobile source air toxics (MSATs). In its review, the 1-5 Coast Corridor Project EIR/EIS noted that "the methodologies for forecasting health impacts ... are encumbered by technical shortcomings or uncertain science that prevents a more complete differentiation of the MSAT health impacts among a set of project 33 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan alternatives." The EIR/EIS further concluded that "there are considerable uncertainties associated with the existing estimates of toxicity of the various MSAT, because of factors such as low-dose extrapolation and translation of occupational exposure data to the general population", and that "there is also a lack of COIJSensus on an acceptable level of risk."5 EXPOSURE TO SUBSTANTIAL CONCENTRATIONS OF CRITERIA POLLUTANT EMISSIONS As shown in Table 1.5-3, the proposed General Plan would result in an increase in criteria pollutant emissions. The emissions reported in Table 1.5-3 are based on plan-wide emissions that would be generated across the entire geographic area of the city over the buildout period ending in 2035. Even in areas where these pollutants are potentially more concentrated, the location of the pollutants cannot be pinpointed at this time to determine specific, localized health impacts. Moreover, air quality in the San Diego Air Basin is continually improving, and although the basin is currently nonattainment for state ozone and particulate matter, there are very few violations of the state standards on an annual basis, and background concentrations of these pollutants are generally low. Because of this, air quality in the San Diego air basin is increasingly improving at a consistent rate, and thus is expected to result in decreased health risks associated with pollutant emissions on a regional basis. Therefore, development under the proposed General Plan is not expected to expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of criteria air pollutants. The potential health risks associated with criteria air pollutants are identified above in the discussion of "Pollutants and Health Effects." Although an increase in criteria pollutant emissions could potentially result in increased human susceptibility to asthma and other respiratory conditions, neither the SDAPCD nor the State of California has identified a methodology for identifying a correlation between increased pollutant emissions and the number or type of health- related incidents that may occur on a plan-wide basis. To effectively measure impacts to human health from pollutant sources that may impact sensitive receptors, a site-specific health risk assessment or similar study would be required. Health risk assessments are based on project-level information such as: the location of existing sensitive receptors (e.g. existing hospitals, schools, elderly care facilities, etc.) in proximity to potential future emission sources; locating new sensitive receptors in the vicinity of existing pollution sources; the distance between the sources of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and the sensitive receptor; the location and exhaust parameters of stationary sources (e.g., stack height, temperature, flow rate, etc.); and pollutant source type. Individual projects proposed under the proposed General Plan would be subject to individual environmental review under CEQA, and a health risk assessment, if warranted, would be conducted at the project level. To further address effects to sensitive receptors and human health, mitigation is provided as described below and would be implemented where applicable on a project-by-project basis. Proposed Plan Policies that Reduce the Impacts See General Plan policies listed above. 5 California Department of Transportation, "Final Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement and Section 4(f) Evaluation", 2013; p. 3.14-27. http:/ jwww.dot.ca.gov/dist11/Env_docs/I- SNCC/Finalji-5_part3_chp3.pdf#page=309 34 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Mitigation Measures Mitigation measures MMAQ-2 through MMAQ-6 above would reduce the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and thereby reduce potential adverse health effects associated with these pollutants. If a future development proposal would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations even after implementation of mitigation measures MM AQ-2 through MM AQ-6, the following mitigation measure would be implemented during project-level environmental review to further reduce exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations: MM AQ-7: The project applicant shall prepare a site-specific health risk assessment based on project-level information such as: the location of existing sensitive receptors (e.g. existing hospitals, schools, elderly care facilities, etc.) in proximity to potential future emission sources; locating new sensitive receptors in the vicinity of existing pollution sources; the distance between the sources of toxic air contaminants (TACs) and the sensitive receptor; the location and exhaust parameters of stationary sources (e.g., stack height, temperature, flow rate, etc.); and pollutant source type. The health risk assessment would identify appropriate measures necessary to reduce the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of pollutants and the impacts to human health to below a level of significance. These measures may include, but not be limited to, the installation of an air filtration system or the installation of vegetative landscaping at the sensitive receptor location. Findings Based upon the Final EIR and the entire record before the City Council, the council finds that: Effects of Mitigating Policies and Remaining Impacts Conformance with the goals and policies of the proposed General Plan, the Climate Action Plan, the city's SWPPP requirements and Green Building Standards Code provisions, and implementation of the mitigation measures identified above, would reduce the exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. However, in the absence of the site- specific information required to perform a health risk assessment, it is not possible at this time to quantify that these measures would reduce exposure to substantial pollutant concentrations to a level below significance. Therefore, impacts would be considered significant and unavoidable (Finding (1); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(1)). Overriding Considerations The environmental, economic, social, and other benefits of the proposed General Plan, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 1.7, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the proposed General Plan associated with impact to air quality. 35 11 r' 'C Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 5.2 Transportation Impact 3.13-1 Finding: The proposed General Plan would exceed an applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of effectiveness of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit as defined below: • Degradation of level of service to below a LOS D for a prioritized travel mode at a facility that is not exempt from the LOS D standard; or • Adds prioritized travel mode usage to a facility that is not exempt from the LOS D standard and is operating at a level of service below LOS D, or • Degrades traffic on a Caltrans' facility to a level of service below LOS C (Caltrans' acceptable operating standard) or adds traffic to a Caltrans' facility operating at an unacceptable LOS D, E, or F (Significant and Unavoidable} Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15091(a)(1), changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed Plan which could avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect identified in the Final EIR as Impact 3.13-1; and, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines §15091(a)(2), such changes or alterations with respect to levels of service on a Caltrans' facility are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of Caltrans, not the city, and such changes can and should be adopted by Caltrans. Facts in Support of Finding: To evaluate the effects of the proposed General Plan to the city's transportation system, the prioritized travel modes were evaluated: a) vehicles, b) pedestrians, c) bicycles, and d) transit. The results for vehicle level of service (a) are summarized below: a) Vehicle Levels of Service Table 1.5-4 summarizes the future traffic volumes on vehicle-prioritized streets with build-out of the proposed General Plan (and accounting for other regional growth in the area). The future traffic volumes were developed using the SANDAG travel demand forecasting model (Series 12) and incorporate the proposed General Plan land use information and the proposed General Plan street network. As shown in the table, at buildout of the proposed General Plan, vehicle level of service on vehicle-prioritized streets is anticipated to operate at LOS D or better, except for the following streets that are anticipated to operate below LOS D, which is considered a significant impact. • Two segments of Palomar Airport Road • One segment of La Costa Avenue 36 ; I' Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan • One segment of El Camino Real • 1-5 through Carlsbad • SR-78 near the City The facilities listed above would generally be congested during peak periods; however, during most hours of the day, the facility would have sufficient capacity to serve the vehicle demand. The city does not have regulatory authority over Interstate-S or SR-78 and has no control over managing traffic on those facilities. The Carlsbad arterial streets listed above would need to be widened beyond their four-or six-lane cross-sections to operate at the city's standard for vehicle level of service on those facilities (LOS D or better}; however, creating streets wider than six lanes is inconsistent with the goals of the proposed General Plan. In addition, widening these streets beyond six lanes creates new challenges for intersection operations, maintenance, and storm water management. Therefore, rather than widening these arterial streets, the proposed General Plan promotes implementation of transportation demand management (e.g., promote travel by modes other than the single-occupant vehicle}, transportation system management (e.g. signal timing coordination and improved transit service}, and livable streets techniques to better manage the transportation system as a whole. The impacts to 1-5 and SR-78 are considered significant and unavoidable, as the city cannot guarantee implementation of improvements to reduce impacts to a facility they do not control. While the proposed General Plan policies would reduce these impacts, they would remain significant and unavoidable. Table 1.5-4: Future Street Operations Street From To Number Classificatio Future Future of Lanes n ADT LOS · ciiv:~¥'clHsbadt$treets ~2-f: ://~:~¥!~{:;:};;;;;.<,;' ' V>·-~; ' if!i:fffd~-'?, ;~:v~~~;i~. _,/YV;c, -<:.-·,v~vw.7?<,;-/-/A'"" , , ·· · c '-;;:~;;;?,,;, -:;;.-,;,' t:&i;; '-V-,-~·»,.) Cannon Road 1-5 El Camino Real 4 Arterial 33,420 LOS D Cannon Road El Camino Real College Blvd 4 Arterial 17,770 LOS B College Blvd Palomar Airport El Camino Real 4 Arterial 16,410 LOS B Rd College Blvd N. City Limits Cannon Rd 4 Arterial 34,570 LOS D Palomar 1-5 College Blvd 6 Arterial 58,430 LOSE Airport Road Palomar College Blvd El Camino Real 6 Arterial 45,360 LOS C Airport Road Palomar El Camino Real Melrose Dr 6 Arterial 69,190 LOS F Airport Road Palomar Melrose Dr W. City Limits 6 Arterial 46,580 LOS C Airport Road La Costa Ave 1-5 El Camino Real 4 Arterial 39,180 LOSE El Camino N. City Limits Tamarack Ave 6 Arterial 37,150 LOS C Real El Camino Tamarack Ave Cannon Rd 6 Arterial 35,020 LOS C Real 37 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Table 1.5-4: Future Street Operations Street From To Number Classificatio of Lanes n El Camino Cannon Rd College Blvd 6 Arterial Real El Camino College Blvd Palomar 6 Arterial Real Airport Rd El Camino Palomar Airport La Costa Ave 6 Arterial Real Rd El Camino La Costa Ave Olivenhain Rd 6 Arterial Real Rancho Santa Melrose Dr El Camino Real 6 Arterial Fe Rd/ Olivenhain Rd Melrose Dr City boundary Rancho Santa 6 Arterial north of Fe Rd Lionshead Ave · .. fl!!!ions Roadways ·"' fj~;;~1lf3;:: >03:c ,''"' '~f:fi )i:{/; '<>r-,i '''// '<i{f~jjj~~;:;~;;l; Interstate 5 Las Flores Dr Carlsbad 8 Freeway (mixed flow Village Dr lanes) Interstate 5 Carlsbad Village Tamarack Ave 8 Freeway (mixed flow Dr lanes) Interstate 5 Tamarack Ave Cannon Rd 8 Freeway (mixed flow lanes) Interstate 5 Cannon Rd Palomar 8 Freeway (mixed flow Airport Rd lanes) Interstate 5 Palomar Airport Poinsettia Ln 8 Freeway (mixed flow Rd lanes) Interstate 5 Poinsettia Ln La Costa Ave 8 Freeway (mixed flow lanes) SR-78 (mixed 1-5 Jefferson 6 Freeway flow lanes) SR-78 (mixed Jefferson El Camino Real 6 Freeway flow lanes) SR-78 (mixed El Camino Real College Blvd 6 Freeway flow lanes) 38 Future Future ADT LOS 35,600 LOS C 49,980 LOS C 63,600 LOS F 43,600 LOS C 31,440 LOS B 25,210 LOS B '·:~;;~~:, , ''f;Y,;r?/; 207,800 LOS F 207,500 LOS F 216,000 LOS F 221,700 LOS F 213,800 LOS F 204,700 LOS F 174,900 LOS F 155,300 LOSE 172,100 LOS F Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Proposed General Plan Policies that Reduce the Impact Mobility Element Policies 3-P.4 Implement the city's MMLOS methodology by evaluating level of service {LOS) for prioritized modes. Maintain LOS D or better only for the prioritized modes of travel by street typology as outlined in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1 [ofthe proposed General Plan]. 3-P.6 Require developers of projects, which are determined to have a significant impact on Caltrans freeway facilities {I-S and SR-78), to enter into a traffic mitigation agreement with Caltrans for implementation oft he necessary improvements and the payment of fair-share fees to be determined by Caltrans based on the increase in freeway traffic directly attributable to the proposed project. 3-P.7 Encourage Caltrans to identify and construct necessary improvements to improve service levels on Interstate-S and State Route 78. 3-P.S Utilize transportation demand management strategies, non-automotive enhancements (bicycle, pedestrian, transit, train, trails, and connectivity), and traffic signal management techniques as long-term transportation solutions and traffic mitigation measures to carry out the Carlsbad Community Vision. 3-P.9 Develop and maintain a list of LOS exempt intersections and streets approved by the City Council. For LOS exempt intersections and streets, the city will not implement motor vehicle capacity improvements to maintain the LOS standard outlined in Policy 3-P.4 if such improvements are beyond what is identified as appropriate at build out of the General Plan; however, other non-vehicle capacity- building improvements may be required to improve mobility, to the extent feasible, and/or to implement the livable streets goals and policies oft his Mobility Element. To be considered LOS exempt, an intersection or street must be identified as built-out by the City Council because: 3-P.lO 1. Acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or 2. The proposed improvements would significantly impact the environment in an unacceptable way and mitigation would not contribute to the nine core values ofthe Carlsbad Community Vision; or 3. The proposed improvements would result in unacceptable impacts to other community values or General Plan policies; or 4. The proposed improvements would require more than three through travel lanes in each direction. After the College Boulevard extension and Poinsettia Lane connections are completed as identified in Policy 3-P.17, allow the following streets to be LOS exempt facilities from the LOS standard identified in Policy 3-P.4, subject to the requirements described in Policy 3-P.7: • La Costa Avenue between Interstate-S and El Camino Real 39 cc Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 3-P.ll 3-P.12 3-P.17 • El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and La Costa Avenue • Palomar Airport Road between Interstate-S and College Boulevard • Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real and Melrose Drive cc Require new development that adds traffic to LOS-exempt locations (consistent with 3-P.7) to implement transportation demand management strategies that reduce the reliance on the automobile and assists in achieving the city's livable streets vision. Update the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to ensure consistency with the General Plan. This includes updating the circulation LOS standards methodologies to reflect a more balanced/multimodal approach. Encourage Caltrans, SANDAG, NCTD, and adjacent cities to improve regional connectivity and service consistent with regional planning efforts. This includes expansion of Interstate-S with two HOV lanes in each direction and associated enhancements, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route along Palomar Airport Road, shuttle bus services from COASTER stations, and other enhancements to improve services in the area. Mitigation Measures The city shall implement all policies identified in the Mobility Element to reduce the demand for vehicles on 1-S. However, even with implementation of these policies, the impact will remain significant and unavoidable. Findings Based upon the Final EIR and the entire record before the City Council, the council finds that: Effects of Mitigating Policies and Remaining Impacts As described above in the discussion of Impact 3.13-1, the proposed General Plan contains numerous policies that would reduce the severity ofthe impact to transportation, namely impacts to Interstate-S and State Route-78 to the extent feasible. However, the timing, design and implementation of improvements to Caltrans' facilities is within the exclusive jurisdiction of Caltrans, not the city, and the city cannot guarantee that implementation of improvements to reduce impacts to a Caltrans' facility will be occur as and when needed. Therefore, the impact is considered significant and unavoidable (Finding (1); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(l) and Finding (2); CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091(a)(2)). Overriding Considerations The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the proposed General Plan, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section 1.7, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the proposed General Plan associated with impacts to transportation. 40 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 6 Project Alternatives An EIR is required to identify a "range of potential alternatives to the project [which] shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic purposes of the projeCt and could avoid or substantially lessen one of more of the significant effects" (CEQA Guidelines, Section 15126.6, subd. (c)). Section 1.5 (below) and Chapter 2 of the Draft EIR state the proposed Plan objectives. 6.1 Alternative Analysis The following is a brief summary of the alternatives to the proposed General Plan considered in Chapter 4 of the recirculated Draft EIR (Chapter 4 contains a complete discussion of the alternatives, a comparative impact analysis of alternatives, and identification of an environmentally superior alternative). NO PROJECT The purpose of evaluating the No Project Alternative is to allow decision-makers to compare the potential impacts of approving the project with the potential impacts of not approving the project. The No Project analysis discusses both the existing conditions at the time the NOP is published as well as what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future ifthe project were not approved. The No Project alternative is depicted in Figure 4.2-4 of the Draft EIR. The No Project scenario represents the continuation ofthe current General Plan (adopted in 1986, last comprehensively updated in 1994) land use designations. It assumes that the existing General Plan and Zoning Ordinance would continue to guide development in Carlsbad until build-out in 2035. There are many differences between the proposed General Plan and the No Project Alternative. In relationship to the proposed General Plan, the No Project Alternative: • Has different land uses that would not accommodate the city's long-term physical and economic development and community enhancement; • Has lower densities/intensities, and mixed-use development and development of centers and walkable communities are not promoted to the level in the proposed General Plan; • Is based on a different set of core values/goals and objectives than those represented in the city's current conditions; • Has lower residential capacity that would not satisfy the required number of additional housing units currently provided by the regional housing needs assessment requirements by 2021 plus the additional units anticipated as part ofthe update, as required by state law; • Has reduced alternate modes of transportation, connectivity, and street capacity; and • Lacks elements addressing the city's economy, business diversity and tourism; and sustainability; and corresponding goal and policies. The No Project Alternative assumes continuation of land development under the existing General Plan and the current Zoning Ordinance. 41 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Findings The No Project Alternative is rejected as infeasible because it would not achieve the proposed General Plan's objectives. Though it may appear to be environmentally superior to the proposed General Plan, as it would result in slightly fewer annual v<ehicle miles traveled compared to the proposed General Plan and thereby result in slightly less significant impacts to air quality and transportation, it would still result in significant impacts related to air quality, as threshold levels for VOC, NOx, CO, PMw and PM2.s would be exceeded; likewise, transportation-related impacts for portions of El Camino Real, Palomar Airport Road, and La Costa Avenue would also still be considered significant, and this alternative is also anticipated to result in an increase in peak period commuter trips out of Carlsbad (compared to the proposed General Plan) since the No Project Alternative provides for fewer residential units and employment opportunities within the city than the proposed General Plan. Explanation This alternative would not realize the benefits of the proposed General Plan and fails to achieve some of the proposed General Plan objectives. As it relates to the Community Vision (described in the Draft EIR, Section 2.2, Purpose and Objectives ofthe Proposed General Plan), the No Project Alternative would only partially achieve some of the Community Vision core values, while conflicting with others. Thus, this alternative may conflict with or prevent attainment of the following objectives ofthe General Plan: • To provide strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow Carlsbad's long-term physical and economic development and community enhancement to be accomplished, because it does not include the same core values/goals and objectives that would allow it to achieve the city's current and future needs; • To establish a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with the Carlsbad Community Vision and updated General Plan policies and standards, as it does not include updated values and policies by which to evaluate new development proposals in relation to the Carlsbad Community Vision; • To allow city departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance important environmental resources, and minimize hazards, as the projects would be reviewed pursuant to policies that are outdated and do not align with the Carlsbad Community Vision; and • To provide the basis, which is consistent with the Carlsbad Community Vision and current laws, to establish priorities for implementing plans and programs, such as the Housing Element, Zoning Ordinance, the Capital Improvements Program, facilities plans, and specific and area plans, as updated values and policies would not be considered. Though the No Project Alternative would result in a lower percent change of VMT from baseline than the proposed General Plan, the increase of VMT from the No Project Alternative is still considered a significant impact to air quality. Additionally, modeling conducted for the Draft EIR projected greater annual VMT per service population for the No Project Alternative than for the proposed General Plan. Thus, impacts related to transportation would not be substantially reduced by selecting the No Project Alternative and remain significant. 42 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan ALTERNATIVE 1-CENTERS CONCEPT Alternative 1 is based on the concept of centers, which directs development to the Village and several new neighborhood commercial centers. The centers are placed in strategic, visible locations along transit corridors, andicdistributed to maximize accessibility from residential neighborhoods. Each center would include local shopping as a pedestrian-oriented focus for the surrounding neighborhood, accessible to local residents. High and medium density housing, in addition to new parks and open spaces, would surround the retail centers or be integrated in mixed-use buildings. Although some centers would be neighborhood-oriented, others-such as the Village and the redeveloped Plaza Camino Real-would be citywide and have regional draws. A significant majority of the city's future housing needs would be accommodated in the centers, enabling people to live close to shops and services and along transit corridors. All centers would have transit access-bus or rail-and pedestrian connections between the centers and the surrounding neighborhoods would be improved to enhance walkability. New centers would be located along El Camino Real, Palomar Airport Road and adjacent to the Poinsettia COASTER Station. Residential uses are located along the eastern city limits, in proximity to local shopping in adjacent cities. The Village and Barrio would see increases in housing and amenities, while the Power Plant would be redeveloped with hotels, retail, and other non- residential uses. This redevelopment would include enhanced beach and lagoon access as well as additional open space along the lagoon. Quarry Creek would include new housing as well as a new campus and ample open space. Table 4.2-1 of the Draft EIR presents a summary of the residential capacity and reasonably anticipated non-residential development on the opportunity sites within the focus areas in Alternative 1. Figure 4.2-1 of the Draft EIR shows the proposed land use under this alternative. Findings Alternative 1 is rejected as infeasible because it would not as effectively achieve the objectives of the proposed General Plan. It is not the environmentally superior alternative and would not avoid or substantially lessen the significant air quality or transportation impacts of the proposed Plan. Explanation This alternative would not realize the benefits of the proposed General Plan and fails to achieve some of the proposed General Plan's objectives. As it relates to the Carlsbad Community Vision (described in Section 2.2, Purpose and Objectives of the Proposed General Plan), Alternative 1 would only partially achieve some ofthe Carlsbad Community Vision core values, while conflicting with others. Thus, this alternative may conflict with or prevent attainment of the following objectives of the General Plan: • To provide strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow Carlsbad's long- term physical and economic development and community enhancement to be accomplished, as it would result in a substantially greater number of vehicle miles traveled-thus resulting in greater air quality and transportation impacts-without 43 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan providing a significantly greater number of additional housing units or potential for job opportunities compared to the proposed General Plan; • To establish a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are irfharmony with General Plan policies and standards because the proposed development build-out totals allowed under Alternative 1 would be based on levels that exceed significance thresholds by a greater extent than the proposed General Plan without providing a corresponding level of benefits; • To allow city departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance important environmental resources, and minimize hazards because additional environmental impacts would result unnecessarily, as the proposed General Plan would be capable of achieving those same goals with fewer impacts. Furthermore, Alternative 1 is not considered the environmentally superior alternative and would not avoid or substantially lessen the significant air quality or transportation impacts of the Proposed Plan. Alternative 1 would result in a greater percent increase in VMT from baseline compared to the proposed Plan, and would substantially exceed thresholds of VOC, NOx, CO, PM10 and PM2.5. Additionally, modeling conducted for the Draft EIR projected greater annual VMT per service population for Alternative 1 than for the proposed General Plan. 44 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan ALTERNATIVE 2-ACTIVE WATERFRONT CONCEPT Alterative 2, the active waterfront alternative, would place greater development along the ocean waterfront, enabling residences, hotels, and other uses to be close to the ocean. Residents and visitCJrs would enjoy waterfront dining, shopping, and lingering experience in clusters of restaurants, cafes, and smaller stores up and down the coast. The Power Plant would be developed with a mix of residential, hotel, and retail uses, with community-accessible open spaces along Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The redevelopment of the Power Plant site would result in enhanced access to the beach and lagoon and reinforce Carlsbad's beach community character. New development along the coast would enhance connections for existing neighborhoods to the east by providing access points and linkages to the beach. About half of the city's new residential growth would be in the waterfront focus areas (Focus Areas 1, 8, and 9). Plaza Camino Real Commercial Corridor would have a mix of uses, while Quarry Creek would have new residential uses. These focus areas would accommodate most of the other new residential growth and would locate residents near Carlsbad's natural amenities such as lagoons and open spaces. Palomar Corridor would continue to contain only employment uses. Table 4.2-2 oft he Draft EIR presents a summary of residential capacity and reasonably anticipated non-residential development on the opportunity sites within the focus areas in Alternative 2. Figure 4.2-2 of the Draft EIR shows the proposed land use under this alternative. Findings Alternative 2 is rejected as infeasible because it would not as effectively achieve the objectives of the proposed General Plan. It is not the environmentally superior alternative and would not avoid or substantially lessen the significant air quality or transportation impacts of the proposed Plan. Explanation This alternative would not realize the benefits of the proposed General Plan and fails to thoroughly achieve some of the proposed General Plan objectives. As it relates to the Carlsbad Community Vision (described in Section 2.2, Purpose and Objectives of the Proposed General Plan), Alternative 2 would only partially achieve some of the Carlsbad Community Vision core values, while conflicting with others. Thus, this alternative may conflict with or prevent attainment of the following objectives of the General Plan: • To provide strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow Carlsbad's long- term physical and economic development and community enhancement to be accomplished, as it would result in a substantially greater number of vehicle miles traveled-thus resulting in greater air quality and transportation impacts-without providing a significantly greater number of additional housing units or potential for job opportunities compared to the proposed General Plan; • To establish a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with General Plan policies and standards because the proposed development build-out totals allowed under Alternative 2 would be based on levels that 45 rc Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan exceed significance thresholds by a greater extent than the proposed General Plan without providing a corresponding level of benefits; • To allow city departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance important environmental resources, and minimize hazards because additional environmental impacts would result unnecessarily, as the proposed General Plan would be capable of achieving those same goals with fewer impacts. Furthermore, Alternative 2 is not considered the environmentally superior alternative and would not avoid or substantially lessen the significant air quality or transportation impacts of the proposed Plan. Alternative 2 would result in a greater percent increase in VMT from baseline compared to the proposed Plan, and would substantially exceed thresholds of VOC, NOx, CO, PMlO and PM2.5. Additionally, modeling conducted for the Draft EIR projected greater annual VMT per service population for Alternative 2 than for the proposed General Plan. 46 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan ALTERNATIVE 3-CORE FOCUS CONCEPT In Alternative 3, the core focus alternative, new residential and commercial uses would be placed at strategic locations at the edges of Carlsbad's employment core in the geographic center of the city-enabling workers to live close to jobs, and stores and restaurants to enjoy patronage from both residents and workers. Shuttles and enhanced bicycle and pedestrian paths would link residential and employment clusters. Although some sites currently envisioned for employment uses would be developed with residential and commercial uses, there remains enough area to accommodate office and industrial uses, ensuring enough capacity for continued employment growth. Just over a third of the new housing growth would be in central Carlsbad, while the rest would be dispersed at different locations. The Power Plant and southern portion of Carlsbad Boulevard would primarily accommodate hotel and visitor-serving commercial uses and would provide access to the beach and lagoon for the community. Table 4.2-3 ofthe Draft EIR presents a summary of residential capacity and reasonably anticipated non-residential development on the opportunity sites within the focus areas in Alternative 3. Figure 4-3 of the Draft EIR shows the proposed land use under this alternative. Findings Alternative 3 is rejected as infeasible because it would not as effectively achieve the objectives of the proposed General Plan. It is not the environmentally superior alternative and would not avoid or substantially lessen the significant air quality or transportation impacts of the proposed Plan. Explanation This alternative would not realize the benefits of the proposed General Plan and fails to thoroughly achieve some of the proposed General Plan objectives. As it relates to the Carlsbad Community Vision (described in Section 2.2, Purpose and Objectives of the Proposed General Plan}, Alternative 3 would only partially achieve some of the Carlsbad Community Vision core values, while conflicting with others. Thus, this alternative may conflict with or prevent attainment ofthe following objectives ofthe General Plan: • To provide strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow Carlsbad's long- term physical and economic development and community enhancement to be accomplished, as it would result in a substantially greater number of vehicle miles traveled-thus resulting in greater air quality and transportation impacts-without providing a significantly greater number of additional housing units or potential for job opportunities compared to the proposed General Plan; • To establish a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with General Plan policies and standards because the proposed development build-out totals allowed under Alternative 3 would be based on levels that exceed significance thresholds by a greater extent than the proposed General Plan without providing a corresponding level of benefits; 47 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan • To allow city departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance important environmental resources, and minimize hazards because additional environmental impacts would result unnecessarily, as the proposed General Plan would be capable of achieving those same goals with fewer impacts; and/or Furthermore, Alternative 3 is not considered the environmentally superior alternative and would not avoid or substantially lessen the significant air quality or transportation impacts of the proposed Plan. Alternative 3 would result in a greater percent increase in VMT from baseline compared to the proposed Plan, and would substantially exceed thresholds ofVOC, NOx, CO, PMw and PM2.s. Additionally, modeling conducted for the Draft EIR projected greater annual VMT per service population for Alternative 3 than for the proposed General Plan. 48 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan REDUCED DENSITY ALTERNATIVE The Reduced Density Alternative would avoid or substantially lessen the significant impacts on air quality and traffic impact, and would otherwise be substantially the same as the proposed General Plan. The Reduced Density Alternative would have the same features as the General Plan discussed in Chapter 2 of the Draft EIR, Project Description, and would generally include the same goals and policies as those defined in the proposed General Plan. The Reduced Density Alternative would allow the same categories of future development as the proposed General Plan, but land use densities and intensities for developable vacant, underutilized, and mixed-use sites would be scaled back by forty percent (40%) compared to the proposed General Plan, resulting in less future residential, commercial, office, industrial and hotel development. Table 4.2-3a of the recirculated Draft EIR shows the future potential development allowed under the Reduced Density alternative as compared to the proposed General Plan. Findings The Reduced Density Alternative is rejected as infeasible because it would not achieve the proposed General Plan's objectives and would inhibit the city from meeting the number of affordable housing units set forth in the regional housing needs assessment (RNHA), as required by state housing law. Though it is the environmentally superior alternative, as it would reduce the overall air quality and transportation-related impacts below those of the proposed General Plan and the other alternatives, it would still result in significant impacts related to air quality. Likewise, transportation-related impacts for portions of El Camino Real, Palomar Airport Road, and La Costa Avenue would also still be considered significant, and this alternative is also anticipated to result in an increase in peak period commuter trips out of Carlsbad since the Reduced Density Alternative provides for fewer residential units and employment opportunities within the city than the proposed General Plan. Explanation The Reduced Density Alternative is not feasible for the following reasons, each of which provides a separate and independent basis for the finding of infeasibility. The number of residential units allowed under the Reduced Density Alternative would impede the city's ability to meet its regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) for lower income housing ("affordable housing"). As discussed in the Housing Element, state housing law requires the city to accommodate an additional 3,728 housing units by 2021 (General Plan, Chapter 10, Housing, Table 10-25, p. 10-43.) This number is expected to increase when SANDAG determines the RHNA for the 2021-2030 housing planning period. The increase in the number of residential units allowed under the proposed General Plan is intended to accommodate the City's obligation to provide affordable housing as well as the anticipated demand for market rate housing that would result from future population and employment growth in Carlsbad. The unmet RHNA obligation for low and very low income housing is 1,436 units, while the unmet need for moderate income housing is 895 units. To meet this need, the city must demonstrate that there is sufficient land available at densities high enough to facilitate lower and moderate income housing. The draft Housing Element has determined that a minimum density of 23 dwelling units per acre is necessary to accommodate very low and low income housing, and 15 dwelling units per acre is necessary to accommodate 49 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan moderate income housing {Table 10-28). Under the existing General Plan there is insufficient land designated at the appropriate densities without re-designating sites to higher densities in order to meet the minimum densities described above. The reduced number of residential units allowed under the Reduced Density Alternative would result in densities below these required mini,p1ums, and therefore would impair the city's ability to meet its current RHNA obligation and other housing objectives {such as encouraging mixed-use and transit-oriented development, and promoting a better jobs-housing balance) through the period for General Plan build-out {2035). Further, to achieve the reduced future dwelling units in the Reduced Density Alternative would require lowering planned densities below the existing General Plan on vacant and underutilized properties throughout the city. This reduced capacity could increase competition for the best available vacant sites, while at the same time discourage redevelopment of underutilized, infill, and potential mixed-use sites. As it relates to the Carlsbad Community Vision {described in Section 2.2, Purpose and Objectives ofthe Proposed General Plan), the Reduced Density Alternative would only partially achieve some of the Carlsbad Community Vision core values, while conflicting with others. For the reasons described above, the Reduced Density Alternative may conflict with or prevent attainment of the following objectives of the General Plan: 50 • To provide strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow Carlsbad's long- term physical and economic development and community enhancement to be accomplished, as significantly reducing the number of housing units, hotel rooms, and available employment space would impair the city's ability to: accommodate housing to meet the needs of all community members: attract, retain and facilitate expansion of businesses; and revitalize neighborhoods. • To establish a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with General Plan policies and standards, as those policies and standards may not feasibly be achieved through this alternative; • To allow city departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance important environmental resources, and minimize hazards because development will be significantly limited by this alternative and will not allow for full enhancement of the community and its resources; this alternative will impede the ability to achieve the character of the community expressed through the Carlsbad Community Vision, as it will: impair the ability to accommodate demand for business and employment growth; will impair the ability to provide multiple modes of travel to improve connectivity, which depends on a balance of land uses at a range of densities and intensities; impair the ability to achieve the communities sustainability values, as sustainable development relies on a mix of land uses that include compact building design, ranges of housing choices, walkable neighborhoods, and a variety of housing choices that promote alternatives to the automobile; and impedes the community's vision for revitalizing neighborhoods, promoting a greater mix of uses, and encouraging more activities along the coastline; and • To provide the basis for establishing priorities for implementing plans and programs, such as the Housing Element, Zoning Ordinance, the Capital Improvements Program, facilities Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan plans, and specific and area plans, as the reduced development densities and intensities of this alternative would conflict with the ability to achieve housing objectives, implement zoning regulations, and implement the improvements identified in the CIP. This alternative would also result in significant and unavoidable il'l'ipacts to air quality and transportation. In the case of air quality, though the alternative would result in a lower percent increase in VMT from baseline compared to the proposed General Plan, it would exceed thresholds of VOC, NOx, CO, PM1o and PM2.s and be considered a significant impact. In the case of transportation, the Reduced Density Alternative may result in incrementally less of an impact than the proposed General Plan, but the reduction would not be sufficient to reduce impacts to freeway traffic volumes to a level below significant. 51 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 7 Statement of Overriding Consideration The City of Carlsbad has: (1) independently reviewed tbe information in the EIR and the record of proceedings; (2) made a reasonable and good faith effort to avoid or substantially lessen the significant impacts resulting from the proposed General Plan to the extent feasible by including policies and actions in the proposed General Plan and mitigation measures in the EIR that effectively mitigate potential environmental impacts to the greatest extent feasible; (3) considered the alternatives evaluated in the EIR and determined that each of them is infeasible for the reasons stated in Section 6.1 above; and (4) balanced the proposed General Plan's benefits against the proposed General Plan's significant unavoidable impacts. The city finds that the proposed General Plan most fully implements the objectives (as stated in Section 1.3 ofthe proposed General Plan): • To outline a vision for Carlsbad's long-term physical and economic development and community enhancement; • To provide strategies and specific implementing actions that will allow this vision to be accomplished; • To establish a basis for judging whether specific development proposals and public projects are in harmony with General Plan policies and standards, (such as those for housing, parks, mobility, and economic diversity); • To allow city departments, other public agencies, and private developers to design projects that will enhance the character of the community, preserve and enhance important environmental resources, and minimize hazards; and • To provide the basis for establishing priorities for implementing plans and programs, such as the Zoning Ordinance, the Capital Improvements Program, facilities plans, and specific and area plans. The City Council declares that it has adopted all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the proposed General Plan's environmental impacts to an insignificant level; considered the entire administrative record, including the Final EIR; and weighed the proposed General Plan's benefits against its environmental impacts. After doing so, the City Council has determined that the proposed General Plan's benefits outweigh its significant environmental impacts on air quality and transportation, and deems them acceptable. The City Council identified the following public benefits in making this determination. Each of these public benefits serves as an independent basis for overriding all unavoidable significant adverse environmental impacts identified in these Findings and the Final EIR. The City Council considers these impacts to be acceptable, consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15093. The City Council finds adoption and implementation ofthe proposed General Plan would provide the following economic, social, legal, and other considerable benefits: 52 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 1. Small town feel, beach community character and connectedness. The proposed General Plan enhances Carlsbad's defining attributes of small-town feel and beach community character, and builds on the city's culture of civic engagement, volunteerism and philanthropy. The proposed General Plan's land use goals and policies promote well-planned, connected neighborhoods with a diversity o'f land uses, housing choices, and convenient access to goods and services. The proposed General Plan also emphasizes access to the coast, preservation of its natural and scenic value, and enhancement of recreational opportunities. 2. Open space and the natural environment. The proposed General Plan prioritizes protection and enhancement of open space and the natural environment. The proposed General Plan fosters strong partnerships with resource agencies and non-governmental organizations to actively and adaptively manage open space to maintain and improve ecological function. The proposed General Plan also supports and protects Carlsbad's unique open space and agricultural heritage. 3. Access to recreation and active, healthy lifestyles. The proposed General Plan promotes active lifestyles and community health by furthering access to trails, parks, beaches and other recreation opportunities. 4. The local economy, business diversity and tourism. The proposed General Plan strengthens the city's strong and diverse economy and its position as an employment hub in north San Diego County. The proposed General Plan also promotes business diversity, increased specialty retail and dining opportunities, and Carlsbad's tourism. 5. Walking, biking, public transportation and connectivity. The proposed General Plan increases travel options through enhanced walking, bicycling, and public transportation systems. The proposed General Plan also enhances mobility through increased connectivity and intelligent transportation systems and demand management. 6. Sustainability. The proposed General Plan builds on the city's sustainability initiatives to emerge as a leader in green development and sustainability. The proposed General Plan also pursues public/ private partnerships, particularly on sustainable water, energy, recycling and foods. 7. History, the arts and cultural resources. The proposed General Plan emphasizes the arts by promoting a multitude of events and productions year-round, cutting-edge venues to host world-class performances, and celebrating Carlsbad's cultural heritage in dedicated facilities and programs. 8. High quality education and community services. The proposed General Plan supports quality, comprehensive education and life-long learning opportunities, provides housing and community services for a changing population, and maintains a high standard for citywide public safety. 9. Neighborhood revitalization, community design and livability. The proposed General Plan contains policies to revitalize neighborhoods and enhance citywide community design and livability. The proposed General Plan promotes a greater mix of uses citywide, more activities along the coastline, and links density to public transportation. The proposed General Plan revitalizes the Village as a community focal point and a unique and memorable center for visitors, and rejuvenate the historic Barrio neighborhood. 53 Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan 10. The proposed General Plan upholds the city's Growth Management Program by ensuring that public facilities and services are provided in a timely manner to preserve the quality of life for residents. The proposed General Plan requires new development to meet public facility performance standards as specified in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, and ~(; ensures that citywide and quadrant dwelling unit limitations are adhered to. 11. The proposed General Plan, in combination with the CAP, combats climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, residential, commercial, industrial, solid waste, and wastewater community sectors, as well as from government operations. The proposed General Plan and CAP help the state achieve greenhouse gas emission targets by reducing emissions to 1990 levels by 2020; and 49 percent below 1990 levels by 2035, consistent with the requirements oft he Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32) and the goals of Governor's Executive Order S-3-05, 12. The proposed General Plan fulfills the city's obligations under state housing element law through strategies and programs that: conserve and improve existing affordable housing stock; maximize housing opportunities throughout the community; assist in the provision of affordable housing; remove governmental and other constraints to housing investment; and promote fair and equal housing opportunities. The proposed General Plan meets its regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) by demonstrating availability of residential sites at appropriate densities and development standards to accommodate at least 866 units for very low income households; 570 units for low income households; 895 units for moderate income households; and 1,397 units for above-moderate income households. 13. The proposed General Plan supports future community and regional demand for products, services, and jobs by accommodating approximately 4,600,400 square feet of additional industrial space, 2,132,200 square feet of additional commercial space, 778,500 square feet of additional office space, 1,895 additional hotel rooms, and 23,217 new jobs. This future development will add to the city's tax base and increase tax revenues, thereby contributing positively to the fiscal health of the city. 54 8 Conclusion Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Carlsbad General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan Ill summary, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed General Plan, the City Council finds that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified may be considered "acceptable" due to the specific considerations listed above, which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts oft he proposed project. The City Council has considered information contained in the EIR prepared for the proposed Plan as well as the public testimony and record of proceedings in which the project was considered. Recognizing that significant unavoidable air quality and transportation impacts may result from implementation of the proposed General Plan, the Council finds that the benefits of the General Plan and overriding considerations outweigh the adverse effects of the General Plan. Having included all feasible mitigation measures as policies and actions in the General Plan, and recognized all unavoidable significant impacts, the City Council hereby finds that each of the separate benefits of the proposed General Plan, as stated herein, is determined to be unto itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, that warrants adoption of the proposed General Plan and outweighs and overrides its unavoidable significant effects, and thereby justifies the adoption of the proposed General Plan. In reaching this conclusion and approving the proposed Plan: 1. The City Council has considered the information contained in the Final EIR and fully reviewed and considered all of the public testimony, documentation, exhibits, reports, and presentations included in the record of these proceedings. The City Council specifically finds and determines that this Statement of Overriding Considerations is based upon and supported by substantial evidence in the record. 2. The City Council has carefully weighed the benefits of the proposed General Plan against any adverse impacts identified in the Final EIR that could not be feasibly mitigated to a level of insignificance. While the Council have required all feasible mitigation measures, some impacts remain potentially significant. 3. This Statement of Overriding Considerations applies specifically to those impacts found to be potentially significant and unavoidable as set forth in the Final EIR and the record of these proceedings. 55 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 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7112 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO COMPREHENSIVELY UPDATE THE GENERAL PLAN, AND ASSOCIATED AMENDMENTS TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, ZONING MAP, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND CITYWIDE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS PLAN TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH THE UPDATED GENERAL PLAN. CASE NAME: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CASE NO.: GPA 07-02/ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02/SS 15-06 WHEREAS, City Planner has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding a comprehensive update to the city's General Plan, including an update to the Housing Element for the 2013 to 2021 planning period, and the development of a Climate Action Plan ("project"), which affect properties citywide; and WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 65350 et. seq., Section 21.52.020 and Section 21.90.090 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, and Public Resources Code Section 30514 and Section 13551 of the California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 5.5, said verified application constitutes a request for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment and Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment, as shown on Exhibit 2A: Draft Carlsbad General Plan (GPA 07-02) dated February 2014, on file in the Planning Division and incorporated by this reference; Exhibit 28: General Plan Update-Land Use Map (GPA 07-02/LCPA 07- 02) dated July 18, 2015, attached hereto; and Exhibit 2C: General Plan Update-Citywide Facilities And Improvements Plan Amendment (SS 15-06) dated July 18, 2015, attached hereto; all of which are on file in the Carlsbad Planning Division; and WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance Amendments are set forth and attached hereto in the draft City Council Ordinance, Exhibit "X" dated, July 18, 2015; and WHEREAS, the City Council accepted the Carlsbad Community Vision in January 2010 and achievement of said vision is supported by the General Plan Amendment, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment; and 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 WHEREAS, per City Council direction on September 11, 2012 and on November 5, 2013, staff utilized the Preferred Plan in the preparation of the General Plan update; and WHEREAS, staff proposes revisions to the Draft Carlsbad General Plan (Exhibit 2A of this resolution) as shown in Chapter 4 of the Final Environmental Impact Report (Exhibit 1A of Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111); and staff proposes revisions to the draft Land Use Map (Exhibit 2B, attached hereto), as described in Attachment 8 of the Planning Commission Staff Report dated July 18, 2015;and WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2011011004) relative to the proposed General Plan Amendment, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment has been prepared and the Planning Commission has considered its contents and recommended the certification thereof; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on July 18, 2015, hold a duly noticed public hearing and received public testimony and thereafter continued said public hearing to July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, 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 General Plan Amendment, Zoning Ordinance Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, and Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan 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 that: A) The foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) The state-mandated six-week review period for the Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 07-02) started on March 27, 2015 and ended on May 8, 2015; no comments were received in response to the LCPA notice. PC RESO NO. 7112 -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 C) Based on the evidence presented at the public hearing and based on the following findings, the Planning Commission RECOMMENDS: 1) 2) 3) 4) THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT -GPA 07-02, ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT-ZCA 07-01, ZONE CHANGE-ZC 15-02, LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT -LCPA 07-02, WITH REVISIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF AS DESCRIBED IN CHAPTER 4 OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EXHIBIT 1A OF PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7111) AND ATTACHMENT 8 OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATED JULY 18, 2015; AND WITH REVISIONS RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION DESCRIBED IN THE MEMORANDUM TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION DATED JULY 24, 2015 AND TITLED "ERRATA SHEET FOR THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN", ON FILE IN THE PLANNING DIVISION AND INCORPORATED BY THIS REFERENCE; AND THE CITY COUNCIL DIRECTS THE CITY PLANNER TO REVISE GENERAL PLAN DATA AND FIGURES, AS NECESSARY, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED LAND USE MAP. THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVES A CITYWIDE FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT-SS 15-06. THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDER DEVELOPING A NOISE ABATEMENT AND CONTROL ORDINANCE TO ESTABLISH NOISE LEVEL LIMITS, STANDARDS, AND CONTROLS ON LAND USES THROUGHOUT THE CITY. Findings: 1. 2. 3. The Planning Commission finds that the project is in conformance with the elements of the city's General Plan, based on the facts set forth in the staff report dated July 18, 2015, including but not limited to the following: the project consists of a comprehensive update to the city's General Plan; the update ensures that all elements of the plan are internally consistent, as required by state law; in addition, the amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map ensure consistency with the General Plan's Land Use Map, density requirements and provisions for residential uses in commercial designations; the Local Coastal Program amendment ensures consistency with the General Plan Land Use Map, the Zoning Map and the Zoning Ordinance; and the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment ensures consistency with the General Plan Mobility Element policies for a multi-modal, livable streets network. The amendment to the General Plan Housing Element complies with state housing element law, as provided in Government Code 65580 et seq. and as demonstrated by the Draft General Plan, dated February 2014, and as revised per Chapter 4 of the Final Environmental Impact Report. The project is consistent with the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CFIP) and all city public facility performance standards that are not proposed to be amended (i.e., performance standards for city administrative facilities, drainage, fire, library, open space, parks, schools, sewer collection, wastewater treatment capacity and water distribution system). The updated General Plan includes policies that ensure future development under the plan to comply with the CFIP public facility performance standards. The updated General Plan is also consistent with the proposed facility performance standard for circulation (multi-modal level of service standard), in that the updated plan establishes policies for a multi-modal transportation system PC RESO NO. 7112 -3- 'I i /, EXHIBIT 2C JULY 18,2015 The Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Circulation Performance Standard is amended to read as follows: CIRCULATION PERFORMANCE STANDARD Implement a comprehensive livable streets network that serves all users of the system-vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles and public transit. Maintain LOS D or better for all prioritized modes of travel, as identified in the General Plan Mobility Element, excluding LOS exempt intersections and streets approved by the City Council. ADDITIONAL FACILITY PLANNING INFORMATION Traditionally, transportation systems have been designed to achieve a level of service from the perspective of the driver, not pedestrians or bicyclists. However, the city's livable streets vision recognizes the street as a public space and ensures that the public space serves all users ofthe system (elderly, children, bicycles, pedestrians, etc.) within the urban context ofthat system (e.g. accounting for the adjacent land uses). The California Complete Streets Act (2008) requires cities in California to plan for a balanced, multi- modal transportation system that meets the needs of all travel modes. As described in the General Plan Mobility Element, the city utilizes a multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) methodology that evaluates the service levels for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users. The vehicle level of service is determined by the Highway Capacity Manual. While many transportation projects in Carlsbad have historically been vehicle capacity enhancing and traffic control focused, the livable streets strategy will explore all potential solutions to enhance the mobility for all users of the street. Many future transportation projects will involve repurposing existing right-of-way rather than acquiring and constructing new right-of-way. The city's approach to provide livable streets recognizes that optimum service levels cannot be provided for all travel modes on all streets within the city. This is due to competing interests that arise when different travel modes mix. Therefore, the General Plan Mobility Element identifies a mode- prioritization approach to ensure livable streets. This approach identifies preferred travel modes for each street typology and identifies that preferred modes should be prioritized. Non-preferred travel modes are accommodated along the street, but their service is not prioritized (i.e., a lower service level for non-prioritized modes is acceptable to ensure that the service level for prioritized modes is enhanced). 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. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH THE UPDATED GENERAL PLAN BY AMENDING THE ZONING MAP, AMENDING THE MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY FOR MIXED USE, REMOVING THE REFERENCES TO "RHNA BASE" DENSITY, AND AMENDING THE OFFICE ZONE TO CONDITIONALLY PERMIT PROFESSIONAL CARE FACILITIES. CASE NAME: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CASE NO.: ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02 Exhibit X July 18, 2015 WHEREAS, the City Council did on the __ day of ____ _..L 2015 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 City Council considered all factors relating to ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02-GENERAL PLAN UPDATE. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION 1: That Section 21.05.030 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, being the Zoning Map, and the Local Coastal Program Zoning Map are amended as shown on map marked "Exhibit X1-ZONING MAP (ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02)" dated July 18, 2015, attached hereto and made a part hereof. SECTION II: That Section 21.26.015.C (Residential Uses in the C-1 Zone) is amended to read as follows: C. Residential uses shall be constructed at a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre, per Table 2-4 of the general plan land use and community design element, subject to approval of a site development plan processed in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of this title. 1. Density and yield of residential uses shall be determined consistent with the residential density calculations and residential development restrictions in Section 21.53.230 of this title and shall be based on twenty-five percent of the developable area. Unit yield in excess of the minimum shall be subject to the finding in subsection 2 below. In no 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 case shall the calculation preclude the development of at least one dwelling unit in a mixed use development. 2. Residential uses shall be secondary and accessory to the primary commercial use of the site. Compliance with this provision shall be evaluated as part of the site development plan. SECTION Ill: That Section 21.28.015.C (Residential Uses in the C-2 Zone) is amended to read as follows: C. Residential uses shall be constructed at a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre, per Table 2-4 of the general plan land use and community design element, subject to approval of a site development plan processed in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of this title. 1. Density and yield of residential uses shall be determined consistent with the residential density calculations and residential development restrictions in Section 21.53.230 of this title and shall be based on twenty-five percent of the developable area. Unit yield in excess of the minimum shall be subject to the finding in subsection 2 below. In no case shall the calculation preclude the development of at least one dwelling unit in a mixed use development. 2. Residential uses shall be secondary and accessory to the primary commercial use of the site. Compliance with this provision shall be evaluated as part of the site development plan. SECTION IV: That Section 21.29.030 (Permitted uses) is amended by the addition of the following use: USE p CUP Ace Residential uses (subject to Section 21.29.035 of this title) X SECTION V: That Section 21.29.035 (Residential uses in the C-T Zone) is added as follows: 21.29.035 Residential uses in the C-T zone. Mixed use developments that propose residential uses in combination with commercial uses shall comply with the following requirements. A. Residential uses shall be located above the ground floor of a multi-storied commercial building with one or more of the non-residential uses permitted by Section 21.29.030 of this title located on the ground floor. B. Residential uses shall be subject to the requirements of the chapters of this title, which include but are not limited to, Chapter 21.29, Chapter 21.44, and in the case of airspace subdivisions, Chapter 21.47. C. Residential uses shall be constructed at a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre, per Table 2-4 of the general plan land use and community design element, subject -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 to approval of a site development plan processed in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of this title. 1. Density and yield of residential uses shall be determined consistent with the residential density calculations and residential development restrictions in Section 21.53.230 of this title and shall be based on twenty-five percent of the developable area. Unit yield in excess of the minimum shall be subject to the finding in subsection 2 below. In no case shall the calculation preclude the development of at least one dwelling unit in a mixed use development. 2. Residential uses shall be secondary and accessory to the primary visitor-serving commercial use of the site. Compliance with this provision shall be evaluated as part of the site development plan. SECTION VI: That Section 21.31.065.C (Residential Uses in the C-L Zone) is amended to read as follows: C. Residential uses shall be constructed at a minimum density of 15 dwelling units per acre, per Table 2-4 of the general plan land use and community design element, subject to approval of a site development plan processed in accordance with Chapter 21.06 of this title. 1. Density and yield of residential uses shall be determined consistent with the residential density calculations and residential development restrictions in Section 21.53.230 of this title and shall be based on twenty-five percent of the developable area. Unit yield in excess of the minimum shall be subject to the finding in subsection 2 below. In no case shall the calculation preclude the development of at least one dwelling unit in a mixed use development. 2. Residential uses shall be secondary and accessory to the primary commercial use of the site. Compliance with this provision shall be evaluated as part of the site development plan. SECTION VII: That Section 21.53.230(e) (Residential density calculations, residential development restrictions on open space and environmentally sensitive lands) is amended to read as follows: (e) The potential unit yield for a property, based on the minimum, growth management control point (GMCP), or maximum density of the applicable general plan land use designation, shall be subject to the following: (1) Equation used to determine unit yield: developable lot area (in acres) x density= unit yield. (A) "Density" used in this calculation is the minimum, GMCP, or maximum density of the applicable general plan land use designation; (B) The resulting unit yield shall be subject to Table A, below. (2) For purposes of this section: -3-l .! 1 2 (A) "Rounded-up" means rounding the fractional unit yield up to the next whole unit; and 3 (B) "Rounded-down" means rounding the fractional unit yield 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 down to the previous whole unit, but not less than one unit. (3) The information contained in Table A, below, shall not preclude the city from approving residential densities above the GMCP, or maximum density of the applicable and use designation, subject to adopted city policies and regulations. Density Used for Calculation MINIMUM GMCP MAXIMUM Notes: Table A Unit Yield Rounding Unit Yield Includes a fractional unit of .5 or greater fractional unit below .5 fractional unit of .5 or greater fractional unit below .5 fractional unit Provisions for Unit Yield Rounding·. ·. SHALL be rounded-up. 1 MAY be rounded-down. 2 MAY be rounded-up. 3 SHALL be rounded-down. SHALL be rounded-down. 1) Unless the project density is allowed below the minimum of the density range, pursuant to the General Plan. 2) Unit yields rounded-down pursuant to this provision that result in a density below the minimum density of the applicable land use designation shall be considered consistent with the General Plan. 3) Subject to a fractional and/or whole unit allocation from the "excess dwelling unit bank" and provided the maximum density of the applicable land use designation is not exceeded. SECTION VIII: That Table A of Section 21.27.020 (Permitted uses in the Office Zone) is proposed to be amended by the addition of the following use: Use p CUP. I ACC Professional Care Facilities (defined: Section 21.04.295) 2 I SECTION IX: That the findings of the Planning Commission in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112 shall also constitute the findings of the City Council. Ill Ill Ill -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 EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption; and the city clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and cause the full text of the ordinance or a summary of the ordinance prepared by the City Attorney to be published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within fifteen days after its adoption. (Notwithstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be effective within the Coastal Zone until LCPA 07-02 is approved by the California Coastal Commission.) INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council on the __ day of _____ , 2015, and thereafter. Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill -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 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the __ day of-----·' 2015, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: CELIA A. BREWER, City Attorney MATI HALL, Mayor ATIEST: BARBARA ENGLESON, City Clerk -6- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EXHIBIT 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7113 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE CARLSBAD CLIMATE ACTION PLAN. CASE NAME: CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ss 15-05 WHEREAS, the City Planner has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad, as part of the General Plan update, to develop a Climate Action Plan, which affects properties citywide; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for approval of a Climate Action Plan as shown on Exhibit 3A: Draft Climate Action Plan dated March 2014, incorporated by this reference and on file in the Carlsbad Planning Division; and WHEREAS, the Carlsbad Community Vision identifies environmental sustainability as a core community value, and the proposed General Plan includes goals and policies that promote environmental sustainability, including transportation demand management, energy efficiency, waste reduction, and resource conservation and recycling, and the proposed Climate Action Plan supports these community values, goals and policies by identifying how the city can reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs); and WHEREAS, state laws requires the reduction of GHGs and recommend that reduction targets be established, and the proposed Climate Action Plan identifies how Carlsbad can meet the GHG reduction targets; WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2011011004) for the proposed Climate Action Plan has been prepared and the Planning Commission has considered its contents and recommends the certification thereof; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on July 18, 2015, hold a duly noticed public hearing and received public testimony and thereafter continued said public hearing to July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, 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 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EXHIBIT 8 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7114 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN ALLOCATION FROM THE EXCESS DWELLING UNIT BANK FOR RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES DESCRIBED HEREIN AND FOR WHICH A RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CHANGE IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL PER PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7112. CASE NAME: CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE GPA 07-02 WHEREAS, the City Planner has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding a comprehensive update to the city's General Plan, which affects properties citywide; and WHEREAS, per City Council direction at its meeting of September 11, 2012 and November 5, 2013, staff utilized the Preferred Plan in the preparation of the General Plan update, and said Preferred Plan and City Council direction included proposals to increase allowed residential densities on various properties; and WHEREAS, to approve any of the proposed residential density increases requires an allocation of units from the city's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank as established in City Council Policy No. 43; and WHEREAS, City Council Policy No. 43 identifies that an allocation of excess dwelling units is an "incentive", as defined by Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Section 21.86.020.A.12 and Government Code Section 65915(k), in that it is a regulatory concession that modifies the requirements of CMC Chapter 21.90 by permitting development with more dwelling units than otherwise permitted by the growth management control point established in CMC Chapter 21.90; the allocation of excess dwelling units to a property will permit more dwelling units on a site than would otherwise be allowed by the existing underlying General Plan land use designation, which reduces land cost per dwelling unit and results in identifiable, financially sufficient and actual cost reductions to development of the property; and WHEREAS, City Council Policy No. 43 requires, in return for the incentive of receiving an allocation of excess dwelling units, that a percentage of the housing units developed on a site, which has been subject to an allocation of excess dwelling units, be provided at a cost affordable to lower income 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 1) THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE ALLOCATION OF EXCESS DWELLING UNITS PER TABLE A OF THIS RESOLUTION, SUPPORTED BY THE FINDINGS BELOW. Findings: 1. 2. 3. The location and density of the sites to be allocated excess dwelling units are compatible with existing adjacent residential neighborhoods and/or nearby existing or planned uses in that the sites: are within close proximity to neighborhood services (shopping, employment, parks, schools, etc.); are not located in areas that contain significant natural or manmade hazards; are adjacent to or near properties with similar densities. The location and density of the sites are in accordance with the applicable provisions of the General Plan and any other applicable planning document in that the allocation of excess dwelling units will enable implementation of the land use designations proposed by the General Plan update and the sites help to ensure the availability of sufficient land in all residential densities to accommodate varied housing types to meet Carlsbad's 2010-2020 Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA), as identified in the Housing Element. The proposed residential land use changes comply with the findings stated in the General Plan for projects that exceed the growth management control point for the applicable density range in that the General Plan EIR did not identify any significant impacts to public facilities resulting from buildout of the subject properties at the proposed densities; and future development at the proposed densities will be subject to the city's growth management ordinance, which requires the provision of adequate public facilities concurrent with development; and the proposed densities will not result in exceeding any quadrant dwelling limit. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad resolves that: A) The density increases provided in Table A herein are substantial and well above the density bonus limits established by Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Section 21.86.030.B, and constitute an "offset" as defined by Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Section 21.85.020. In exchange for making such offset available, the city council finds it is appropriate to require, in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Section 21.85.100, any residential development (rental or for-sale) on the properties identified in Table A of this resolution to enter into an affordable housing agreement with the City of Carlsbad to provide a minimum of 20 percent of the total housing units on the site of the residential development as affordable to lower income households at 80% or below the San Diego County Area Median Income. At the sole discretion of the City of Carlsbad and following completion of an alternate public benefit analysis, any residential development (rental or for-sale) on the properties identified in Table A of this resolution may be permitted to produce affordable housing units on the site of the residential development that meet one of the following minimum requirements as an alternative to satisfy the lower income affordable housing requirement set forth above: 1. A minimum of 15 percent of the total projects housing units shall be affordable to lower income households at 80% or below the San Diego County Area Median Income and an additional10 percent shall be affordable to moderate income households at 100% or below of the San Diego County Area Median Income; or PC RESO NO. 7114 -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. A minimum of 15 percent of the total project housing units shall be affordable to very low income households at 50% or below the San Diego County Area Median Income. PC RESO NO. 7114 -4- 1 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of 2 the City of Carlsbad, California, held on _____ , 2015 by the following vote, to wit: 3 4 AYES: 5 NOES: 6 ABSENT: 7 ABSTAIN: 8 9 10 11 VICTORIA SCULLY, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 12 13 ATIEST: 14 15 DON NEU 16 City Planner 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 7111 -5- Errata E•hlbit B ~t'Yisoons to the Draft Goneral Plan and Draft Cllmate Action P1an Page2 Revise page 4-14 or Chapter 4 or the Final Envir~>nmental Impact Report to revise footnote 2 of Table 2 ·3 of the General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element. as highlighted below (note: the changes shown below that are not highlighted are proposed c hang es currently reflected In the Final Environmental Impact Report): P age 2-18 TABLE 2-3: D EN SITY AND INTENSITY STANDARDS L.lnd Use Oeslgnotlon Lobel RM identlal R-1.5 Resodenual R·l.5 R-4 Resldenu.l ll-4 R-8 Re>odenual R-8 R·l S Res1dential R-15 1\-23 1\e•identlol R·U R~30 Re~tdenu;a l R-30 Non·Re•identlal and Mixed Use Local Shopping Center L Gen~nl Commerclilt GC llep>NI Commen:,.l fl ViSn.or Commerc.al "'"' "'''"'~ v Office 0 PIMM·d lnduttnal PI 1\e>idonual Density P.anxe (Mtnlmum 1 To M••lmum Owelhn& UNo/Ac,) 0 to IS 010 .. ~to 8 8 to 15 IS to 23 23 to 30 15-)01 15-301 I S··30> ll:lQ.."- Distnct 1-4 : 28-lS Dimtct 5-9 : 18-2 3 Growth MJfU&tmf.l'lt Con~ Pomt Ot!nsity1 (Dwellln& Unoul...,..) u 6 11.5 19 15 Resldentlal Dcn"IJI Used In Tho Housln& E'tment1 (Owtlllna Unlu/Acre) 3.2 1 8 IS 23 15 15 IS DIStriCt 1-4: 28 Olwkt 5·9: 18 Maximum Permitted Far ~ O..St' 0..5" OS! 1.2' 0.6 0.5 I Retk:lt'fltlal Ot¥t:f0p11'1tnl Jhatl I'M)l be IPPf"'\1eod above \hiJ clentrty. excerx a.s prowkSed ror bt Polley l·P 8 or dlb etement. ~ StcUon 1.7 or tNi ~tmtnt for more iflfot'm;Jtlon on Growth Man.J~tnt. l ptt,u.t CtfrC tp Hpydps filcmem Appcnd•x B ..,hl<b tptgfitJ a b!rhct miOtmMm drtnfl'r [« todt"d.eat arnpmla. Residtndll ~ ~· '* be IPPf~ed Wow tM den~ CX' the dr::rng;c W:CifiMJD the Hpy--......... '"'. bJlil!lsl, except ., """'dod for by Polq 2-¥ J d tho> dom~nt. ) Combined -Mid...,., ... ....,_,. fAR 4 Non·rt:SfcSttltiat bfllr No s~~te c~ retJdetlual and nonoff'kSrndlt FAR 'IPthtlf e of Ff!.di!nti.eol uJNw ~t"-1111 ,.., .. !flY" f*A far t\Dfl etl.t*tdtl tet1t GeU. S RcJidcntliJl ct«cJ!Inr, 1rp allgwcd "1 '££9041ry YJ.t ac a m tatmym dc:nJ!rt gt I$ dWdl ln r uolu DC!' am (ba1cd on l5 ptnC'flt o( devclooabfr uqagcl. it Btddffl(]al dwdllnp mg bt JIIO'dcd )'a tt:condacy U\1!; 41 a mlmmum dcnsuy gf !$ ¢«t!liM uo!u P« aaet IIN;tf:d on 1$ ptrsrnt rJ dcyrloo;tbtf V(fi'ftt), 1ublttt ro lJX'NDJi g{ f >PC(lfiC pbn rftlU« plio or she dmtdppn\fOC plan IbN dqngmtpto lh£ edm;ac)' YIC oftbt !'J(OPM1'y h; ys\lto(•)ttY!Ot 11.'1 Errata Ex~ib i t 8 Revi sion s to the Draft Gener al Plan and Drafl Climate Actio n Plan Page 3 Revise page 4·22 of Chapter 4 or the Final Environmental Impact Report to add a revision the "Sunny Creek Commerqal " description i n Sectron 2.7 of the General Plan land Use and Community Design Element, as highlighted below (note: the changes shown below that a re not h ighlighted are proposed changes currentlY reflected In the Final Envi ronmental impact Report): Page 2·33 Plan 'allliAe Real Westfield Commercial Area The principal opportunity In t hi s area is the Plaza CamiAa ReaiWestfleld mall. a 90-acre enclosed regiona l shopping mall, ~urrounded by su rface parking lots owned by the city. The mall I~ 9YI9atell aA9 lla5 peteAtial far being redeveloped !2014\m~ as an exciting, contemporary pedestrian -oriented destination. The General Plan maintains a Regional Commerci al designati on, which waYI9 require~ regionally oriented retail uses , but~ also perm i t~ hous ing In a mixed· use setting. East of El 'aFAiAa Real-and west of the mall are locally-serving shopping centers and a cluster o f offices; these are anticipated to remain In their present use, with potential upgrading and reinvestment by property owners. S'•nny Creel<: Commercial This Is a strategically located site at the northwest corner of El Camino Real and the future extension ol College Boulevard , consisting of a vacant site designated for a m1x of resi<Jentlal ana commerclaily..!IW. dl!&i&Aate~ prspeRy ffeRtiRB eA tRe stree& tnleFJie&tisR witR I.IRderdtvel&petl Fe&iGi eAii:ally de&i&Aattd pr:epeFties aEijaeeRt te tl:le eerRmerelat fJFepewls AeFtA aAd west bawn8arles ~ The General Plan envJ.sions this area with a neighborhood-oriented commercial center designed to be pedestrian-oriented to surrou nding residential uses. The commercia l uses would serve a number of existing and future residential developments In the area, as well as office uses in the employment core to the south. With a significant population within wa lking distance of this site, co nnectivity and pedestrian orlentatlon will facilitate easy access from the surroundings. 130 Errata uh>bl t 8 ReV ISions to the Draft Genera l Plan and Draft CRmal e Action Pi on Pase4 Rev.~ page 4·29 of Chapter 4 or the Anal Environmental Impact Report to revise the "Sunny Creek Commercial" policy I n the General Pian Land Use and Community Design Element, as hlghlishted below (note: the changes shown below that are not highlighted are proposed changes currently reflected in the Final Environmental Impact Report): Sunny Creek Commercial (See Fig ure 2·2) 2·P.8§a Foster development of this site as a m~Metl-usemlx of multi-family residential dwellings and a local neighborhood-serving s hopping center, •dilh a lo!XII she~piRg eeRier alene ~I '""miRe Real that provides amenilie6 dally goods and servkes for the surrounding neighborhoods, ·•·AI611 inelijde H+kleAtial uses at a deRs•t;' of 8 te 15 d\<'elliA! YAits per aeFe 10 the no Ft .. aAit ,.est of t:Re s~oppiRg eenter. a The location of commercial and residential uses(land use designat ions shall be determined through reyiew and aooroval ol a site development plan. b . The area ofland utilized for a local shoppi ng center ,shall be a minimum of 8 acres In size. c. A total oi lS?] IS dwelling units hay!!. been allocated to the site lor growth manasement purPOSes (based on 9.6 acres developed at •Be R ~i fSFEI\nAh M•"'''"''"' ''"'"' PaiAl cleA&it•t ef the minimum density oB:I!l2 dwelling units per acre. pursuant to Houslns Element Apoondlx 8). li._Resldentlal and commercial uses should be Integrated In a walkable setting, Revise page 4·34 of Chapter 4 or the Final Environmental Impact Report to add a revision to policy 3 ·P.4 In the General Plan Mobility Element, as highlighted be low (note: the c hanges shown below that are not hlghllghted are proposed changes currently reflected In the Final Environmenrallmpact Report): Pase 3·27 3.P.4 Implement the city's MMlOS methodology by evaluatmg level of serv><:l! (lOS) for fiFier~tizecl all gualllled street.s and all mod6 conststeot wrth the Growth Management Plan. Qualified streets are those having exress caoacitv as determined by the Qtv Council after rectMnca reoor1 and recommendation from the qty !(affic EnslnE'fC. MaiAtaiAl-05 0 er b@tcer OAIY ler 1~1 fJflartUIIII MOd@s sf tFavel &J•t street ty,ales·t as awtiiAeB 1A Table :a 1 a Ad Figwtre a 1, 3·P.5 Req uire developers to construct or pay their fair share toward improvements lor all travel modes consistent with this Mobility Element , the Growth Management Plan, and specific Impacts associated with t~eir development. 3·P.6 Reaulre developers of pro!ects, which are determined to have a significant Impact o n Caltrans freeway !acllitles (t-5 and SR·78l, to enter lnrq a traf!k mitigation agreement with Caltrans for Implementation of the necessary improvemems and the payment or fair-share fees to be determined bv Caltrans bastd on the I ncrease in freeway traffic directly attributable ro the prqoosed project. l·P.? Encourage Caltrans to Identify and construct neassary i mprovements to i mprovr service levels on Interstate-S and State Route 78, l~l Errata Exhibit B Revisions to the Draft Genera l Plan and Draft Climate Action Plan Page 5 Revise page 4-35 of Chapter 4 or the Fina l Environmental impact Report to add a revision to policy 3-P.9, add two new policies, and llelete policy 3-P.13 In the General Plar1 Mobility Element, as hlghlightell below I note: the changes shown below that are not highlighted are proposed changes currently reflected In the Final Environmental I mpact Report): Page3·28 3-P.eu Require new development that adds traffic to LOS-exempt locations (consiste nt with 3-P .7) to implement; a. ~Iransportation demand management strategies that reduce the reliance o!1-IM slog le- occuoancy automobile1 and assist in achieving the city's livable streets vision. b. Transportation system management strategies that improve traffic signal coordination and Improve transit service. 3-P.13 Use oubllc outreach to edUcate and eocou@ge alternative modes of travel. and inform the community about the benefits of partiCipation in new orograms. approaches and SJtategies that support Mobilitv Element goals and policfes, 3·P.l4 Require perfonnance measures tied to transportation facllit1es and services to comoly with the Climate Action Plan and other state regulatloqs and policies. Page 3·29 ~ P.ll ~valwate iFApjemeAtiAg a read diet to tR(ee laAes or fe\u er far e.Hs&-iRg fewr lane streets ewrre~t..,. r:arFYh•g er prlijeete~ to earP/ ~§,QOQ average elafly traf4i& voi-.Ftu?s er les§ lA eMer te f:U&Mate liikiRth wall dAg , safer street &rosslRSS; an~ attraGtive streetseapes. Revise page 4 ·50 of Chapter 4 or the Final Environmental Impact Report to add a policy to the General Plan Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element , as highlighted below (note: the changes shown below that are not highlighted are proposed changes currently reflected in the Final Envi ronmental Impact Report): Page 4-49 4·P.8 Utlllze the criteria developed by the Proposition COpen Space and Trails Ad Hoc Otizens Advlso~ Committee (approved by Qty Coync!l Resolvt!on No. 2006·294. 10/10/06) to evaluate potential future open space propertv acquisitions by the city . 1?2- Errata Exhibi t B Revisi ons to the Draft General Plan and Draft Climate Action Plan Page 5 Rev ise page 4·65 of Chapter 4 or the Fina l Env ironmental Impact Report to revise policies 9 ·P.l and 9-P .7 of the General Plan Sustainablflty Element, as highlighted be low (note: the changes shown below that a re not highllghted are proposed changes curre ntly reflected I n the Final Environmental i mpact Report): Page 9 ·2 2 9·P.l ~Enforce the Cli111ate Action Plan as the city's strategy pelley aREI a ~ieR gwhle ~o A!dwee Garlsbad's £9R~to mitigate the significant effects of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change. Page 9 ·23 9·P.7 Investigate the feasibility or developing full-functioning groundwater and sub-groundwater systems in the Sa n luis Rey River Miss ion Groundwater Basin and Cannon Well Fie ld within or near Rancho Carlsbad in order to reduce the city's reliance on Imported water. Revise page 5·37 of Chapter 5 or the Final Environmental Impact Report to revise the Climate Action Plan, as highlighted below (note: the changes shown below that are not highlighted are proposed cha nges curr ently reflec t ed in the Fina l Envi r onmental Impact Report): Fgr d!scretJonarv pro !egs $eekjng to use CEQA slrearnljnlog proyJsioos . ro an eoylronmenta! document thg cjty m;t¥$hal! refer tg.tbe regu jred measures jn this CAp i$ maodatprv cgnditioos of aoproyal or as mjtigat!og . Ibis wj !l enable oro jects to bgnefiUrom CEOA stg:amlinln.g prgvis!ons ythlle ep$urjpg that the cJty can achjeye the reductlon target s oytliped In thi s plan. I~ ERRATA E)(HIBIT C PLANN ING COMMISSIO N RESOLUTIO N N O. 7112 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLA NNIN G COMMISS ION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CAUFOR NI A1 RECOMMEND IN G APPROVAL OF A GE NE RAL PLAN AM EN DM ENT TO CO M PREHE NSIVEL V UPDATE THE GENERAl PLA N, AND ASSOC IATED AME NDMENTS TO THE ZO NING ORDINA NCE, ZO NI NG MAP, LOCAL COASTA L PROGRAM AN D CITYWIDE FAClliTIES AN D IM PROVE M ENTS PLAN TO ENSURE CO NSIST EN CY WITH THE U PDATED GEN ERAL PLAN . CASE NAME : GENERAL PlAN UPDATE CASE NO.: GPA 07·02/ZCA 07·01/ZC 15·02/LCPA 07·02/SS 15.{)6 WHEREAS, Cit¥ af Carlsl•aiiCity Planner has liled a verified application With t he City of Carlsba d regarding a comprehensive update to the city's General Plan, Inclu d ing an update to t he Ho using Eleme nt for t he 20 13 to 2021 planning period, and the development of a Cli ma te Act ion Plan f'project"), which affect properties <:Jtywide; and WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Section 6S350 et. seq ., Sect ion 21.52.0 20 and Section 21.90.090 of the Carl.sba d Municipal Code, and Pub li c Resou rces Code Section 30S14 and Section 13SS1 o f the California Code of Regulations Title 14 , Division 5.5, sai d ver1fied application constitutes a request for a General Pla n Amendment, Zoning Ordinance Ame ndment, Local Coasta l Program Amendment a nd Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment, as shown on Exhibit 2A: Draft Carl sbad General Plan (GPA 07·02) dat ed February 2014, on file I n t he Planning Division a nd incorporated by this reference; Exhi bit 28: Gen er al Plan Update -Land Use Map (GPA 07.{)2/LCPA 07- 02) dat ed Ju ly 18, 2015, attached hereto; and Exhibit 2C : General Plan Updat e-Citywid e Facilities And Improvem en ts Plan Amendment (55 15·06) d at ed July 18, 2015, attach ed hereto ; a ll of w hich are o n fil e in the Carlsbad Planning Division ; ana W HER EAS, the proposed Zon i ng Map and Zoning Ordinance Amendm ents are set forth and attached hereto in the d raft Oty Council Ordinance, E~lli blt ''X" dated , July 18, 2015; and W HE REAS, the City Co u ncil accepted the Carl sbad Community VIsion In January 2010 and achievement of sa id visio n Is supported by t he General Pla n Am endmen t, Zoning Ordinance Am endment, Zone Change, local Coasta l Program Ame ndment, and Ci tywide Facilities and I mprovements Pla11 Amendment: and l?h Report dated July 18, 2015 ldentlfles how bulldout of the updated General Plan relates to the CF IP pubfic Facility performance s tandards. The project Is consistent with the adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for t he McClellan · Palomar Air port (ALUCP ), dated October 2004, in that the goals, policies and proposed l•nd uses of the updated General Plan are consistent with the ALUCP, as determined by the San Diego Airport land Use Commission on June 5, 2014, That tl•e proposed Zoning Map and Zo ning Ordinance Regu lations Amendmen t are consistent wit h the goals and policies of the variou s elements or the General Plan and will provlde consistency between the General Plan and Zoni ng. in that the proposed zone tlasslflcatlons ensure consistency whh and will Implement the land use designations on the proposed land Use Map and the proposed tonin g regulations amendment will ensure consistency with General Plan policies related to resi dential density and residential uses In commercial areas. That the proposed Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance Regulations Amendment are consistent with t he public convenience, ne<esslty, and general welfare, and are consistent with sound planning princ.iples In that the p roposed General Plan land use deslsnations and residential policies, and the proposed Im plementing zoning regulations and dasslflcatlons are compatible and ensure that the soals and policies of the General Plan can be adequately Implemented to achieve the community's vision. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amend ment meets the requirements of, and is In conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of t he Coastal Act and all applicab le policies of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program not being amended by this amend ment, In that the amendments ensure c onsistency with the Carlsbad General Plan and Zon ing Ordinance and do not conflict with any coastal zone regulations or policies with which future development must comply. That the proposed amendment to the Carlsbad local Coastal Program Is required to bring It Into consistency w ith t he General Pla n and Zoning Ordinance. Tha t the proposed amendment t o the Citywide Fad!ilies and Improvements Plan Is required t o bring it into consistency with the General Plan Mobility Elemen t. PC RESO NO . 7112 -4· 126 1 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of 2 the City of Carlsbad, California, held on ____ __, 2015 by the following vote, to wit: 3 4 AYES : 5 NOES: 6 ABSENT : 7 ABSTAIN : 8 9 10 11 VICTORIA SCULLY, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 12 ATIEST: 14 15 OONNEU 16 City Planner 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO . 7112 ·5· l?fl ERRATA EXHIBIT F PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7113 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE CARLSBAD CLIMATE ACTION PLAN. CASE NAME: CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE ss 15-05 WHEREAS, the Cit'{ ef Carlsi:JaeiCity Planner has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad, as part of the General Plan update, to develop a Climate Action Plan, which affects properties citywide; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for approval of a Climate Action Plan as shown on Exhibit 3A: Draft Climate Action Plan dated March 2014, incorporated by this reference and on file in the Carlsbad Planning Division; and WHEREAS, the Carlsbad Community Vision identifies environmental sustainability as a core community value, and the proposed General Plan includes goals and policies that promote environmental sustainability, including transportation demand management, energy efficiency, waste reduction, and resource conservation and recycling, and the proposed Climate Action Plan supports these community values, goals and policies by identifying how the city can reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs); and WHEREAS, state laws requires the reduction of GHGs and recommend that reduction targets be established, and the proposed Climate Action Plan identifies how Carlsbad can meet the GHG reduction targets; WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, a Final Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2011011004) relative tofor the proposed Climate Action Plan has been prepared and the Planning Commission has considered its contents and recommend~ea the certification thereof; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on July 18, 2015, hold a duly noticed public hearing and received public testimony and thereafter continued said public hearing to July 22, 23 and 24, 2015" WAiCA was COAtiAI:Iee to , 2.015, as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 1 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of 2 the City of Carlsbad, California, held on _____ , 2015 by the following vote, to wit: 3 4 AYES: 5 NOES: 6 ABSENT: 7 ABSTAIN: 8 9 10 11 Victoria Scully, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 12 13 ATIEST: 14 15 DON NEU 16 City Planner 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PC RESO NO. 7113 -3-I I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 eb__A minimum of 15 percent of the total project housing units shall be affordable to very low income households at 50% or below the San Diego County Area Median Income. PC RESO NO. 7114 -4- Exhibit 10 SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN On July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, the Planning Commission discussed and voted on the proposed General Plan update and Climate Action Plan. Below is a summary of the commission's actions ·and recommendations for each component of the project. TABLE 1-SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN DRAFT GENERAL PLAN ELEMENT VOTE (yes-no) 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 2 lntrod uction 7-0 Approve, as recommended by staff Approve, as recommended by staff with revisions: • Addition of footnote to describe location of the open space (OS) Overall Element 7-0 designation on beachfront properties in Terra mar • Revise text description and policy related to the Sunny Creek Commercial site Land Use/Zone Map Designation Changes 3 Robertson Ranch PA 22 4-3 Revise staff recommended designation from: (revise staff recommended R-30) • R-30 to R-23 (20 du/acre min. density) Land Use and Sunny Creek Commercial 4-3 Revise staff recommended designation from: Community (revise staff recommended R-23) • R-23 to R-15 (12 du/ac min. density) Design Marja Residential Approve the staff supported designation: 7-0 (approve R-15) • R-15 (12 du/ac min. density) 925 Buena Place 5-2 Approve, as recommended by staff (change zone to R-1) (Category 2 zone change3 ) Encina Power Plant (change land use to VC/OS/P and zone to CT/OS/PU; per staff 6-04 Approve, as recommended by staff recommendation) All other Category 1 and Category 2 land use/ zone map changes3 7-0 Approve, as recommended by staff Previous Rancho Santa Fe Road right-of-way 7-0 Approve, as recommended by the Planning Commission (designate as OS) 1 For more information regarding individual commissioner comments during commission discussion on the project, please see Planning Commission minutes for the July 22, 23 and 24 commission meeting (Exhibit 15 of this City Council agenda bill). 2 For more information about the Planning Commission's recommended revisions summarized in this table, see the Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan" (Exhibit 9 to this City Council agenda bill). 3 See Attachment 8 of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated July 18, 2015 {previously distributed to the City Council) 4 Commissioner Siekmann recused herself from the vote on this item Exhibit 10 SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN Page 2 TABLE 1-SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN DRAFT GENERAL PLAN, CONTINUED ELEMENT VOTE (yes-no) 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 2 Approve, as recommended by staff with revisions: • Revise draft Policy 3-P.4 to clarify MMLOS applies to all"qualified streets", as defined, consistent with the Growth Management Plan • Revise draft Policy 3-P.9 to require new development impacting LOS-exempt streets to implement transportation system management improvements, as well as transportation demand management (TOM) measures; clarify TOM is intended to reduce reliance on single-occupant vehicle travel • Delete draft Policy 3-P.ll regarding road diets Mobility 5-2 • Add a new policy to educate about and encourage use of alternative travel modes • Add a new policy to require performance measures tied to transportation facilities to comply with the city's climate action plan and state laws and policies Note: the two "no" votes on this element were made by commissioners who wanted to continue working with staff in an effort to further revise the Mobility Element to resolve concerns that had been raised during commission discussion.1 See Exhibit 12 of this agenda bill for a description of staff's recommendations to address the commission's concerns on the Mobility Element. Approve, as recommended by staff with revisions: Open Space, Conservation and Recreation 7-0 • Add a new policy to require use of evaluation criteria developed by Prop COpen Space committee when considering acquiring properties for open space Approve, as recommended by staff • Include a recommendation that the City Council consider developing a noise abatement Noise 6-1 and control ordinance to establish noise level limits and standards for land uses throughout the city (this recommendation is not a recommendation to revise the draft Noise Element; the one "no" vote was an objection to development of a noise ordinance, not an objection to the Noise Element). 1 For more information regarding individual commissioner comments during commission discussion on the proJect, please see Planning Commission minutes for the July 22, 23 and 24 commission meeting (Exhibit 14 of this City Council agenda bill). 2 For more information about the Planning Commission's recommended revisions summarized in this table, see the Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 2015 and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan" (Exhibit 9 to this City Council agenda bill). Exhibit 10 SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND DRAFT CLIMATE ACTION PLAN Page4 TABLE 1-SUMMARY OF PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN OTHER PROJECT COMPONENTS PROJECT COMPONENT VOTE (yes-no) 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 2 Approve, as recommended by staff with revisions: Climate Action Plan • Minor text changes to clarify CAP compliance is required 7-0 of new development that would have significant GHG impacts Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, and Local Coastal Program Amendments 7-0 Approve, as recommended by staff Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment 7-0 Approve, as recommended by staff Approve, per Planning Commission Resolution No. 7114 Allocate excess units to sites identified in Note: the commission's recommended allocation of excess Planning Commission Resolution No. 7114 7-0 units does not exceed the number of excess units currently Allocation from the available in the excess unit bank and does not utilize any Excess Dwelling Unit Bank excess units generated by the Category 2 land use changes. 3 (City Council Policy 43) Impose a 20% affordable housing requirement on those sites that receive an S-2 Approve, per staff recommendation and Planning Commission allocation of excess units per Planning Resolution No. 7114 Commission Resolution No. 7114 Final Environmental Impact Report (including Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and 7-0 Certify, as recommended by staff a Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program 1 For more information regarding individual commissioner comments during commission discussion on the project, please see Planning Commission minutes for the July 22, 23 and 24 commission meeting (Exhibit 14 of this City Council agenda bill). 2 For more information about the Planning Commission's recommended revisions summarized in this table, see the Memorandum to the Planning Commission dated July 24, 201S and titled "Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan" (Exhibit 9 to this City Council agenda bill). 3 See Attachment 8 of the Staff Report to the Planning Commission dated July 18, 201S (previously distributed to the City Council) EXHIBIT 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS-CATEGORY 1 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CHANGES Please refer to Attachment 8 of the Report to the Planning Commission dated July 18, 2015 (referred to as "Attachment 8" hereafter). Attachment 8 provides a description and analysis of the land use changes (Category 1 and Category 2) proposed as part of the General Plan update; and as described in Attachment 8, the Category 11and use changes are those that were evaluated pursuant to the preferred land use plan. The Category 1 land use changes also represent the primary housing sites needed to satisfy Housing Element objectives. As stated in Attachment 8, the city cannot approve all of the Category 1 residential land use changes evaluated as part of the General Plan update due to two reasons: 1. Northeast quadrant Growth Management dwelling unit limit: the residential land use changes evaluated in the northeast quadrant would exceed the quadrant's dwelling unit limit if all were approved (see Attachment 8 for more information). 2. Excess Dwelling Unit Bank (EDUB): the number of excess dwelling units currently available in the EDUB (outside the Village= 891 excess units) is not sufficient to approve all of the evaluated residential land use changes (2,188 excess units needed outside the Village). See Attachment 8 for more information. A. Planning Commission recommendations The Planning Commission recommends revisions to the residential land use changes evaluated as part of the General Plan update; the commission's recommendations will ensure that: a) the Growth Management dwelling unit limit is not exceeded in any quadrant, including the northeast quadrant (see Table 11-1), b) the number of excess units needed to approve the land use changes does not exceed the current number of excess units available in the EDUB (see Table 11-2), and c) there are a sufficient number of sites designated at appropriate densities to accommodate the city's regional housing needs assessment (RHNA) (see Table 11-3). See Attachment 6 of the Report to the Planning Commission dated July 18, 2015 for more information regarding the city's RHNA. Table 11-1-Growth Management Dwelling Limits Quadrant Growth Management Dwelling Existing plus Estimated Future Dwellings with all Residential Recommended Residential Land Use Unit Limit Land Use Changes Recommended by the Planning Commission Changes Will Result In: Northwest 15,370 15,113 257 units fewer than the quadrant limit1 Northeast 9,042 8,939 103 units fewer than the quadrant limit Southwest 12,859 11,109 1,750 units fewer than the quadrant limit Southeast 17,328 16,667 661 units fewer than the quadrant limit CITYWIDE 54,599 51,828 2,771 units fewer than the citywide limit . . 1 Reflects the remaining residential capacity in the northwest quadrant outs1de the Village. Capac1ty for an add1t1onal 768 dwellmgs IS reserved for the Village area . PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS-CATEGORY 1 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CHANGES Page 2 Exhibit 11 Table 11-2-Planning Commission Recommendations on Category 1 Residential Land Use Changes (reflects revisions to the evaluated land use changes) Recommended Land Use and Zone Changes Current Recommended Quadrant Site Name From (Existing) To (Recommended) Planned Planned Units Needed Future from EDUB3 Land Use Zone Land Use Zone Units1 Future Units2 Basin BJ RLM/OS RMHP R-30/0S RDM/OS 14 108 94 Oaks North Lot 1 PI PM ~f.! @MPM 0 ±£Q ±£Q Raceway Lots 12-15 PI PM ~f.! @MPM 0 ~Q ~Q R 30/0S R-23/0S Robertson Ranch PA22 0/0S PC (20 duLac. min.) PC 0 H-698 H-698 Northeast R 23 (ll.S8 ac.) b (6.02 aE.) ,,.;go S!,J A'liHeEl !;Se Sunny Creek Commercial L CL R-15 (9.6 ac., 12 duLac. min.) CL/RDM 0 8Gll5 8G115 L (8 ac. min.) Sunny Creek (RLM6) RLM LC ~R-4 @MR1 32 ±±932 8-7-Q Sunny Creek (RLM8) RLM/OS LC ~R-4LOS RQMlO!> R1L0S 17 ~17 4&Q Northwest Marja Residential RLM RA-10,000 R-15 (12 duLac. min.) ROM 35 ;!,.2.g135 94100 Southeast La Costa Town Square 0 0 R-23 PC 0 120 120 Aviara Farms UA EA R-30 ROM 0 224 224 RQMlC2/PU EWA Pl/0 PM/0 R 30/GC/P Pl/0 0 ~Q ~Q PMLO RQM/0!> Southwest Palomar Oaks West PI/OS PM ~P!LOS PM LOS 0 ;!.G9-Q ;!.G9-Q Ponto Residential UA PC ~R-23 PC 0 ±64124 ±64124 Ponto Mixed Use 4 UA PC GC (mixed use) PC 0 12 12 Ponto Mixed Use 4 RMH RDM GC C-2 14 0 -14 TOTAL 112 B00985 ~873 CURRENT EDUB BALANCE OUTSIDE THE VILLAGE 891 REMAINING EDUB BALANCE AFTER WITHDRAWALS FOR TIER A LAND USE CHANGES ~~~';I tSJ~II·.· H EDUB DEPOSIT AFTER APPROVAL OF CATEGORY 2 SITES OUTSIDE COASTAL ZONE (SEE ATTACHMENT 8) 312 EDUB BALANCE AFTER APPROVAL OF CATEGORY 2 SITES OUTSIDE COASTAL ZONE (SEE ATTACHMENT 8) !,,rt· . ~~911' ;~ 1. Number of res1dent1al un1ts planned by the current General Plan (current Growth Management Control Pomt dens1ty x developable acreage). Future un~ts exclude ex1stmg bUilt un~ts. 2. Number of residential units estimated based on Planning Commission recommendations (recommended Growth Management Control Point density (or min. density, whichever is higher) x developable acreage). Future units exclude existing built units. 3. Difference between the current and recommended future planned units. 4. Ponto Mixed Use consists of two areas to be designated General Commercial (GC), which allows mixed use. One area (currently designated UA) is part of the Housing Element sites inventory and residential units are included as part of the city's total planned future units. The second area (currently designated RMH) is not part of the Housing Element sites inventory and, like other GC designated sites in the city, no residential units are included in the planned future units; any future proposal to construct residential units on commercially designated sites will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS-CATEGORY 1 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE CHANGES Page 3 Exhibit 11 Table 11-2 reflects the Planning Commission's recommendation to require a minimum of 20 dwelling units/acre for "Robertson Ranch PA 22" and a minimum of 12 dwelling units/acre for "Sunny Creek Commercial" and "Marja Residential." The reason for these minimum densities is to ensure that the city can include the sites in the Housing Element inventory of housing sites that can accommodate lower and moderate income housing. For a site to be included in the inventory as a site that can accommodate housing affordable to low or moderate income households, the site must be designated at a minimum density of 20 dwelling units/acre (for low income housing) or a minimum of 12 dwelling units/acre (for moderate income housing). Table 11-3 includes the Planning Commission's recommended minimum densities for the residential land use changes identified in Table 11-2. Table 11-3-Planning Commission Recommended Adequacy of Sites in Meeting RHNA, by Household lncome 1 Site Type Very Low Low Moderate Above Total Moderate Units constructed/approved in development projects 46 123 167 935 1,271 Units that can be accommodated on vacant land 114 789 837 1,622 3,362 Units that can be accommodated on underutilized land 1,102 140 264 375 1,881 Total 1,262 1,052 1,268 2,932 6,491 RHNA 912 693 1,062 2,332 4,999 Surplus 350 359 206 600 1,515 1 The Housing Element sites inventory will be updated to reflect the residential land use designation changes approved as part of the draft General Plan. Exhibit 12 STAFF PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE MOBILITY ELEMENT TO ADDRESS PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERNS On July 22, 23 and 24, 2015, the Planning Commission discussed and voted on the proposed General Plan update and Climate Action Plan. The commission voted to recommend approval of the Draft Mobility Element with revisions (see Section Ill, below). During the commission's discussion on the Draft Mobility Element, some commissioners expressed concerns about certain aspects ofthe element. Below is a summary of the primary concerns expressed and staff's proposal to address those concerns. See the minutes from the July 22"d and July 241h Planning Commission meetings (Exhibit 15) for more information regarding the commission's discussion on the Draft Mobility Element. I. Summary of the primary Planning Commission concerns on the Mobility Element TABLE 1.1-PRIMARY PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERNS REF. TOPIC/ISSUE CONCERN Draft Mobility Element Table 3-1 identifies the vehicle Some commissioners expressed a concern that if the city "prioritized" pedestrian A as a "non-prioritized mode" on some streets and and bicycle modes, but not the vehicle, then the vehicle level of service would be identifies pedestrian and bicycles as "prioritized reduced to an unacceptable level; this concern was particularly expressed in modes" on those same streets regard to "connector" streets such as Poinsettia Lane. Draft Mobility Element Table 3-1 categorizes the travel Some commissioners expressed that they did not like or did not understand the B meaning of the terms "prioritized" and "non-prioritized"; that the terms imply modes as either "prioritized" or "non-prioritized" greater importance of one mode over another. c Draft Mobility ElementTable 3-1 and Figure 3-1 Some commissioners expressed that the street title did not make sense in identifies a street typology titled "Employment Street" locations where the street was not providing access to employment. Draft Mobility Element policy 3-P.11 directs the city to Some commissioners expressed concern that staff would implement road diets D and significantly impact vehicle levels of service; this was particularly concerning evaluate implementing road diets on certain streets in combination with the issue summarized in row A, above. Draft Mobility Element policies 3-P.7 and 3-P.S allow Some commissioners expressed concern that the exemption from the vehicle LOS E the city, under specified circumstances, to exempt standard meant the city would be giving up and would not do anything else to certain intersections and street segments from the improve vehicle travel levels of service. minimum level of service standard for vehicles. 1 Exhibit 12 II. Staff proposal to address Planning Commission concerns A. CONNECTOR STREETS AND VEHICLE LEVEL OF SERVICE TABLE 11.1-PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERN "A" REF. TOPIC/ISSUE CONCERN Draft Mobility Element Table 3-1 identifies the Some commissioners expressed a concern that if the city "prioritized" A vehicle as a "non-prioritized mode" on some pedestrian and bicycle modes, but not the vehicle, then the vehicle level of streets and identifies pedestrian and bicycles as service would be reduced to an unacceptable level; this concern was "prioritized modes" on those same streets particularly expressed in regard to "connector" streets such as Poinsettia Lane. 1. Background and staff proposal The terms "prioritized" and "non-prioritized" in the Draft Mobility Element are intended to reflect the types of street improvements that will be prioritized in the future; a prioritization of future investments for street improvements to create a balanced mobility system that meets the mobility needs of persons of all ages and abilities. Today, most of the city's streets are built and adequately accommodate the vehicle travel mode and are projected to continue to do so in the future. It is not the intent of the Draft Mobility Element to degrade vehicle levels of service by prioritizing improvements for the pedestrian and bicycle modes of travel. That being said, the Draft Mobility Element could be revised to require that the vehicle mode of travel be provided at or above the city's minimum standard (LOS D) on the primary east-west connector streets (in addition to the arterial streets). To do this, staff recommends the following: 2 • Divide the "connector street" typology into two categories (see Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1 in attached Exhibit 12A), as follows: TABLE 11.2-STAFF PROPOSED CONNECTOR STREETS Travel modes Connector Description to be Street Title accommodated on the street These streets primarily connect arterial streets, and provide • Vehicle access to adjacent neighborhoods. Pedestrian • Arterial connector streets are recommended to include: • Bicycle Arterial • Carlsbad Village Drive (east of Interstate 5) Connector • Poinsettia Lane (east of Aviara Parkway) • Bus Streets • Aviara Parkway • Alga Rd See attached Exhibit 12A to view these revisions depicted in Draft Mobility Element Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1. These streets primarily connect people to neighborhoods and • Vehicle generally carry lower average vehicle trips than the "arterial connector streets" described above. • Pedestrian Neighborhood connector streets are recommended to include: • Bicycle Neighborhood • Tamarack Ave • Bus Connector Avenida Encinas • Streets Paseo Del Norte • • El Fuerte St • La Costa Ave (east of El Camino Real) • Calle Barcelona • Other streets shown on Figure 3-1 in attached Exhibit 12A Exhibit 12 Travel modes Travel modes that are that must meet not subject to a min. a min. LOS D LOS standard • Vehicle • Bus • Pedestrian • Bicycle • Pedestrian • Vehicle (see Section II.D, below) • Bicycle • Bus 3 2. Limitation on the extent of changes that can be made to the Draft Mobility Element Within the scope of analysis contained in the FEIR for the Draft General Plan, the city is limited in regard to which streets the vehicle travel mode can be made subject to a minimum LOS standard. The FEIR provides analysis of future vehicle LOS for "arterial streets" and the primary east-west "connector streets". Based on the FEIR analysis, the city may revise the Draft Mobility Element to require a minimum LOS D for the vehicle mode of travel on the streets staff proposes as "arterial connector streets" in Table 11.2, above. In addition, the city may require a minimum LOS 0 for the vehicle mode of travel on Tamarack Avenue. However, Tamarack Avenue provides access to and through neighborhoods, and direct driveway access is provided to residential properties fronting the street; therefore, staff recommends that the "neighborhood connector street" typology is more appropriate for Tamarack Avenue. In regard to concerns about streets where the vehicle mode of travel is not subject to a minimum LOS standard, as mentioned Exhibit 12 previously, the city's streets are currently built to accommodate the vehicle mode of travel; most streets currently provide acceptable vehicle service levels (LOS 0 or above) and are projected to continue to do so in the future with buildout of the Draft General Plan. Although, per the Draft Mobility Element, the vehicle travel mode would not be subject to a minimum service level on some streets, there are limited circumstances where the level of service could be reduced below a LOS D. However, the Draft Mobility Element will provide the city with the flexibility to allow such reduction of vehicle service to occur only on some streets and in certain circumstances; see Sections II.D and II.E, below. To require a minimum LOS standard for the vehicle mode of travel on additional streets, other than those identified in Table 11.2, above, and identified as "prioritized" for the vehicle mode in Draft Mobility Element Table 3-1, the City Council would need to direct staff to conduct additional traffic analysis, revise the draft EIR and recirculate the revised portions of the EIR for public review and comment. 4 Exhibit 12 B. USE OF THE TERMS "PRIORITIZED" AND "NON-PRIORITIZED" TABLE 11.3-PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERN "B" TOPIC/ISSUE CONCERN Draft Mobility Element Table 3-1 categorizes the Some commissioners expressed that they did not like or did not understand B travel modes as either "prioritized" or "non-the meaning of the terms "prioritized" and "non-prioritized"; that the terms prioritized" imply greater importance of one mode over another. 1. Background and staff proposal: As mentioned above, the terms "prioritized" and "non-prioritized" in the Draft Mobility Element are intended to reflect the types of street improvements that will be prioritized in the future; a prioritization of future investments for street improvements to create a balanced mobility system that meets the mobility needs of persons of all ages and abilities. Staff recognizes that the terms may be interpreted to mean that one mode of travel is more important than another. That is not the intent of the Draft Mobility Element; all modes are important in order to provide a balanced mobility system. However, to avoid confusion about the meaning of the terms, staff recommends that the Draft Mobility Element be revised to delete use of the terms "prioritized" and "non-prioritized" in reference to modes of travel. See attached Exhibit 12A and Section Ill, below. Attachment 10 to the Report to the Planning Commission, dated July 18, 2015, proposes an amendment to the city's Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CFIP) circulation standard to establish a multi-modal level of service standard (MMLOS) consistent with the Draft Mobility Element. Staff's recommendation to eliminate the terms "prioritized" and "non-prioritized" will necessitate a modification to the CFIP amendment to ensure consistency with the recommended changes (see attached Exhibit 12B). 5 Exhibit 12 C. EMPLOYMENT STREETS TABLE 11.4-PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERN "C" TOPIC/ISSUE CONCERN Draft Mobility Element Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1 Some commissioners expressed that the street title did not make sense in c identifies a street typology titled "Employment Street" locations where the street was not providing access to employment. 1. Background and staff proposal: The Draft Mobility Element identifies "employment streets", in addition to "freeways", "arterial streets", "industrial streets", and "streets within Y2 mile of a transit center", as a street typology that "prioritizes" the bus mode of travel (i.e., the bus mode is subject to a minimum LOS D). There are a few short street segments that are important for providing access to a transit station or key destination (e.g., Poinsettia Lane west of Aviara Parkway, Marron Rd, Aviara Parkway east of Ambrosia Lane, and Calle Barcelona west of El Camino Real); however, these street segments are not freeways, arterials, industrial streets or within Y2 mile of a transit center. Therefore, the Draft Mobility Element classified these segments as "employment streets" to ensure adequate and enhanced bus service is provided. To clarify the purpose of the street typology in the context where it is applied, staff recommends changing the name of the typology to "employment/transit connector street." See Table 3-1 in attached Exhibit 12A. Staff also recommends that the segment of Aviara Parkway east of Ambrosia Lane be changed from "employment street" to "arterial connector street." This street connects two arterials and it would be appropriate to classify the entire street length as an "arterial connector street." The bus mode of travel will still be accommodated along the entire street segment. See Section II.A, above, and Figure 3-1 in attached Exhibit 12A. 6 Exhibit 12 D. ROAD DIETS TABLE II 5-PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERN "D" TOPIC/ISSUE CONCERN Draft Mobility Element policy 3-P.ll directs the city Some commissioners expressed concern that staff would implement road diets D to evaluate implementing road diets on certain and significantly impact vehicle levels of service; this was particularly streets concerning in combination with the issue summarized in row A, above. 1. Background and staff proposal: As a means to promote biking, walking, safer streets, and attractive streetscapes, the Draft Mobility Element includes a policy (policy 3- P .11) that directs the city to evaluate implementing road diets on existing four-lane streets with 25,000 average daily traffic volumes or less. While the policy does not require that road diets be implemented (only to evaluate doing soL some commissioners expressed concern that road diets would be implemented and vehicle levels of service would be degraded to an unacceptable level. Therefore, the Planning Commission recommends that policy 3-P.ll be deleted. It should be noted that road diets can be implemented today, provided the vehicle level of service does not go below a LOS D. Therefore, staff recommends that policy 3-P.ll be replaced with the following policy (also see attached Exhibit 12A and Section Ill, below): Evaluate methods and transportation facility improvements to promote biking, walking, safer street crossings, and attractive streets capes. The City Council shall have the sole discretion to approve any such improvements that would reduce vehicle capacity to or below a LOS D; this also applies to streets where the vehicle is not subject to the MMLOS standard as specified in Table 3-1. This proposed policy will ensure that the City Council has the sole discretion to approve any road diet that would reduce the vehicle level of service to or below a LOS D, even on streets where the vehicle mode oftravel is not subject to a minimum LOS standard. With this proposed policy and the proposed street typologies in the Draft Mobility Element, the following benefits are provided, which the current Circulation Element does not provide: • • Requirement for City Council approval of any road diet or other improvement that would reduce vehicle service levels to LOS D (council approval is not required today). Flexibility for the City Council to approve a road diet or other improvement that would reduce vehicle service levels below LOS Don streets where the vehicle mode is not subject to a minimum LOS standard (today, the council cannot authorize any improvement that would reduce vehicle service below LOS D). o This flexibility is beneficial in locations where community values (other than the ease of traveling in a vehicle) outweigh the importance of maintaining a minimum LOS for vehicles. For example, a road diet may be proposed where the value of providing a safe street is more important than maintaining a minimum LOS for vehicles, such as along La Costa Avenue east of El Camino Real. 7 Exhibit 12 E. LOS EXEMPT INTERSECTIONS AND STREET SEGMENTS TABLE 11.6-PLANNING COMMISSION CONCERN "E" TOPIC/ISSUE CONCERN Draft Mobility Element policies 3-P. 7 and 3-P.8 allow Some commissioners expressed concern that the exemption from the vehicle the city, under specified circumstances, to exempt E certain intersections and street segments from the LOS standard meant the city would be giving up and would not do anything minimum level of service standard for vehicles. else to improve vehicle travel levels of service. 1. Background and staff proposal: Staff does not propose any change to address this concern beyond revisions to clarify draft policy 3-P.7 (see attached Exhibit 12A and Section Ill, below). The following provides background information about the topic and description of the commission's recommendations regarding this issue. The Draft Mobility Element recognizes that, in the future at buildout of the planned land uses identified in the General Plan, there are some arterial street intersections and segments that will operate at a level below the city's minimum LOS standard (LOS D) for the vehicle mode of travel. This is due, primarily, to regional growth that is projected to occur in surrounding communities, which will result in additional vehicle trips on some of Carlsbad's arterial streets that provide regional access to and through the city. These streets include: • La Costa Ave between Interstate-S and El Camino Real • El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Rd and La Costa Ave • Palomar Airport Rd between Interstate-S and College Blvd • Palomar Airport Rd between El Camino Real and Melrose Dr The only means of maintaining a LOS D for vehicles on these street segments is to widen the roads beyond six lanes, which may be infeasible (due to inability to acquire the rights-of-way) or could negatively impact other community values (environment protection, public safety, aesthetics, etc.). In short, the city cannot feasibly continue to build its way out of congestion in some locations; the traffic generated regionally will impact vehicle service levels on Carlsbad streets and will cause the service levels to drop below LOS Din the locations noted above. Draft Mobility Element policy 3-P.7 recognizes this issue and provides a means for the City Council to "exempt" a street facility from the minimum LOS standard, based on the following criteria: • Acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or • The proposed improvements would significantly impact the environment in an unacceptable way and mitigation would not contribute to the nine core values of the Carlsbad Community Vision; or • The proposed improvements would result in unacceptable impacts to other community values or General Plan policies; or • The proposed improvements would require more than three through travel lanes in each direction. 8 In addition, Draft Mobility Element policy 3-P.8 identifies the street segments listed above and specifies that they will be exempt from the minimum vehicle LOS standard when the city's street network is complete (when College Blvd. and Poinsettia Lane are completed). This ensures that the city can continue to allow growth, as planned for by the General Plan, without having to widen the streets to a width that may be infeasible or would negatively impact community values for safety, environment protection, and aesthetics. Some commissioners expressed concern that, by exempting some street facilities from the vehicle LOS standard, the city would give up and not implement other methods (besides widening the street) to improve vehicle service levels. This is not the intent ofthe Draft Mobility Element. In fact the draft element promotes other means of "managing" the number of vehicles on the road. Draft policy 3- P.9 requires implementation oftransportation demand management (TDM) strategies in lieu of widening a LOS exempt street facility when a project would add traffic to such facilities. TDM strategies are methods to manage the amount of vehicle traffic by reducing reliance on the vehicle; such methods include carpool programs, flexible work hours, telecommuting, shuttle services to transit, etc. (see page 3-26 of the Draft Mobility Element). Exhibit 12 The Planning Commission recommends modifying draft policy 3-P.9 to clarify that TDM strategies are intended to reduce reliance on "single-occupant" vehicles, and to add a requirement to implement transportation system management (TSM) strategies to improve traffic signal coordination and transit service. The commission also recommends adding a policy that directs the city to encourage the use of alternative modes oftravel by educating the community about the benefits of doing so. Another new policy recommended by the commission requires the performance measures that are tied to transportation facilities to comply with the Climate Action Plan; this new policy recognizes that successful implementation of the Climate Action Plan is dependent on the successful implementation of policies in the Mobility Element that are intended to reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled (i.e. TDM measures and enhancement of street facilities that promote pedestrian, bicycle and bus modes of travel). See attached Exhibit 12A and Section Ill, below, to view the Draft Mobility Element policy revisions recommended by the Planning Commission. 9 Ill. DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS Below is a list of all policies in the Draft Mobility Element and the revisions proposed, pursuant to the FEIR, Planning Commission, and by staff as described above in this exhibit. Policy Number Draft Mobility Element Policy Implement a comprehensive livable streets network. 3-P.1 This network, as outlined in Table 3-1 and shown on Figure 3-1, prioritizes transportation modes by street typology and accessibility to users of the system. Integrate livable streets in all capital improvement 3-P.2 projects, where applicable, as well as new development projects. Apply and update the city's multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) methodology and guidelines that reflect the core values of the Carlsbad Community Vision related to 3-P.3 transportation and connectivity. Utilize the MMLOS methodology to evaluate impacts of individual development projects and amendments to the General Plan on the city's transportation system. Implement the city's MMLOS methodology by evaluating 3-P.4 level of service (LOS) for prioritized modes. Maintain LOS D or better only for the prioritized modes of travel by street typology as outlined in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1. Require developers to construct or pay their fair share toward improvements for all travel modes consistent 3-P.S with this Mobility Element, the Growth Management Plan, and specific impacts associated with their development. TABLE Ill 1-DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS Revisions Proposed in the FEIR Planning Commission Recommended Revisions N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Implement the city's MMLOS methodology by evaluating level of service (LOS) for 13rioritized .iill qualified streets and all modes consistent with the Growth Management Plan. Qualified streets are those N/A having excess ca12acity as determined by the City Council after receiving a reQort and recommendation from the City Traffic Engineer. MaiAtaiA bQ~ Q or setter OAI•; for the j3rioritized modes of tra'v'el 9•; street ty13ology as outliAed iA Taele 3 ±a Ad Figure 3 ±. N/A N/A Exhibit 12 Planning Commission Staff Proposed Revisions to Address Concern Planning Commission Concerns Addressed (per Table 1.1 above) Implement a comprehensive livable streets network. This network, as outlined in Table 3-1 and shown on Figure 3-1, 13rioritizesidentifies the transportation modes that shall be accommodated, based on:-By B street typology, to ensure-ilfltl. accessibility of the city's street system to 12ersons of all ages and abilitieste users of the system. N/A N/A - N/A N/A Implement the city's MMLOS methodology and maintain LOS D or better for each mode of travel for which the MMLOS standard is aQQiicable, as identified in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1. a•,• e'v'aluatiAg le'v'el of A, B& D ser>viee {bQ~) for 13rioritized modes. MaiAtaiA bQ~ Q or setter OAI•,• for the j3rioritized modes of tra'v'el 9•; street ty13ology as outliAed iA +aele 3 ±a Ad Figure 3 ±. N/A N/A 10 ~~~-~ ~---------------~---~___1 Exhibit 12 TABLE Ill 1-DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS Planning Commission Policy Draft Mobility Element Policy Revisions Proposed in the FEIR Planning Commission Staff Proposed Revisions to Address Concern Number Recommended Revisions Planning Commission Concerns Addressed (per Table 1.1 above) Reguire future develogment grojects, which are determined during site- sgecific environmental review to have a significant imgact on freeway Reguire develogers of grojects, which are determined to have facilities (1-5 and SR-78}. to imglement a freeway traffic mitigation a significant imgact on Caltrans freeway facilities (I-S and SR-grogram aggroved by the city that will avoid, reduce or offset the 78}. to enter into a traffic mitigation agreement with Caltrans increase in freeway traffic directly attributable to the grogosed groject. 3.P.6 N/A for imglementation of the necessary imgrovements and the N/A The mitigation grogram may include, but is not limited to, gayment of a N/A gayment of fair-share fees to be determined by Caltrans based fair share fee to Caltrans for necessary imgrovements to affected on the increase in freeway traffic directly attributable to the freeway facilities or to NCTD or such other transit agency for grogosed groject. imgrovement of gublic transit on affected freeways, or such other activities as will avoid, reduce or offset the groject's significant imgacts on freeway facilities. Encourage Caltrans to identify and construct necessary 3-P.7 N/A imgrovements to imgrove service levels on Interstate-S and N/A N/A N/A State Route 78. Utilize transportation demand management strategies, non- automotive enhancements (bicycle, pedestrian, transit, train, 3-P.e§. trails, and connectivity), and traffic signal management N/A N/A techniques as long-term transportation solutions and traffic N/A N/A mitigation measures to carry out the Carlsbad Community Vision. Develop and maintain a list of street facilities where sgecified modes of travel are exemgt from the LOS standard (LOS exemgt street facilities). eJEeffiJ3t iAl:eFseEl:ieAs a REI sl:Feetsas approved by the City Council. For LOS Develop and maintain a list of LOS exempt intersections and exempt street facilitiesiAteFseEtieAs a REI stmets, the city will not streets approved by the City Council. For LOS exempt implement meteF vehiEie EJf'JEity improvements to maintain the LOS intersections and streets, the city will not implement motor standard outlined in Policy 3-P.4 if such improvements are beyond what vehicle capacity improvements to maintain the LOS standard is identified as appropriate at build out of the General Plan. In the case outlined in Policy 3-P.4 if such improvements are beyond what of street facilities where the vehicle mode of travel is exemgt from the is identified as appropriate at build out of the General Plan; LOS standard,; hmveveF, other non-vehicle capacity-building however, other non-vehicle capacity-building improvements improvements l!Y.ill_may-be required to improve mobility through may be required to improve mobility, to the extent feasible, imglementation of transgortation demand and system management and/or to implement the livable streets goals and policies of measures as outlined in Policy 3-P.ll, to the extent feasible, and/or to this Mobility Element. To be considered LOS exempt, an implement the livable streets goals and policies of this Mobility Element. 3-P.+-2 intersection or street must be/identified as built-out by the City Evaluate the list of exemgt street facilities, as gart of the Growth Council because: N/A N/A Management monitoring grogram, to determine if such exemgtions are E a. acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or still warranted. b. the proposed improvements would significantly impact the To exemgt the vehicle mode of travel from the LOS standard at a environment in an unacceptable way and mitigation would garticular street intersection or segment, Te be EeAsiEiemEI LOS eJEeffiJ3l:, not contribute to the nine core values of the Carlsbad Community Vision; or aRthe intersection or street segment must be identified as built-out by c. the proposed improvements would result in unacceptable the City Council because: impacts to other community values or General Plan policies; a. acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or b. the proposed improvements would significantly impact the or d. the proposed improvements would require more than three environment in an unacceptable way and mitigation would not through travel lanes in each direction. contribute to the nine core values of the Carlsbad Community Vision; or c. the proposed improvements would result in unacceptable impacts to other community values or General Plan policies; or d. the proposed improvements would require more than three through travel lanes in each direction. 11 _, Exhibit 12 TABLE 111.1-DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS Planning Commission Policy Draft Mobility Element Policy Revisions Proposed in the FEIR Planning Commission Recommended Revisions Staff Proposed Revisions to Address Planning Concern Number Commission Concerns Addressed (per Table 1.1 above) Allow the following streets to be LOS exempt facilities After the College Boulevard extension and Poinsettia Allow the following streets facilities to be ~exempt Lane connections are comQieted as identified in Policy 3-from the LOS standard identified in Policy 3-P.4, subject facilitiesfrom the vehicle LOS standard identified in to the requirements described in Policy 3-P.7: £_.1L__A.9_IIow the following streets to be LOS exempt Policy 3-P.4, subject to the requirements described in facilities from the LOS standard identified in Policy 3-P.4, • La Costa Avenue between Interstate-S and El subject to the requirements described in Policy 3-P.7: Policy 3-P.+2_: Camino Real • La Costa Avenue between Interstate-S and El • La Costa Avenue between Interstate-S and El • El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road Camino Real Camino Real 3-P.810 N/A E and La Costa Avenue • El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and • El Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and • Palomar Airport Road between Interstate-S and La Costa Avenue La Costa Avenue College Boulevard • Palomar Airport Road between Interstate-S and • Palomar Airport Road between Interstate-S and • Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real College Boulevard College Boulevard and Melrose Drive • Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real and • Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real and Melrose Drive Melrose Drive Require new development that adds traffic to LOS-Require new development that adds vehicle traffic to exempt locations (consistent with 3-P.7) to street facilities that are exemQt from the vehicle LOS implement~ standard e><empt locations (consistent with 3-P.2_+) to Require new development that adds traffic to LOS-.9.:_tiransportation demand management strategies implement~ exempt locations (consistent with 3-P.7) to implement 3-P.911 transportation demand management strategies that N/A that reduce the reliance on t-R-esingle-occuQant .9.:_tiransportation demand management strategies that E a. automobile and assist in achieving the city's livable reduce the reliance on t-R-esingle-occuQant automobile reduce the reliance on the automobile and assist in achieving the city's livable streets vision. streets vision. and assist in achieving the city's livable streets vision. Q,_ TransQortation system management strategies Q,_ TransQortation system management strategies that that imQrove traffic signal coordination and imQrove traffic signal coordination and imQrove transit imQrove transit service. service. Update the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to 3-P.l.f_Q ensure consistency with the General Plan. This includes N/A N/A N/A N/A updating the circulation LOS standards methodologies to reflect a more balanced/multi-modal approach. Use QUblic outreach to educate and encourage alternative modes of travel and inform the 3-P.13 N/A N/A community about the benefits of QarticiQation in new N/A N/A Qrograms, aQQroaches and strategies that SUQQOrt Mobility Element goals and QOiicies. Reguire Qerformance measures tied to transQortation 3-P.14 N/A N/A facilities and services to comQiy with the Climate N/A N/A Action Plan and other state regulations and QOiicies. 12 Exhibit 12 TABLE Ill 1 DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS - Planning Commission Policy Number Draft Mobility Element Policy Revisions Proposed in the FEIR Planning Commission Recommended Revisions Staff Proposed Revisions to Address Planning Concern Commission Concerns Addressed (per Table 1.1 above) Evaluate methods and transQortation facility Evaluate implementing a road diet to three lanes or e>.•alblat:e iA9flleA9eRtiRg a FsaEI Eliet: tS U'lFee laRes SF imQrovements to Qromote biking, walking, safer street fewer for existing four-lane streets currently carrying or f'ev.•eF fSF elEiStiRg fSblF I aRe StFCetS EblFFeRt:l•r EaFPfiRg crossings, and attractive streetscaQes. The City Council 3-P.1.2_± projected to carry 25,000 average daily traffic volumes N/A sF flFSjeet:eEI t:s eaFPf ~§,QQQ a~·eFage Elaily t:Fal':l'ie shall have the sole discretion to aQQrove any such A&D or less in order to promote biking, walking, safer street •,•slb!A9CS SF less iR SFEieF tS flFSA9Ste siiEiRg, •,o.!aiiEiRg, imQrovements that would reduce vehicle caQacity to or crossings, and attractive streetscapes. saf'eF StFeet: EFSSSiRgS, a REI aUFaet:ive StFCetSEaflCS. below a LOS D; this also aQQiies to streets where the vehicle is not subject to the MMLOS standard as SQecified in Table 3-1. Design new streets, and explore funding opportunities for existing streets, to minimize traffic volumes and/or speed, as appropriate, within residential neighborhoods without compromising connectivity for emergency first 3-P.l.§.~ responders, bicycles, and pedestrians consistent with N/A the city's Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategies. This N/A N/A N/A should be accomplished through management and implementation of livable streets strategies and such programs like the Carlsbad Residential Traffic Management Plan. Consider innovative design and program solutions to improve the mobility, efficiency, connectivity, and safety of the transportation system. Innovative design solutions include, but are not limited to, traffic calming devices1 roundabouts, traffic circles, curb extensions, separated bicycle infrastructure, pedestrian scramble intersections, high visibility pedestrian treatments and infrastructure, and traffic signal coordination. Innovative program 3-P.lZ& solutions include, but are not limited to, webpages with N/A travel demand and traffic signal management N/A N/A N/A information, car and bike share programs, active transportation campaigns, and intergenerational programs around schools to enhance safe routes to schools. Other innovative solutions include bicycle friendly business districts, electric and solar power energy transportation systems, intelligent transportation systems, semi-or full autonomous vehicles, trams, and shuttles. Encourage and seek partnerships to foster innovations in emerging technology for transportation mobility to 3-P.1~4 support the city's workforce, residents, and tourists. N/A N/A N/A N/A Integration between communication technology, energy, and transportation mobility should be encouraged. 13 ----~ ·-~~~ ~~---~~~~----------------------~-~---- Exhibit 12 TABLE 111.1-DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS Planning Commission Policy Draft Mobility Element Policy Revisions Proposed in the FEIR Planning Commission Recommended Revisions Staff Proposed Revisions to Address Planning Concern Number Commission Concerns Addressed (per Table 1.1 above) Encourage Caltrans, SANDAG, NCTD, and adjacent cities to improve regional connectivity and service consistent with regional planning efforts. This includes expansion of 3-P.12~ Interstate-S with two HOV lanes in each direction and N/A N/A N/A N/A associated enhancements, a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) route along Palomar Airport Road, shuttle bus services from COASTER stations, and other enhancements to improve services in the area. Engage Caltrans, the Public Utilities Commission, transit agencies, the Coastal Commission, and railroad agency(s) regarding opportunities for improved connections within the city, including: • Improved connections across the railroad tracks at Chestnut Avenue and other locations • Completion and enhancements to the Coastal Rail N/A 3-P.20±e Trail and/or equivalent trail along the coastline N/A N/A N/A • Improved connectivity along Carlsbad Boulevard for pedestrians and bicyclists, such as a trail • Improved access to the beach and coastal recreational opportunities • Improved crossings for pedestrians across and along Carlsbad Boulevard Implement connections and improvements identified in Implement connections and improvements identified in this Mobility Element, including those identified in policy this Mobility Element, including those identified in policy 3-P.lS, as well as: 3-P.12~, as well as: • Extension of College Boulevard from Cannon Road • Extension of College Boulevard from Cannon Road to El Camino Real to El Camino Real • Completion of the Poinsettia Lane connection near • Completion of the Poinsettia Lane connection near El Camino Real (Reach E) El Camino Real (Reach E) 3-P.21±..f. • Extension of Camino Junipero to the eastern city N/A N/A • Extension of Camino Junipero to the eastern city N/A boundary boundary • A bicycle/pedestrian trail/pathway connecting the • A bicycle/pedestrian trail/pathway connecting the eastern terminus of Marron Road to the east eastern terminus of Marron Road to the east • A bicycle/pedestrian trail/pathway connecting the • A bicycle/pedestrian trail/pathway connecting the eastern terminus of Cannon Road to the east, and eastern terminus of Cannon Road to the east, and coordination with adjacent agencies to coordination with adjacent agencies to appropriately link to their facilities appropriately link to their facilities 3-P.22±8 Support pedestrian and bicycle facilities at all Interstate- N/A N/A N/A N/A 5 and State Route 78 interchanges. 14 -------'-'--=-.;;..:...;;:....c:....-=::c=..:'-"=='-".::..C.:.'---'--~~----------------------------------~---------------------------------------------------1 Exhibit 12 TABLE 111.1-DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS Planning Commission Policy Draft Mobility Element Policy Revisions Proposed in the FEIR Planning Commission Recommended Revisions Staff Proposed Revisions to Address Planning Concern Number Commission Concerns Addressed (per Table 1.1 above) 3-P.23-±9 Maintain the city's scenic transportation corridors as N/A N/A N/A N/A identified in the Carlsbad Scenic Corridor Guidelines. Update the pedestrian, trails and bicycle master plans, as 3-P.2_1_9 necessary, to reflect changes in needs, opportunities and N/A N/A N/A N/A priorities. Implement the projects recommended in the pedestrian, 3-P.22_± trails and bicycle master plans through the city's capital N/A N/A N/A N/A improvement program, private development conditions and other appropriate mechanisms. Identify and implement necessary pedestrian Identify and implement necessary pedestrian improvements on pedestrian-prioritized streets with improvements on streets where r;1edestrians are to be accommodated r;1er Table 3-1, on pedestrian prioritized 3-P.2§;!. special emphasis on providing safer access to schools, N/A N/A B parks, community and recreation centers, shopping 5tfeet5-with special emphasis on providing safer access districts, and other appropriate facilities. to schools, parks, community and recreation centers, shopping districts, and other appropriate facilities. Implement the Safe Routes to School and Safe Routes to Transit programs that focus on pedestrian and bicycle 3-P.2Z& safety improvements near local schools and transit N/A N/A N/A N/A stations. Prioritize schools with access from arterial streets for receiving Safe Routes to School projects. Improve and enhance parking, connectivity, access, and 3-P.2§_4 utilization for pedestrians and bicycles to COASTER N/A N/A N/A N/A stations, utility corridors, and open spaces consistent with city planning documents. Evaluate incorporating pedestrian and bicycle Evaluate incorporating pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure within the city as part of any planning or infrastructure within the city as part of any planning or 3-P.22,§. engineering study, private development, or capital N/A N/A engineering study, private development, or capital B project where bicyclists or pedestrians are a prioritized project 'Nhere l3icyclists or pedestrians are a prioritized or non-prioritized mode. or non prioritized mode. Complete the Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategies 3-P.30~ to assist in identifying livable street implementation N/A N/A N/A N/A parameters within the city. Engage the community in the policy setting and planning 3-P.31P of street, bicycle, pedestrian, transit, and connectivity N/A N/A N/A N/A studies, plans and programs. 15 -------------------------------------------------------~ ----------~-~~- Exhibit 12 TABLE 111.1-DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS Planning Commission Policy Draft Mobility Element Policy Revisions Proposed in the FEIR Planning Commission Recommended Revisions Staff Proposed Revisions to Address Planning Concern Number Commission Concerns Addressed (per Table 1.1 above) Require developers to improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity consistent with the city's bicycle and pedestrian master plans and trails master planning 3-P.32~ efforts. In addition, new residential developments N/A N/A N/A N/A should demonstrate that a safe route to school and transit is provided to nearby schools and transit stations within a half mile walking distance. Work with existing neighborhoods and businesses to 3-P.33-2-9 improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity and safety N/A N/A N/A N/A consistent with the city's pedestrian and bicycle master plans and trails master planning efforts. Actively pursue grant programs such as SANDAG's Active Transportation Grant Program and Smart Growth Incentive Program to improve non-automotive connectivity throughout the city. The emphasis of grant- 3-P .3_1_G funded projects shall be on implementation, which N/A N/A N/A N/A includes planning documents that guide and prioritize implementation, programs that encourage the use of active transportation modes, education for the use of active transportation modes, or physical improvements themselves. Partner with other agencies and/or developers to Partner with other agencies and/or developers to improve transit connectivity within Carlsbad. As part of a improve transit connectivity within Carlsbad. As part of a comprehensive transportation demand management comprehensive transportation demand management (TDM) strategy and/or with transit oriented (TDM) strategy and/or with transit oriented development (TOD), a shuttle system could be development (TOD), a shuttle system could be established that connects destinations and employment 3-P.32± established that connects destinations and employment centers like LEGOLAND, hotels, the Village, McClellan-N/A N/A N/A centers like LEGOLAND, hotels, the Village, McClellan-Palomar Airport, business parks, the COASTER and Palomar Airport, business parks, the COASTER and Breeze transit stations, QUblic activity centers (such as Breeze transit stations, and key destinations along the senior centers, city hall, libraries, etc.) and key coast. The system could incorporate shuttle service in destinations along the coast. The system could adjacent cities to maximize connectivity. incorporate shuttle service in adjacent cities to maximize connectivity. Encourage NCTD, SANDAG and other transit providers to 3-P.3.§.;!. provide accessibility for all modes of travel to the N/A N/A N/A N/A McClellan-Palomar Airport area. 3-P.3Z3-Coordinate with NCTD to improve the quality of bus stop N/A N/A N/A N/A facilities in the city. 16 _" ______ ----------------- Exhibit 12 TABLE Ill 1-DRAFT MOBILITY ELEMENT POLICY REVISIONS Planning Commission Policy Planning Commission Recommended Staff Proposed Revisions to Address Planning Concern Number Draft Mobility Element Policy Revisions Proposed in the FEIR Revisions Commission Concerns Addressed (per Table 1.1 above) Develop flexible parking requirements to provide the "right amount" of on:site vehicle parking. Such 3-P.3~4 requirements will include implementation of innovative N/A N/A N/A N/A parking techniques, implementing effective TOM programs to reduce parking demand, and consideration of other means to "right size" the parking supply. Require new employment development to provide 3-P.32_.§. secure bicycle parking on-site. Major employers should N/A N/A N/A N/A provide shower and changing rooms for employees as appropriate. Assist Village businesses to manage parking in the Village area to maximize parking efficiency. Any potential parking-related revenues generated in this area should 3-P.40~ be reinvested into the Village area for implementing N/A N/A N/A N/A livable streets and other parking, pedestrian, and bicycle enhancements, including way-finding signage and maintenance of associated infrastructure. Consider supporting new development and existing businesses with various incentives (such as parking 3-P.41~ standards modifications) for implementing TDM N/A N/A N/A N/A programs that minimize the reliance on single-occupant automotive travel during peak commute hours. Identify and update truck routes within the city that 3-P.42~ provide sufficient turning radii and other design N/A N/A N/A N/A attributes to support large vehicles on those facilities. Coordinate with other agencies and private entities to investigate methods of improving service, implementing a quiet zone, and enhancing connectivity and safety along Coordinate with other agencies and private entities to the rail corridor; such as through develogment of a grade 3-P.43~ investigate methods of improving service, implementing segarated rail corridor that includes grade segarated N/A N/A N/A a quiet zone, and enhancing connectivity and safety street crossings at Grand Avenue, Carlsbad Village Drive, along the rail corridor. Tamarack Avenue and Cannon Road, as well as new gedestrian and bicycle crossings at Chestnut Avenue, Chinguagin Avenue and the Village and Poinsettia COASTER stations. Work with San Diego County and other agencies to Work with the County of San Diego ~and other 3-P.41G ensure continued safe and efficient operation of the agencies to ensure continued safe and efficient operation N/A N/A N/A McClellan Palomar Airport, consistent with the Carlsbad of the McCiellan:-Palomar Airport, consistent with the Community Vision and existing city policy. Carlsbad Community Vision and existing city policy. 17 3-2 This element J:n-ovides a short context for Carlsbad's existing mobility system, identifies how that system was developed, and communicates the c.:unent vision for the fitture of mobility within the city . Topics addressed include: Livable Streets Multi-Modal Levels of Service Walking BicycUng Transit Connectivity to SupJ)Ort Mobility Parking Transportation Demand Management Traffic Signal Management Freight and Goods Movement and Innovation in Transportation Mobility 3 .1 Introduction Background an d Pu rp ose Much of Carlsbad's transportation system has developed withi n the last 30 years, concurrent with the city's physical expansion. The transportation emphasis during thfs period has been on Improving travel by the automobile, within the framework provided by Proposition E (commonly referred to as the Growth Management Plan) passed by Carlsbad voters i n 1986. The 1994 General Plan and the G rowth Management Plan helped assur e that infrastructure was provided in a systematic fashion as the city grew and developed. The transportation system envisioned in the 1994 General Plan has largely been realized , with the majority of the street Infrastructure constructed to its ultimate configuration. As the city looks Increasingly to 1nffll development rather than outward expansion, the primary transportation issues relate to protecting and enhancing the community's quality of life. as reflected in the core values of the Carlsbad Community V ision. The community's vision i ncludes better pedestrian and bicycle connections between neighborhoods. destinations, and different parts of the community, and a balanced transportation system rather than a singular focus on automobile movement. In recent years , the city has been taking steps to support complete and livable streets. In January 2012, the City Council identified complete and livable streets as a top strategic focus area for the city. In February 2013. the city completed a Livable Streets Assessment report that reframes potential challenges into opportunities. based on best practices in other jurisdictions wrestling with similar challenges. In 2011 ·2013 the city implemented a traffic signal program to better serve and manage m otorists and connect traffic signa ls throughout the city. This element focuses on providing livable streets that impro ve mobility and connectivity for a ll use rs of the transportation system, Rela tio ns hip to Stat e Law Californ ia state law (Government Code Section 65032{b)) r equires that a general plan include a circu lation element that cons ists of "the general location and extent of existi ng and proposed major thoroughfares, transportation routes , terminals ... and other local public utilities and faci lities, all correlated with the land use element ofthe [genera l) plan." This Mo bility Element includes all Information required of circulat ion elements, except that the location and extent of "ather local public utilities and facilities• is addressed in the Public Safety Element. Addttionally, i n 2008, the State of California passed Assembly Bill1358, the California Complete Streets Act. This bill requires that all circulation elements developed after January 1, 201 1 include a complete streets approach that balances the needs of all users of the street, including mo to rists , pedestrians, bicycles, 3·3 Ill 3 .2 Context: Existing Transportation System Currently, Carlsbad 's transportation system includes streets (travel lanes, bicyc le lanes . sidewa lks, etc.), trails. transit (bus and train), truck routes, and the McC lellan-Palomar airport. The existing transportation system is described oelow. Streets The city accommoda tes motorists via its system of freeways, regiona l streets and local streets . North/south facilities include Intersta te-S. El Camino Real. Carlsbad Bou levard. Co llege Boulevard . Paseo del Norte , Avenida Encinas. Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive. East/west facilities include Carlsbad Village Drive, Chestnut Avenue, Tamarack Avenue, Cannon Road, Faraday Avenue, Palomar Airport Road, Poinsettia Lane. Aviara Parkway, and La Costa Avenue . Many of these streets not only serve Carlsbad, but also provide regional connectivity to the north county area . Although there are numerous easVwest streets through the city, major barriers interrupt connectivity -the north/south railroad that parallels Interstate-S and Carlsbad Bouleva rd. the Interstate-S freeway , t hree lagoons , and the general rolling hill topography of the city. While State Route 78 does not run within the city limits of Carlsbad , it provides a reg iona l east-west freeway just north of Carlsbad that connects with Interstate 1S in Escondido. Many city-maintained streets provide for pedestrian and bicycle travel on such facilities as parallel bike lanes, trails , and/or sidewal ks-(el«;lucling alang ffee'l.'ays an a ra ilr aacls wi'lere ~eaestrians ana bisyslists are ~rai'lillilea). Wa lking and bicycling environments are critica l to Carlsbad 's htgh qua lity of life, especially in areas that have a high demand for those services (such as the Village area, along the coast and near the lagoons). Trails Trails typica ll y serve pedestrians and. where allowed , bicycles. Automobiles are prohibit ed on trails . Wh il e the city's rolling 1opography can be cha ll enging, "s open space areas, three lagoons, coastline and Mediterranean climate make it ao ldeal location to provide an extensive trail sys tem . In April 2013 , the city initialed a Trails Master Plan update. This upd ate wi ll include identification of existing and proposed trails within the city that will in tegrate with other tra nsporta tion system elements . Additionally , the Trails Master Plan will ensure consistency with the city's recently comple ted and accepted ADA Transition Plan . The Trai ls Master Plan will be completed In coordination with the Carls bad Active Transportatio n Strategy, also initi ated by the city in April 2013. The Comprehensive Active T ranspo rt ation Strategy will resu lt in a se t of strategies to Identify and construct livable streets solutions for the city's street sys tem . 3-5 \1'1 Multi-Modal Levels of Service Trad"ionally, transportation systems have been designed to achieve a level of service from the perspective of the driver, not pedestrians or bicycli sts . However, cities throughout the country are now designing their transportation systems to achieve levels of service for all travel modes. Some cities, such as Fort Collins , CO , San Francisco, CA. Gainesville , FL, Charlotte. NC, and others, have been doing this for more than a decade; and in 2010, national guidelines were developed by the Transportation Research Board to encourage other cities to establish levels of service for all travel modes. The Californ ia Complete Streets Act (2008} requires cities in California to plan for a balanced , multi-modal transportation system that meets the needs of all travel modes. This Mobility Element establishes a multi-modal level of service ~MLO ~ methodology for Carlsbad that determines t he vehicle level of service by the Highway Capacitv Manual and eva luates the service levels for ~estrians, bicyclists and transit users. +fle.lletlisle le•.•el e~seFViGe ~~~ighwa CatlaGily MaRto~al. The city's MMLOS methodology will provide a qual~ative •grade" assigned to ~eEl soecified travel modes (see Table 3-1), rang ing from a level of service (LOS) A to LOS F. LOS A reflects a high service standard for a travel mode (e.g . outstanding characteristics and experience for that mode) and LOS F would reflect a poor service standard for a travel mode (e.g. congestion for vehicles. no bicycle , pedestrian, or transit facilities, etc.). Th resholds are identified to balance supply and demand to create a sustainable system of public right-of-way, keeping in mind on - going maintenance of the infr astructure and implementation of livable streets. The level of service of the various travel modes are evaluated according to th e fo ll owing factors: • Vehicular level of Service. leVel of service will be determined by the most recent versi on of the Highway Capacity Manual. This methodology eva l uates vehicles based on their freedom to maneuver and overall delay experienced at intersections. • Pedestrian Level of Service. Level of service to be evaluated using the Carlsbad MMLOS met hod. This method evaluates the quality of the pedestrian system (e.g. number of vehicle lanes that need to be crossed and the speed of adjacent traffic) an d the friendliness of the infrastructure at intersections (e.g. pedestrian countdown heads, dedicated pedestrian phases (e.g. a scramble phase), curb extensions, r efuge median). • Bicycle levels of Service . Level of service to be evaluated using the Carlsbad MMLOS method. This method evaluates the quality of the bicycle system (e.g . bicycle route, bicycle lanes, or bicycle pathway; presence of bicycle buffers from the veh icl e trave l way), the amenities of the syst em (e.g. presence of bicycle parking), and the friendliness of the infrastructur e (e.g. bicycle detection at int ersections, pavement conditions, presence of veh icle parking). 3 ·18 • Transit Levels of Service. Leve l of service to be evaluated using the Car l sbad MMLOS method. This method evaluates the transit vehicle right-of-way (e.g. dedicated or shared, signal priorfty), hours and frequency of service (e.g. weekday/weekend hours, peak period headway); performance (e.g. on-time or late); amenities and safety (e-g. lighting, covered stop, bench, on-board b ike/surfboard storage); and connectivity (e.g. to other transit routes, employment areas, schools , visitor attractions, and other major desti nations). Futu re Operations and Street Improvements Most of the envisioned Carlsbad street system Is built out. The remaining planned street improvements are summarized in Table 3-2; these facilities serve the needs of land uses identified in the Land Use and Community Design Element The p lanned streets are identified on the Street Network map, Figure 3-1 In add~ion to the new street connectivity and capacity expansion described in Table 3-2, the c ity is a lso implementing a citywide traffic signal system upgrade effort, This effort includes retiming of traffic signals, upgrading the controll er and detection technology, and integration of the traffic control system to a single point traffic management center. This enables the oily to monitor, manage, and adjust traffic signal timing along major corridors to improve mobility and manage vehicle trow within the city. Improved traffic signal timing also enhances the safety for drivers, Improves air quality by reducing emissions and brake dust, and improves commute times. TABLE 3-2: PLA NNED CITY OF CARLSBAD STREET CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVEMENT NAME IMPROVEMENT DESCRIPTION College Boulevard Complete improvements between Cannon Road and El Cam i no Real to arterial street typology standards Poinsettia Lane Complete improvements between Cassia Road and El Camino Real to connector street typology standards Camino Junipero Extend to t he eastern city limit as a loca l street Extension Intersta te-S North Includes the widening of Interstate-S io include high- Coast Project occupancy vehicle (HOV) (carpool) managed lanes and auxiliary lanes co nnecting adjacent Interchange off- ramps and on-ramps as needed Interstate-S/State W hile in preliminary desig n, identlfylng transportation Route-78 Interchange opiions will relieve congestion on the freeway as it Is a Improvement bottleneck t hat i mpacts adjacent interchanges, regional streets, and the movement of goods and people. This interchange is not located within the Ci ty of Carlsbad but is part of the Caltrans Public Works Plan for the Interstate-S North Coast Corridor Project 3-24 Connectivi ty to Support Mobility Connectivity in the city is critical to achieving the Carlsbad Community Vision . As previous ly described, there are a number of street Improvemen ts that are planned that will complete connections within the city , This Mobility Element also recommends additional connectivity for bicycles and pedestrians, as noted below: • Car)non Road connection. Provide a bicyc le/pedestrian facility that wou ld begin at the current eastern terminus of Cannon Road and continue eastward to the city's eastern boundary. • Marron Road connection. Prov1de a bicycle/pedestrian facility that would begin at the current eastern terminus of Marron Road and extend eastward to the city's eastern boundary. • Additional crossin gs of Interstate-S and the railroad. Continue to look for opportunities to add crossings of these two barriers and Improve east -west connectivity to and from the coa st . Key connections will includec i mprovements (bicyc le, pedestrian. and vehicular) to thea crossing§ at Chestnut Avenue (9ieyele, (leElestFiaR, a REI Yellie~laF) Lu nder the freeway ) and t Chinquapin Avenue (over the freeway; and new connection s (bicycle and p edestrian) across the railroad at Chestnut Avenue, and a-Chinquapin Avenue EBAAeetieR (~ieyele, ~e~estriaR, aAd veRindar) ever tRe fFeewa ·,. aRd (Bi~ele a AEI lleEiestFiaR) aEFass IRe r:aiiF9aEI . Additionally, Ca ltrans is designing a number of new pedestrian and bicyclist connections along and across Interstate-S and near the lagoons as part of the Int erstate-S North Coast Corridor Public Works Plan. The city will continue to coordinate with Caltrans on these improvemen t s. • Improved accessibility to the lagoons and to the coast are envisioned t o improve connectivity to those areas. Parking Parking is critical to ensuring the success of any area . Inadequate parl<ing means that businesses and residents suffer. Too much parl<ing underutil izes va luable land; promotes lower density development: discourages using other forms of transportation (such as pu blic transit); spreads out land uses; and creates gaps in store fronts . thereby req uiring the use of the automobile. Addnio na ll y. too much parl<ing also requires more driveways for accessibility, introducing confl icts between pedestrians and veh icles. Restrictive parl<ing requirements impact the abili ty to rejuvenate/repurpose older buildi ngs and rev italize activity centers that can be better served and connected by enhancing faciliti es and amen ities for bicycl ists and pedestrians. Therefore, it is Important to "right size" and manage parl<ing su ch that there is enough to support the needs generated by the use, but not so much that n wastes land and impairs other ways of getting around . \CfJ The city's Zoning Ordinance and adopted master and specific plans provide standards for parking facilities based on development types within the city. To promote "right sizing" of parking facilities , the city wi ll develop flexible parking requirements that may include the following techniques : • Shared parking. Cont inue to allow uses that have different parking demands at different times of the day to share the same parking facilities . This is an effective way to minimize pavement, allow denser land use, provide for more landscaping, and provide improved walkabillty within a mixed use area. The best example of shared park ing Is an office building and an apartment building as office's peak parldng demand occurs at 10:00 a.m . and apartment's peak parking demand occurs at 11:00 p.m . • Collective parking. Allow uses in mixed use projects/areas to reduce the standard parking rate to account for shared mi~ed use on -site parking. • Unbundled parking. Rather than provide free guaranteed parking, "unbundle" the parking from the development and require resi dents and/or employees to pay for use of a parking space. • Park once . A strategy in destination districts to enabl e visi tors to •park once" and visit a series of destinations. Park once strategies work well in areas like the Village and areas that are well connected by pedestria n and bicycle facilities. The creation of centralized parking areas supports this strategy. • In-lieu parking fees. Continue strategies in appropriate areas that allow developers to contribute fees toward the development of a common parking facility in lieu of providing on-site parking. This works best in concentrated commercial areas, and assists In payi ng for unified structured parking and provides developers an opportunity to increase densi ty on their parcels. • Parking management strategies. A business district or businesses manage high demand parking locations and destinations through a number of different strategies including demand pricing, time restrictions, valet parking, and other techniques. • PUbli c-private partnerships. The city, business owners, and developers colla!:lorate to provide both private and public parking opportunities. Instances where this works well include parcels owned by the city, where a private entity develops, manages, and enforces parking in these public lots. • Parking locater signs. Electronic monitoring devices that identify the available parking in a given facility and utilize changeable message signs to assist travelers in identifying available parking locations. This may require modifications to the city's Zoning Ordinance to be implemented In some areas of the city. 3-25 EXHIBIT 13 ·-pvov 1DecJ by ~ON AShMan June 30, 2009 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue· Carlsbad, CA. 92008 Attn.: Honorable City Council Ref.: General Plan Update and Rezone Joint Workshop, July 2015 Sirs and Madams, I appreciate the efforts of the City staff and management in reaching out to the affected land owners and public and trying to bring some !evel·of harmony to the many and varied interests that tend to polarize land use in our area. I am the owner of approximately 5 acres in the Ponto Beachfront area ( Ponto Public Storage) and have attended the previous workshops and hearings of this venture. When last in pup lie hearing the City staff indicated that ·our are~ would be held to the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan as it was recently conceived and was thus my expectation. My main suggestion was and remains, flexibility. Flexibility of uses due to the many challenges that exist arising from the existing and needeq infra~ructure in and around the area. If it is ·the desire of the Council and p1,4b\ic to pursue an Active Waterfront idea then the financial burden of relocating and extending utilities in this area will weigh heavily in finding an economically viable use for each prope~.1tQ!e many components of the Beachfront Plan should be considered seriously wttielT each developmentproposal ~s they may be criticai economic elements for the u1timate use Qf the area (i.e.; public sewer in Ponto Drive/ Road and the connection of Beach Blvd./ Drive to Carlsbad Boulevard). I h~v!3 some reservations about the split pla.n and zoning proposed on my parcels but hear that this may be the p~th tb flexibility. 1 have inquired into the possibility of l!PScaie assisted Jiving use as an alternative redevelopment of my 43 year old mini storage and a public parking component ( if the City has an interest) on my lots abutting Carlsbad Boulevard We have also previously formally inquired about a hotel/ extended stay combined f~cility. The viability of many praposats depends on the cirCUlation and infrastructure solutions. At some future time Ponto Drive is anticipated to be raised in elevation approximately 5 feet to make the whole area functional. The only other concern I have relates to background biologicatstudies that were generated with the Beachfrorit-Pian and Which I see as having errors. There are diagrams suggesting that a stream exists through my property abutting Carlsbad Boulevard ( APN's 214-160-04 through 06 and 34) which terminates offsite in a mlni~ture So. coastal salt marsh about 1500 squ~re feet in size. That portion of my property :was filled and raised With export from the Pointsettia Road ·construction back in the 1970's and an engineered ·earthen ditch was constructed to convey nuisance local drainage, the original natural ~rainage was where Ponto Drive is at . The l () / supposed salt marsh is a low spot where the old offramp/ on ramp from Highway 1 01 went under the bridge. The existing stormdrain system which dr~ined that area is still in the ground but the inlets were capped when the ramps were shut down. I protest the misrepresentation and reserve the right to address it further in the future, if this is in any way being relied upon in making findings or determinations for the GPU project. Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence please contact me directly. Respectfully Submitted, o!£t~ I r t General Plan Update -From PI nne Industrial (PI) to Residential (R--30) 8.4 acre site located at Palomar Oaks/Palomar Airport Rd :.:1;.-t::fV\j +ied Jack Henthorn I si Respectfully request that Palomar aks est remain as Residential (R-30) as contemplated in the Draft General Plan and EIR INTEGRAL 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l1 l1 l1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t1 l1 l1 l1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l From: Madeleine Szabo[~ Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2015 12:21 PM To: Matthew Hall; Keith Blackburn; Mark Packard; lorraine Wood; Michael Schumacher; Planning; Council Internet Email; Don Neu; Velyn Anderson; Neil Black; Hap L'Heureux; ~Jeff Segall; Kerry Siekmann Subject: Speech before the Public Hearing on Saturday JKuly 18th To: Council Members and Planning Commissioners, Questions: 1. Why are you increasing the density of Sunny Creek Focus Area 5, the Sunny Creek undeveloped property, as high density residential zoning {(R23) on 9.6 acres and RlS on a little over 22 acres on the two adjoining properties} that will exacerbate traffic, congestion, pollution, noise, City services, energy use, and water usage especially in light of the many developments that will be built in the immediate area that will already add l,OOOs of more cars and residents? Meeting {obscure} City Housing Element objectives" is not a valid reason to disrupt the tranquility of the area. land Use and Community Design http://www.car!sbadca.gov/civicaxLfHebankLblobdload.aspx?BiobiD=23304 Draft General Plan Page 15: 2. Obviously the discrepancy in this 2015 DRAFT General Plan on Page 52 is because the Sunny Creek area was always Medium Density: "Foster development of this site as a mixed-use neighborhood center, with a local shopping center along El Camino Real that provides amenities for the surrounding neighborhoods, which include residential uses at a density of 8 to 15 dwelling units per acre to the north and west of the shopping center." httg:fLwww.carisbadca.gov/civicaxLfllebankLblobdload.asgx?BiobiD=23304 (See Figure 2-2) 2-P.82 Again, why did you change the density? 3. Why this other discrepancy?: The map in the General Plan shows densities that would allow a total of 550 dwelling units to be built and in the 2015 Draft EIR the development is 399 (though it should be about 202 dwelling units for the total 31 acres per previous documents)? 2015 Draft EIR for GP Table 2.4-1: Estimated New Development: for "Sunny Creek Commercial" Page 3- 1: http://www.carlsbadca.govLcivicax/filebankLblobdload.aspx?BiobiD=28470 4. Why did you change from the low to Medium (6-12 du/ac) Residential Density designation in the "Draft Preferred Plan in the May 2, 2012 Report to the Planning Commission for GPA 07-02-Envision Carlsbad" .... Which stated also that it is "consistent with the Growth Management Plan" (page 2). http:LLwww.carlsbadca.govLcivicaxLfilebankLblobdload.aspx?BiobiD=23332 Page 2: "Consistency with the Growth Management Program. The Draft Preferred Plan is consistent with the city's Growth Management Program." Do not change the Growth Management Plan as outlined in the "Car~_bad Community Vision in January 2010 and the Preferred Plan in September 2012. With the 1,000s of planned and existing residential units in the vicinity of Sunny Creek, 550* more units are not needed. The Growth Management cap for the NE quadrant was already met at Low to Medium Residential zoning designation as specified in the aforementioned existing documents. Stay with the Growth Management Plan. Keep the unique character of Carlsbpd. Additional Reasons not to approve high density for Sunny Creek Focus Area 5: Page 8: Significant Irreversible Environmental Change http://preservecalavera.org/wp-content/uploads/2014LOSLS.O - CEQA Required Conclusions March 2014.pdf TRAFFIC: Operational emissions from motor vehicles, due to vehicular traffic generated by future development, and area sources, such as natural gas combustion, landscaping, and architectural coatings for maintenance, would exceed the SDAPCD's significance threshold for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 primarily due to motor vehicle emissions; therefore, impacts would be potentially significant. WATER CONSUMPTION New development under the proposed General Plan will increase the demand for water supplies for residential, commercial and industrial uses. It would place a greater demand on Carlsbad Municipal Water District, Olivehain Municipal Water District, and Vallecitos Water District, which derive water supply from Northern California watersheds and the Colorado River, in addition to recycled water supplies. This increased demand for public water represents an irreversible environmental change. ENERGY SOURCES New development under the proposed General Plan would result in increased energy use, in the form of new buildings and transportation. Both residential and nonresidential development use electricity, natural gas, and petroleum products for power, lighting, heating, and other indoor and outdoor services, while cars use both oil and gas. Use of these types of energy for new development would result in the overall increased use of nonrenewable energy resources. This represents an irreversible environmental change. Thank you for your valued support and commitment to the residents of Carlsbad. Please continue to uphold the Carlsbad's defining attribute of "small town community feel" and the principles in the Envision Carlsbad Land Use Concepts report that specifies the Sunny Creek undeveloped property as Low to Medium Density Residential. "Future housing needs" had already been met on Sunny Creek per the Council's admission in the Resolution of November 5, 2013: "The General Plan update could not increase densities on any sites in the NE quadrant due to "Limited residential capacity in the NE quadrant-to ensure compliance with the Growth Management dwelling unit limit for the NE quadrant." El Camino Real in the NE quadrant was designated a "scenic corridor" in the 1986 General Plan and should remain a scenic corridor. The existing documents mentioned above recognized that the 1,000s of residential units in the surrounding area, built or approved to be built, do provide ample employees close to jobs and do provide places to reside close to goods and services. The General Plan Mobility element affects the quality of life in this area. Another shopping center is not needed. People do not walk to stores and carry packages home. There isn't a need for stores right next to our residences. The Robertson Ranch shopping center will be a mile away from Sunny Creek. Certainly that is close enough without having to disrupt the Sunny Creek area with more delivery trucks, stop-and-go cars, noise, lights, and congestion. People generally would rather drive to stores of their choosing regardless of proximity to home. They enjoy the independence of a car especially to carry packages. Furthermore, the large number of s~nior citizens that live in the vicinity of Sunny Creek do not need shopping next door as it is not safe for them to be carrying packages home or even navigate a transport cart in congested areas. Why are you designating 8 acres of Sunny Creek as Commercial? It was originally supposed to be 6.8 acres in the Envision Carlsbad report. A few small convenience stores are all that is needed. "Meeting {obscure} City Housing Element objectives", the reason given in the General Plan for high density residential, should not be at the expense of more traffic, congestion, water usage, energy uses, and City services, especially when l,OOOs of residential units already exist in this immediate area (and also provide low and moderate income housing {i.e. the existing Pacific View Apartments, Sunny Creek Apartments, and the Robertson Ranch housing/apartments, and the planned Encinas Creek Apartments near Sunny Creek, etc.). "Future housing needs" have already been adequately addressed in previous updates to the General Plan. Why change it? When will it stop? Building to subjective "future housing needs" in this 2015 updated General Plan will deteriorate the quality of life due to: increased population, congestion, traffic, energy use, pollution, noise, water usage, and constrained resources and impacts on Carlsbad's unique character and quality of life. Respectfully submitted, Madeleine Szabo bee: Concerned residents along the NE quadrant of El Camino Real 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 11 11 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 ~ I "Beach-goers and campers appreciate the convenient and fun services in the Ponto Beachfront Village," "The Ponto Beachfront Village is a truly special place in the City of Carlsbad that is enjoyed by both visitors and residents." The SCCRA Redevelopment Plan (2000) lists these core goals: *Strengthen and stimulate the economic base * Enhance commercial and recreation functions * Increase amenities to benefit the public The current proposal fails to deliver on the above. Ponto is the southern gateway to the city. Once it is built out there is no going back. I urge you to reject the current plan under review and keep to the well balanced plan set forth in the Ponto Vision Plan. Carlsbad is a beautiful city and if developed properly the Ponto area can be jewel that rivals any along the Southern California coast. Should you go ahead with the currently proposed plan I'm afraid I will be forced to relocate due to the congestion and ugliness proposed in the plan you are currently considering. Thank you very much, Raj Altenhoff Planning Commission City of Carlsbad July 17, 2015 Page2 I. The Climate Action Plan is Insufficiently Enforceable. «c a. The Climate Action Plan is Not Tied to the General PlaQ. as Enforceable CEQA Mitigation. The EIR claims that the General Plan will not have a significant impact with regard to greenhouse gas generation. This is based, in part, on the strategies embodied in the CAP. The EIR states, "Federal, state, and local regulations, as well as policies in the proposed General Plan and associated reduction measures :in the CAP would make the impacts of the proposed General Plan less than significant." (DEIR. p. 3.4-59.) However, the CAP is not a required element of the General Plan, nor is it enforceable as a required mitigation measure of the General Plan EIR Nothing seems to require General Plan compliance with the CAP, even though the EIR relies upon the CAP for its conclusion that the General Plan will not have significant greenhouse gas impacts. Without inclusion in the General Plan as mitigation, the CAP cannot be enforced through CEQA. Accordingly, the Sierra Club is concerned both that the EIR's conclusions regarding greenhouse gas emissions attributable to the General Plan are unsupportable, and that the CAP is unenforceable. In Sierra Club v. County of Sqn Diego (2014) 231 CalApp.4th 1152, the Court found that the County of San Diego's Climate Action Plan failed to contain concrete and enforceable greenhouse reductions strategies an.d specific greenhouse gas emission reductions targets. These specific strategies and reductions targets were required mitigation for the County's 2011 General Plan update, which properly admitted that the growth anticipated pursuant to the policies of the General Plan update would result in significap.t greenhouse gas emissions. Here, despite the City's best attempts to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions with General Plan policies and compliance with state law, it is certain that the General Plan will lead to significant greenhouse gas emissions. Other cities with ·progressive climate policies-San Diego and Chula Vista, for example-have admitted as such and adopted climate action plans as mitigation for those impacts. This has resulted both in compliance with CEQA as well as compliance with state· policies designed to fight climate change. The Sierra Club urges the City of Carlsbad to do the same. Only with a truly binding and enforceable CAP can the City meet its climate change goa1s and provide substantial evidence for the EIR's conclusions about greenhouse gas impacts. From a drafting standpoint, the solution to the CAP enforceability issue is simple. First, the City need only to modify the Section 3.4 of the EIR regarding "Energy, GHG, and Climate Change .. to admit that the cumulative nature of greenhouse emissions and 2.. Planning Commission City of Carlsbad July 17, 2015 Page3 climate change means that the City's anticipated growth under the new General Plan will have significant impacts on climate change, despite the City's inclusion of General Plan policies and a CAP. Then, the General Plan should be modified to include the CAP as a Policy contributing both to Greenhouse Gas reductions and Sustainability. The EIR should list these policies as enforceable mitigation measures. The language used by the County of San Diego is oue model that could be followed. San Diego's Climate Change Mitigation Measure CC-1.2 committed to preparing a climate action plan with "more detailed greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and deadlines" and "comprehensive and enforceable GHG emissions reductions that will achieve" specified GHG reductions by the year 2020. Here, the City of Carlsbad has already prepared such a Climate Action Plan that is designed to meet certain reductions targets. The City could add a mitigation measure committing the City to "adopting a climate action plan with detailed greenhouse gas emissions reductions targets and deadlines and comprehensive and enforceable GHG emissions to achieve those reductions by the years 20:?0 and 2035." b. Mitigation Will Not Render Greenhouse Gas Impacts Not s~~~~~ . At full build out, the General Plan estimates 7,880 new housing units, 22,906 new City residents, 2 million square feet of commercial development, 778,500 square feet of office space, and 4.6 million square feet of industrial development. (FEIR p. 3-2.) Due to this, the DEIR admits, "Future development under the proposed General Plan would result in an increase in energy consumption and generation ofGHG emissions from mobile, stationary, and area sources." (DEIR p. 3.4-28.) Despite population growth of 20 percent, the EIR somehow concludes that no significant greenhouse gas emission effects will result. (DEIR p. 3.4-28) This is unsupportable, given that the vehicle miles traveled for smaller projects, by themselves, are often found to generate significant environmental impacts that require mitigation 1mder CEQA. Certainly, the vehicle miles traveled by 22,906 residents and the trips generated by the commercia4 office, and industrial development would lij{ely generate significant greenhouse gas impacts. Further, no other General Plan EIR has credibly claimed insignificant greenhouse gas emissions. Although the C:ity might be able to justifY a conclusion of no significant impacts if its General Plan included sufficient and enforceable mitigation measures to reduce vehicle miles traveled or enforceable mitigation measures in the fonn of a Climate Action Plan, the City has not done so here. As described above, the Climate Action Plan is evaluated in the same EIR as the General Plan, but it :is not tied to the General Plan as enforceable mitigation for the General Plan's greenhouse gas impacts even though the CAP is part of the basis for the City's claim of no significant impacts. Further; after 3 Planning Commission City of Cai'lsbad July 17, 2015 Page4 2020, the City's only transportation sector action item is a large increase in zero emission vehicle;. (Revisions to the CAP, p. 5-28) Reliance on this, alone, to offset the greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle miles traveled by 22,906 new residents and trips generated by millions of square feet of new development is unrealistic. Sales of zero emission vehicles have not yet lived up to expectations, and 'With declining subsidies and incentives to purchase these vehicles, their increased market share cannot be assumed. These declining subsidies and incentives may reduce the City's ability to replace its own vehicle fleet Based on this action item alone, the General Plan policies will result in significant greenhouse gas impacts, contrary to the conclusion of the EIR. Thus the EIR' s conclusion lacks substantial evidence. Without significant revision of the General Plan to include new enforceable policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the only supportable way for the EIR to claim that it has mitigated greenhouse gas impacts to a level below significance is ifthe EIRincorporates the CAP as enforceable mitigation. Without incorporation of the CAP as mitigation for the General Plan's greenhouse gas emissions impacts, the EIR cannot satisfy CEQA. c. Additio~al Strengthening ofthe Climate Action Plan is Necessary. The Sierra Club is pleased by the City's efforts to strengthen the Climate Action Plan, but the Plan still lacks many of the feasible goals and strategies suggested by commenters. For example. the Sierra Club strongly supports a goal achieving 100 percent renewable energy on the City's electrical grid by 2035, a goal the City of San Diego included in its draft CAP. The Sierra Club hereby incorporates the additional suggestions contained in the comments submitted by North Coast Advocates (Everett Delano) and Preserve Calavera. The Sierra Club further suggests the inclusion of additional mitigation for future greenhouse gas impacts in the form of acquisition of additional open space and park lands. In addition to preventing additional greenhouse gas emissions caused by development; undeveloped green spaces provide opportunities for cooler surface temperatures and can help to offset the urban heat island effect. II. Responses to .Comments Raited Uwing the DEIR Comment Period are Jnad~uate. CEQA requires the lead agency to respond to comments raised during the administrative process. The EIR is a document of accm.mtability. (Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376, 392.) CEQA ensures accountability through the requirement that the lead agency provide written "'good faith, reasoned analysis" in response to comments on an EIR by the public. (Guideline§ 15088, subd.(c).) When a comment raises a significant enviromnental issue, the lead agency must address tl1e comment "in detail giving reasons Planning Commission City of Carlsbad July 17,2015 PageS why" the comment was "not accepted." (Ibid.) "Conclusory statements unsupported by factual :information will not suffice." (Ibid; Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents ofUniversity of California (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1112, 1124.) The level of detail of responses to comments must be commensurate with the level of detail of the comments. (Friends of the Eel River v. Sonoma County Water Agency (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 859, 878 ["the determination of the sufficiency of the agency's responses to comments on the draft EIR turns upon the detail required in. the responses"].) This requirement for good faith, reasoned analysis "ensures that stubborn problems er serious criticism are not swept under the rug.'' (Santa Clarita Organization for Planning the Environment v. County of Los Angeles (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 715, 732.) The courts have held that inadequate responses to comments-alone-can be grounds for voiding a project's approval. (See, Env. Protection Information Center. v. Johnson (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 604. 627 .) Failwe to respond to a single substantive comment is sufficient to invalidate approval of a FEIR. (Flanders Foundation v. City of Carmel by-the-Sea (2012) 202 CalAppAth 603.) The Sierra Club's comments on the draft EIRraised many important substantive issues regarding the Climate Action Plan, its likely effectiveness) methodology and the CAP's enforceability. These comments were detailed and well-supported with attached documentation. Detailed letters regarding the Project submitted by city residents, advocacy groups, and other members of the public, including North County Advocates (Everett Delano) and Preserve Calavera, during the comment periods for the Project echo these concerns. The FEIR fails to include good faith, detailed and specific :responses to many of these specific comments, especially those raised regarmng the Climate Action Plan. "[W]here comments from responsible experts or sister agencies disclose new or conflicting data or opinions that cause concern that the agency may not have fu11y evaluated the project and its alternatives, these comments may not simply be ignored. There must be good faith, reasoned analysis in response." (Cleary v. County of Stanislaus (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 348, 357. Inadequate responses include, but are not limited to the following: -In Comment B 10-17, attorney Everett Delano, on behalf of North County Advocates, pointed out the CAP's reliance on SANDAG's RTP, which was held to be insufficient by the Court of Appeal. In response, the FEIR cJaims that the GHG targets are based only on AB 32 and S-3-05. However, throughout the EIR, the City states that it is using SANDAG methodology and models. For example, the DEIR used the RTP to 5 Planning Commission City of Carlsbad July 17, 2015 Page6 calculate traffic-related GHG emissions. This is not a good faith, reasoned response. -In Comment B22-12, the Sierra Club pointed out the EIR's failure to consider the General Plan • s greenhouse gas impacts to be significant. In response, the FEJR notes only that the Sierra Club's disagreement over methodology and significance criteria does not mean the draft ElR is inadequate. This comment is nonresponsive and does not address how the City determined that greenhouse gas impacts would not be significant. -In Comment D71-18, the Sierra Club asked the City to add kitchen scraps to the City's curbside waste collection program, a program that has been instituted in several other Southem California cities, including Santa Monica and Redondo Beach. The FEIR does not respond to thls reasonable request -In Comment E12-4, North Coast Advocates noted the CAP's failure t.o incorporate Governor Brown's Executive Order B-30-15, which established a new interim statewide greenhouse gas emission reduction target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. While the FEIR correctly states that the CAP provides for continuous monitoring and updating to respond to changed circumstances~ the Governor• a Executive Order is a changed circumstance that wammts updating. The Executive Order must be incorporated into the CAP prior to adoption. Conclusion The San Diego Chapter of the Sierra Club respectfully requests that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council refuse to certifY the BIR and deny approval of the General Plan and Climate Action Plan at this time. The City has an unparalleled opportunity to put in place an enforceable model Climate Action Plan. For the benefit of future generations, the Sierra Club urges the City not to squander this opportunity. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Michelle N. Black 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 11 11 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I From: DeAnn Weimer [mailto_:·········· Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 8:20AM To: Don Neu; Council Internet Email Subject: Pedestrian Plan & Ambrosia Hi Don, I wanted to follow up on my comments Saturday, particularly as Planning Commissioner l'Hereux wanted more information on Ambrosia pedestrian improvements. As you may recall, Alta Planning & Design was the consultant. I have attached one of the slide presentations they did and on slide 9 Ambrosia at Aviara Oaks Campus is listed as the 14th location (out of 15) for improvements. The August 2008 Pedestrian Master Plan called for widening the sidewalk to 10 feet along Ambrosia from the Aviara Oaks campus at a cost of $103,410; installation of a Class 1 path facility connecting Dove library to Aviara Oaks schools via the northeastern baseball path ($190,362); and providing Wayfind signage to connect major origins and destinations (including the school, trail access points, public library and parks)-representing 22,618 feet of wayfinding network with 1 sign every 900 feet for a cost of $7,800. These measures were designed to alleviate the following problems identified by the report: 1. Safety of student pedestrians during peak school periods 2. Inadequate sidewalk waiting areas 3. Circulation issues during drop-off/pick-up periods 4. Poor connectivity to nearby shopping and library land uses. Conditions at this location have become more critical over the last seven years. We don't want these measures to be forgotten in the new "livable streets" focus or under the new mobility plan. Thank you for considering all of our recommendations regarding the Amended General Plan. Regards, De'Ann Weimer - From: Evelyn Montalbano Sent: Monday, July 20, 2015 8:51AM To: Glen Van Peski Subject: MEETING JULY 18 Hi Glen: Yesterday, there were over 200 people at the meeting. Most of us had fallen ~ut of bed with the early morning thunder. Since you are the Director of Economic Development, and we know economic development needs energy, you should be aware that more than half of the public wore RED badges for 100% clean, renewable energy. Unfortunately, none of them knew the facts. After my speech, I was confronted by many of them about my stance. I proceeded to tell them it was not my stance but the FACTS! One of them, cited Elon Musk and his storage batteries. Yes, for autos and homes NOT power plants. Significant progress needs to be made in the development of these storage batteries. Everyone, with whom I had spoken, was either ignorant or in denial of these facts. Another lady brought numerous articles from solar energy publications written by environmentalists. My speech referred to an article in the "Economist" which was impartial about fossil fuels vs. renewable, clean energy. The residents of Carlsbad are educated, intelligent people. However, they may refuse to accept the facts. Well, drum it into their heads. If there is another critical meeting, I would be happy to appear with others in tow. Another thought, 40/60 is a wild figure but there should be a compromise about densities especially for the Ponto Beachfront Village. I did sign that petition. A lady approached me about the 40/60, "saying it's not true; open space is the least costly to maintain". I told her, "if it does not produce revenue, it's costly". My speech is attached. EVELYN MONTALBANO- THE CITY NEEDS TO INFORM THE PUBLIC OF WHY WE CANNOT REPLACE THE SHUTTERED SAN ONOFREE PLANT WITH A 100% RENEWABLE, CLEAN ENERGY PLANT. AN ARTICLE IN THE JUNE 13, 2015 EDITION OF THE ECONOMIST STATES, AND I AM PARAPHRASING, uFOR SOLAR POWER TO KEEP INCREASING ITS SHARE OF ELECTRICITY GENERATION, THERE NEEDS TO BE SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS IN ENERGY STORAGE BECAUSE THE RENEWABLE, CLEAN POWER SOURCES ARE INTERMITTENT. THEREFORE, OUR POWER GRIDS CANNOT SUPPORT THIS SOURCE OF UNSTABLE, INCONSISTENT ENERGY. ONLY BY BUILDING THE GRIDS TO OPERATE WITH INTERMITTENT POWER; AND, IF SIGNIFICANT PROGRESS IS MADE IN ENERGY STORAGE FROM CLEAN, RENEWABLE SOURCES, CAN THIS DREAM BECOME A REALITY. RIGHT NOW, IT IS A DREAM AND DOES NOT WORK IN THE REAL WORLD. CONSEQUENTLY, WE NEED TO USE THE PLENTIFUL, CONSISTENT GAS WE HAVE TO POWER OUR PLANTS. I SUGGEST THAT BEFORE YOU MAKE A FINAL DECISION YOU UNDERSTAND All OF THE ABOVE AND ACCEPT THE FACTS UNTIL TECHNOLOGY IS DEVELOPED TO CHANGE THOSE FACTS. TO THE NEXT ISSUE--THE CRY FOR 40% OPEN SPACE (A PARK IN EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD) IS SHORTSIGHTED. THE GOLDEN YEARS ARE OVER. TODAY, THE ECONOMY IS SUCH THAT All STATES AND CITIES STRUGGLE FOR REVENUE. THE 21sT CENTURY DEMANDS THAT WE USE OUR RESOURCES WISELY, I.E., OIL, GAS AND REVENUE-PRODUCING DEVELOPMENT. PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ARE WONDERFUL I WOULD LOVE TO LIVE IN A PARKLAND. HOWEVER, THE DAYS OF SPRAWLING SUBURBIA ARE NO LONGER DESIRABLE --NOR IS IT VIABLE. WE NEED TO BE WISE AND REASONABLE AND LIVE IN TODAY'S WORLD. THAT SAID, SMART PLANNING FOR QUALITY OF LIFE IS IMPORTANT. PRESERVING THE SMAll TOWN BEACHY VI BE OF CARLBAD IS PARAMOUNT. I DO BELIEVE THE UPDATED GENERAL PLAN STRIVES VALIANTLY AND SUCCEEDS IN THAT DIRECTION. NOW IN THE 21sT CENTURY, DO YOU REAllY WANT TO HOLD ON TO GOALS THAT WERE 11 1M PLIED" AS A LOFTY IDEAL DECADES AGO AND NOT RECOGNIZE THAT THE WORLD HAS CHANGED? All OF THOSE PARKS AND OPEN SPACE NEED FUNDING! WE NEED A BETTER BALANCE FOR GROWTH AND REVENUE. 40/60 CANNOT SUPPORT THE COLD, ECONOMIC REALITIES THAT WE MUST FACE. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I l1 l1 l1 l1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 From: DandD [mailto Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 4:16PM To: Jennifer Jesser Subject: Additional Comments on GP/EIR July 21, 2015 for Planning Commission Ms Jesser Please forward this email and the 2 pages of att to the Planning Commissioners for their consideration. Thank you Diane Nygaard Chair Scully and Planning Commissioners I have just reviewed the pile of additional late submittals added to the thousands of pages you have already received. Let me be respectful of your time and be extra brief: -Three property owners/reps requested reductions in the amount of their property designated as open space. I expect over the next few years there will be more requests like this. Having a broad goal for open space provides you some flexibility in responding to such concerns as they are raised-while still assuring the overall community vision is honored. Including a broad goal does not lock the city in, but it does set a direction-and suggest if there are losses in some places perhaps additions could be considered in others. -You asked staff to provide some information about the flip side of establishing goals like 40% open space. Please also consider the att. This summarizes research done by the Trust for Public Land over many years, and a more recent study that really qualified these benefits using data from five sample cities. Cities financially benefit from their investment in parks and open space-from increased property values/taxes from homes near parks, increased tourism dollars, and reduced costs for storm water clean-up and removal of air pollution. There is hard data that supports what we have all known for some time-there are multiple benefits from establishing a system of parks and open space as part of the fabric of the community. Please make continuing the goal for 40% open space part of your legacy to this community. Diane Nygaard On behalf of Preserve Calavera Measuring the Economic Value of a City Park System Trust for Public Land 2009 http://www.tp!.org[sites/defau!t[flles/c!oud.tp!.org[pubs[ccpe-econvalueparks-rpt.pdf This research study evaluated the economic benefits of seven attributes of city park systems that can be measured and then quantified the results for five sample cities. Economic Measure Direct Income to City Property Values Tourism income Direct Savings to City Direct Use Value of Parks Health Community Cohesion Environmental Savings Reducing costs of storm water clean-up Removal of air pollution by vegetation Value to City 5% inc in property value of properties within 500' of a park 35% increase it tourist spending(1) $ 1.91-$ 9.33 avg value per visit $ 250-500/yr annual difference in health costs of active/inactive residents $ 18.77/hr value of volunteer hours $ .012/cubic foot reduced cost of stormwater clean-up{$ 5.9m/yr savings in Phila) $ 19.9 m/yr in Phila for tons of air pollutants removed by tree cover and acres of park land (1) SD Study estimated 26% of overnight visitors visited because of parks/open space IT PAYS TO SAVE ! Six reasons why land conservation makes good economic sense : 1 Parks and open space often increase the value of nearby properties, along with property tax revenue. 2 Parks and open space attract businesses and trained employees in search of a high quality of life. 3 Parks and open space attract tourists and boost recreation spending. 4 Parks and open space reduce obesity and health care costs by supporting exercise and recreation. 5 Working lands, such as farms and forests, usually contribute more money to a community than the cost of the services they require. 6 Conserved open space helps safeguard drinking water, clean the air, and prevent flooding- services provided much more expensively by other means. For more information on the economic benefits of parks and open space, go to www.tpl.org/benefits 1 1 1 1 1 ,:c 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ 11 11 11 11 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 SHOPOFF REALTY INVESTMENTS Transforming Opportunity into Value July 21, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commissioners c/o Don Neu Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Ponto Beachfront Village-Proposed Land Uses Carlsbad Planning Commissioners, Page 11 Several comments and concerns were brought forward during the joint Planning Commission/City Council hearing on Saturday regarding Ponto Beachfront. As the applicant for Ponto Beachfront, we are providing this letter to darify several items discussed, and to respectfully request the City provide an R-23/and use designation on the easterly parcel and a split land use designation of GC/R-30 on the westerly parcel to allow the Ponto Beachfront property to be developed consistent with the Vision Plan. First and foremost, our plan is to develop Ponto Beachfront consistent with the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan (the Vision Plan) that the City approved in 2007. We are planning town homes on the easterly portion of the property, and mixed-use residential and commercial uses on the westerly portion of the property, as called for in the City's Vision Plan. Several comments regarding the proposed density were noted during the hearing. Our proposed Ponto Beachfront plan is not high density, and as currently proposed, averages a density of 19 dwelling units/acre. Proposal for Ponto East Parcel: R-23 We would like to confirm our support for the staff recommendation of an R-23 land use designation, not R-30, on the eastern parcel. The Vision Plan proposed a density of 19 dwelling units per acre on this site. R-23 would match that exactly by implementing a range of 15-23 dwelling units per acre with a growth control point of 19 dwelling units per acre. Proposal for the Ponto West Parcel: GC/R-30 The Vision Plan called for Mixed Use on the western parcel and Envision Carlsbad is intended to implement that Vision Plan. The City's Vision Plan proposes commercial on the ground floor with residential on the second and third stories along with some freestanding town homes. --·~--·--~--·----- From: Steve Linke [m?JLtQ.;_?.pJinl<•.~--····· Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 10:56 AM To: Planning Cc: Don Neu Subject: Loss of Carlsbad's road system arterials--Mobility Element needs revision Greetings Planning Commissioners: I was unable to attend the public hearing on the General Plan update on Saturday to provide my feedback on the newly proposed Mobility Element, so I am writing to you instead. The major thrust of the new Mobility Element is to improve pedestrian and bicycle access to Carlsbad streets, which is laudable. However, it goes too far in re- prioritizing the vast majority of current arterial streets to pedestrians and bicycles, and exempting major portions of the few remaining arterials from meeting vehicle level of service standards in the future. Please see the "before" and "after" figures attached below. Frankly, it is shocking to me how few remaining street segments there will be for which the Transportation Department will be required to maintain acceptable vehicular levels of service. The reality is that Carlsbad is largely comprised of huge swaths of residential areas with limited inter-mixed areas of employment and retail, and over 96% of Carlsbad residents currently drive their vehicles to work with an average commute time of 29 minutes. Re-prioritizing nearly all streets to pedestrian and bicycle travel will do little or nothing to change these facts. Thus, it is unavoidable that vehicles will remain the primary mode of transportation in the foreseeable future. Retaining the current vehicle priority on just the arterial streets, as I am proposing, does not mean that extensive improvements could not still be made to those streets to make them more inviting for pedestrians and bicycles. It would just help ensure that such improvements are not done (or even required to be done) at the expense of unacceptable vehicle congestion. Thus, I urge you to make two important changes to the Mobility element of the proposed General Plan prior to recommending it to the City Council: 1. Change the first attribute under "Connector Streets" and "Employment Oriented Streets" (these are the reclassified arterial streets under the new scheme) in Table 3-1 of the draft Mobility Element to "Vehicular and bus efficiency shall be prioritized and managed; pedestrians and bikes are provided for, but not prioritized" (to match the arterial street attribute). 2. Modify Implementation Policies 3-P.7 and 3-P.9 to provide the City more latitude to implement vehicle capacity improvements on arterial streets that have been deemed exempt from vehicle service requirements, and delete Implementation Policy 3-P.8, which describes exemption of specific arterial street segments on La Costa Avenue, El Camino Real, and Palomar Airport Road. It does not seem prudent to handcuff the City by codifying specific segments as exempt in the General Plan, because conditions could change for those segments in the future, and there is no reason they could not be included on the separate list of exemptions under 3-P. 7 that remains fluid. I have attached my full public comment on the General Plan/Environmental Impact Report, which delves much deeper into these topics. I would appreciate the opportunity to discuss this with each of you. Thank you for your consideration. Best regards, Steve Linke June 17, 2014 Jennifer Jesser Carlsbad Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 je n n ifer.jesser@ ca rls badca.go\f Re: Carlsbad draft General Plan update and Environmental Impact Report Ms. Jesser: The following are my comments on the above-referenced documents with extensive footnotes attached in support. The transportation portion (Mobility Element) of the February 2014 draft General Plan update is in need of revision. While the transportation plan in place under the current General Plan may be biased toward vehicles, the proposed update is ideologically biased against vehicles to an alarming degree. The City needs to take a more balanced approach in the update and recognize the reality of vehicular traffic needs in Carlsbad. Unbalanced street typologies The newly proposed scheme inappropriately downgrades all but a handful of Carlsbad's largest "arterial" streets to "connector" or /I employment oriented" street status and requires them to be re- prioritized to serve pedestrian and bike travel over vehicular travel (identical to neighborhood streets). For example, most of the major east-west corridors in the eastern portion of the city (e.g., Faraday Avenue, Poinsettia Lane, Alga Road, La Costa Avenue east of El Camino Real, and Calle Barcelona) would be re-prioritized to pedestrian/bike travel (Footnotes 1A-1C), and reduction from fourto two vehicle lanes and installation of features intended to impede vehicle flow on these arterial streets is intended, even ifthey are carrying up to 25,000 vehicles per day (Footnote 2). Street typologies untested and inconsistent with those in other cities being used as models City staff has cited "complete streets" plans from other cities to support their new scheme, but close inspection of such plans show that they have retained vehicle priority on arterials similar to those destined to be re-prioritized in Carlsbad. For example, the "complete streets" initiative in Fort Collins CO has been cited as a successful model (Footnote 3A). However, Fort Collins retains vehicle priority on the equivalents ofthe streets planned for downgrade to bike/pedestrian priority in Carlsbad (Footnote 3B), and the Fort Collins street classification scheme retains four vehicle lanes when the streets serve over 15,000 vehicles per day {Footnote 3C). City staff has acknowledged that the street re-prioritization is something of a cutting edge experiment that has not been done before (Footnote 4). 1 Reduced vehicle capacities on current arterials could compromise evacuations During the recent Poinsettia fire, Poinsettia Lane was in gridlock, and it is concerning to think what might happen during evacuations when many of our main corridors have been reduced to single lanes in each direction with bulb-outs, medians, roundabouts, and other features intended to enforce single- lane traffic flow. This could greatly restrict the ability of police to adjust traffic patterns in emergency situations (Fcrotnote 5). Even the largest arterials are being compromised for bike/pedestrian priority Even for the few streets that would retain their vehicle priority as arterials, there is a list of predefined exempted areas (Footnote 6A) and a directive to develop a further list of exempted areas (Footnote 6B). The City and any developers that might increase vehicle traffic on these exempted arterials are then restricted from implementing vehicle capacity improvements, but instead are required to implement improvements to enhance pedestrian/bike service that would likely further degrade vehicle service (Footnote 6B). The predefined exempted areas carry massive volumes of vehicles and include portions of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road, and all of La Costa Avenue west of El Camino Real (Footnote 6A). It is unrealistic to assume re-prioritization will reduce vehicular service needs in Carlsbad These vehicular service downgrades are being proposed under the guise that wider bike lanes and related changes on the arterial routes will compel people to start commuting to work, shopping, etc. on foot and by bike rather than by car. However, much of Carlsbad is a sprawling bedroom community with steep grades and expansive areas of residences without nearby employment, stores, etc. Commercial areas in Carlsbad tend to be in very limited and focused areas along arterial routes (Footnote 7). Nearly $6 million was spent between 2003 and 2007 to install improved bike lanes in Carlsbad (Footnote 8) with a major goal being to reduce vehicle-based commutes to work (Carlsbad Bicycle Master Plan). However, these improvements had no meaningful impact on the vehicle commuting rates. In fact, the percentage of vehicle-based commuters increased in that period (as assessed by the US Census Bureau in 2000 and 2010) to an all-time high of 96.3%. In addition, average commute time by Carlsbad residents is 28.6 minutes (US Census Bureau 2010 data). For the vast majority of Carlsbad residents, it is not practical to routinely use non-vehicle modes of transportation for things like commuting and shopping Significant improvements to bike/pedestrian access and safety can be achieved without codifying street re-prioritization It is a laudable goal to convert people from driving to walking/biking, but, as a practical matter, that likely would be largely restricted to recreational activities and would not meaningfully reduce vehicle trips or the need for vehicle capacity on the streets. It is appropriate for the proposed General Plan to prioritize nearly all Carlsbad streets for walking/biking (e.g., neighborhood streets and those in the coastal and village areas). However, the City needs to have a reality check and realize that it must continue to prioritize vehicle service standards on its arterial streets, keeping in mind that the vehicle 2 priority does not preclude substantial improvements to pedestrian/bike access and safety on those routes. The City and developers will no longer be required to mitigate traffic congestion and may need to increase it One of the most disturbing aspects of the proposed street re-prioritization scheme is that developers and the City will no longer be required to take steps to reduce vehicle congestion created by their projects or other emerging conditions. Rather, developers and the City may be required to take costly steps that will actually increase vehicle congestion with minimal practical impact on pedestrian/bicycle usage (Footnote 9). La Costa Avenue's projected vehicular traffic volume make it unsuitable for its proposed street typology that is equivalent to a neighborhood street The most egregious example is La Costa Avenue east of El Camino Real, which is projected to carry over 22,000 vehicles per day after La Costa Town Square opens in the Fall of 2014 and is projected to carry over to 24,000 vehicles per day by 2030 (La Costa Avenue Road Diet Arterial Traffic Calming Project, KOA Corp., September 2008; La Costa Town Square Environmental Impact Report, EDAW Inc., 2009}. Ironically, just as the vehicle service requirement is increasing for La Costa Avenue, the City is planning further reductions in total vehicle capacity. This includes vehicle lane removal and installation of features (e.g., roundabouts, bulb-outs, medians, and other narrowings) that are primarily intended to impede vehicular traffic {La Costa Avenue Improvement Plan, Pat Noyes & Associates, August 2011). The above-described downgrades to La Costa Avenue will reduce the vehicular level of service to an "F" rating (the worst on the scale of {/A" to uF") based on the rating system in the new Mobility Element (Footnote 10). Under the existing General Plan, that would be unacceptable. However, there- prioritization for pedestrians and bikes under the new scheme means that this degradation in vehicle service on La Costa Avenue is not only acceptable, but it may be necessary to meet the new requirements (Footnote 1C). Interestingly, Fort Collins, CO, which has been cited as a "complete streets" success story, has limited four-to-two travel lane "road diets" to streets with 15,000 vehicles per day or less (Footnote 3C), and most road-diet guidelines suggest that they should only be done when traffic is limited to 18,000 vehicles per day. In contrast, Carlsbad is planning road diets for streets carrying up to 25,000 vehicles per day (Footnote 2), including the current plans for La Costa Avenue, which is projected to carry over 24,000 vehicles per day by 2030. The unbalanced ideological shift in transportation priorities is inconsistent with public sentiment A 2009 city-wide survey was supposedly designed to assess the priorities of Carlsbad residents related to the General Pian update. City staff has used responses from that survey to support their initiatives tore- prioritize the streets. However, the twisted interpretations are not consistent with the actual responses. 3 For example, in reply to a survey question about the importance of improving traffic flow in and around Carlsbad, three-fourths of respondents ranked that as medium to high importance, which seems inconsistent with re-prioritizing arterial streets from vehicles to pedestrians and bikes. In addition, there were two virtually identical questions in the survey asking people to rank the importance of increasing walking and biking paths. Not surprisingly, again, three-fourths of respondents ranked that as medium to high importance, but the questions certainly implied off-street improvements (Footnote 11). There were no questions about downgrading vehicle service standards on arterial streets in order to prioritize walking and biking on those streets. Thus, I challenge the City Council to distribute another city-wide survey before accepting the street reclassifications in the current draft General Plan and ask questions similar to the following: • Do you favor a conversion of streets like Faraday Avenue, Poinsettia Lane, Alga Road, La Costa Avenue east of El Camino Real, and Calle Barcelona from being prioritized for vehicle traffic to being prioritized for pedestrian and bike traffic, including potential removal oftravellanes to widen bike lanes and/or installation of roundabouts and other traffic calming features? • If such a conversion took place, would you begin commuting to work or going shopping on foot or by bike given the increased comfort/safety of walking or biking on those streets? Conclusion and suggested changes To be clear, I strongly support a pedestrian and bike emphasis on all local/neighborhood streets. I also strongly support any pedestrian and bike safety and usability improvements to the current arterial streets, as long as vehicle service is not degraded. That said, to address the above concerns, I am requesting the following changes to the draft General Plan: 1. Change the first attribute under "Connector Streets" and "Employment Oriented Streets" (these are the reclassified arterial streets under the new scheme) in Table 3-1 of the draft Mobility Element to "Vehicular and bus efficiency shall be prioritized and managed; pedestrians and bikes are provided for, but not prioritized" (to match the arterial street attribute). 2. Modify Implementation Policies 3-P.7 and 3-P.9 to provide the City more latitude to implement vehicle capacity improvements on arterial streets that have been deemed exempt from vehicle service requirements, and delete Implementation Policy 3-P.8, which describes exemption of specific arterial street segments on La Costa Avenue, El Camino Real, and Palomar Airport Road. It does not seem prudent to handcuff the City by codifying specific segments as exempt in the General Pian, because conditions could change for those segments in the future, and there is no reason they could not be included on the separate list of exemptions under 3-P.7 that remains fluid. 4 Footnote 2. Proposed Carlsbad policies showing intent to remove vehicle lanes and install features to impede vehicle flow on streets carrying up to 25,000 vehicles per day. J·P.u Eval,u:.ate implementing a road diet to three lanes or fewer for existrng four-.!ane streets currently carrying or projected to carry 25,000 average dally traffic volumes or less ln order to promote biking, v·val!dng, safer street crossings, ami attrattive streetscapes. 3-P.13 Consider innovative design and program solutions to improve the rnobiiity, efficiency, connectivity, and safet~~ of the tramportati;on s~.rstem. Innovative design solutions include, but are not 'limited to, traffk calming devices, rm.mdabouts, traffic drc~es, curb extensions, separated bicycle infrastructure, pedestrian scramble intersections, high visibility pedestrian treatments and infrastructure, and traffic coordination. innovative program sol!utions include, but are not limited to, webpages with travel demand and traffic signal management information, car and bike share programs, active transportation campaigns, and rntergenerational programs around schools to enhance safe. routes to schools. Other innovative solutions In dude bic;rde friendly business districts, electric and solar power enerm1 transportation systems, intelligent transportation systems, semi-or autonomous vehicles. and shutttes. Source: Policies section from the Mobility Element ofthe February 2014 draft General Plan 9 Footnote 3A. Change in Carlsbad street classifications justified by citing transportation system design in other cities. From Section 3.3 of the Mobility Element of the February 2014 draft General Plan: "Traditionally, transportation systems have been designed to achieve a level of service from the perspective of the driver, not pedestrians or bicyclists. However, cities throughout the country are now designing their transportation systems to achieve levels of service for ail travel modes. Some cities, such as Fort Collins, CO, San Francisco, CA, Gainesville, FL, Charlotte, NC, and others, have been doing this for riC more than a decade ... " 10 Footnote 4. City staff acknowledge that their proposed street classification scheme is something of a cutting edge experiment. Source: April17, 2014 email exchange with Doug Bilse, Senior Traffic Engineer, Transportation Division, City of Carlsbad. Linke: " ... [A]re there examples of other cities comparable to Carlsbad where only a small number of "major arterials" are prioritized for vehicles and subject to minimum service levels, while the vast majority of streets, including all "minor arterials" (e.g., carrying 10,000 to 20,000 cars per day on four lanes), are prioritized for pedestrians and bicycles and exempt from achieving minimum vehicle service levels? I started looking at the cities promoted in the reports on the Carlsbad web site as being successful examples of the "complete streets" concept, and i have not found evidence to support that. For example, Fort Collins, CO has an MMLOS system, but their "minor arterials", which appear similar to the streets currently considered prime and secondary arterials in Carlsbad, still seem to be prioritized for vehicles. In other words, what is the street typology model Carlsbad is trying to emulate? Or, is this a grand, cutting-edge experiment to see what happens?" Bilse: "This is somewhat a cutting-edge experiment. However, I don't think the LOS methodology we have been using has provided meaningful results. Our consultant has concluded that the MMLOS being used does not really support a multimodal solution (I have a little bit of evidence to support that claim). I have no problems working with the community getting a better solution. You were quite frankly the origin of why we decided to change. So if all roads keep measuring how well vehicles are served, have we created a better place to live in Carlsbad? Should a few more roads have the {(typology" changed so that they are auto and pedestrian priority?" 13 Footnote 6A. Predefined arterial street sections exempt from vehicle capacity standards. J·PJil: Allow the follovJing streets to be LOS exempt facilities from the LOS standard identified ln Pol'rcy 3-P.4, subject to the requirements described In Pofky 3-P.7: • La Costa Avenue between Interstate-S and El Camino Real cc • fl Camino Real between Palomar Airport Road and La Costa Avenue • ?alornar Airport Road between Interstate-S and College Boulevard • Palomar Airport Road between El Camino Real and ~llelrose Drive Source: Policies section from the Mobility Element of the February 2014 draft General Plan Footnote 6B. Directive to develop a further list of arterial street sections exempt from vehicle capacity standards. 3·P.7 Develop and maintain a !1st of lOS exempt intersections and streets approved by the City Cou ndi. for lOS exempt intersections and streets, the dty wilt not impl'ement motor vehicle capacity improve- ments to maintain the lOS outlined in Policy 3-P)ll:fsuch improvements are beyond \<Vhat ;is identified as appropriate at build out of the Gf!>neraf Plan; however, other non-vehide capac- ity-building irnprmlemenh may be required to improve mobility, to the extent feasible, and/or to implement the livable streets goals and policies of this Mobility Element To be considered LOS exempt, an rntersection or street must be identified as built-out by the City Cound! because: a. acquiring the rights of way is not feasible; or the proposed improvements would sig:nificantly impact the envi- ronment an unacceptable way and mitigation vvould not contribute to the nine core values of the Carlsbad Cornmunity Vision; or c the proposed lmprovements would result in unacceptable irnpacts to other communit)l values m General Plan polkies; or d" the proposed improvements would require more than three through travel lanes in each direction. Source: Policies section from the Mobility Element of the February 2014 draft General Plan 15 footnote 10. The reduction of La Costa Avenue east of El Camino Real to 2 lanes will result in the degradation of the vehicle level of service (LOS} to an "f" rating under the MMLOS system in the draft Mobility Element. La Costa Avenue east of El Camino Real already serves >19,000 vehicles per day, and it is project to carry over 22,000 vehicles after La Costa Town Square opens in Fall 2014 and over 24,000 by 2030. LOS "F" kicks in at just 15,000 vehicles per day. Note that Fort Collins, CO, which has been cited in the draft General Plan as a "complete streets" success story, keeps streets carrying 15,000-35,000 vehicles per day as 4 lane arterials prioritized for vehicles, while Carlsbad is planning to downgrade La Costa Avenue to a 2-lane connector prioritized for pedestrians and bikes, despite the >24,000 vehicle per day need. Table 3.13~ I: Daily Street Segment Capacity Street Typology Typical Lane Level of Service Configuration LOSA LOS B LOSC LOS D LOS E. Arterial 61anes 25,000 35,000 50,000 55,000 60,000 Arterial 4lanes !5,000 2!,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 Industria! 41anes 10,000 14,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Industria! 21anes 5,000 7,000 10,000 12,500 15,000 Connector 41anes !0,000 14,000 20,000 25,000 30.000 Connector 21anes 5,000 7,000 10,000 13,000 15,000 Mixed-Flow Freeway Lanem 17,600 19,800 22,000 Freeway HOV Lanesf"l 14,400 16,200 !8,000 1n LOS thresholds were calculated based on VIC ratios of the daily thresho'ld volumes for the corresponding street dassification. !ZI Per lane capadttes presented. Note-These are general capacities for planning purposes. Spedfk operational characteristics, such as signa! coordination, can enhance operations significantly. Source: SANTfCI!TE Guidelines for Traffic Impact Studies in the San Diego Region, 2000. Source: Transportation chapter of the draft Environmental Impact Report on the draft General Plan 18 Footnote 11. Carlsbad Public Opinion Visioning Survey Report from the Envision Carlsbad Appendix, November 2009. 4F asked about traffic flow, and 4D and lSC asked almost identical questions about increasing walking and biking paths. However, there were no questions about downgrading vehicle service standards on arterial streets in order to prioritize walking and biking on those streets. 4. The City of Carlsbad is considering different priorities in planning for the City's future. For each priority listed below, please indicate if it should be a high priority, medium priority or low priority in thinking about Carlsbad's future. Don't A. B. c_ D. E. F. G. .!::lim Providing parks and recreational facilities in the City for active recreational uses ...... .48ilt. Protecting undeveloped areas for hiking and exploring____________________________________ _ __________ 62'l·f. Protecting natural habitats in and around Carlsbad __________________________ _ ·---···--·· 65q4} Creating new walking and biking trails within Carlsbad ___ _ _ _ _ ____ __ _ ___ . .43'% Increasing revenue for the City to maintain and improve the sePJices and programs thCJt Carlsbad currently offers ..... -··-··--··-----·----·--·---·--------------·--------···- Improving traffic flo .. v in and around Carlsbad ____________________ _ Mainlafning or improving property values within the City .... ______ ........ ···-···-------- ....... 26% _______ 37q.<(t .55% H_ Providing a range of housing options of different types & price levels within Medium Low Know 38% ·11 ~{J 3'% 26% W% 20/ ,o 25~<'0 gq-o 2% 35% 20'% 2'H, 45% 23~10 6% 38% 22ql& 3~!0 29% 121fb 4% CCJr!sbad ---------·-···-···--····-···--·--·--··· -·----·---·-·---·-----·---···-··---·---------·-·-····-···-······-__ 21'>,1,:, 30% 46";;, 4% I. Preserving historic bur!dings and places \Nithin Carlsbad-·----·----·---·----------·-----------------31% 41% 25% 3% 15. Please place a priority level on each of the following programs and facilities being considered for improvement or development in Carlsbad. Mecllum Low A. Improving and expanding the City's current community centers ________ ·-·-··-··-·····--··---.. 20% 43% 29% B. Developing public plazas and gathering places in or near your neighborhoocL _________ .22% 35% 39~/~ C. Increasing the number of walking and biking paths th3t connect to local parks and open space····-··-. ··-·····-·-···----··· . ··---···-·-··-·-......... 39% 36% 21% D. Providing food and shelter for homeless families both in the City and the region ____ ... 20% 33% 4o~~.o E. Supporting additional community events, such as local art exhibitions and "Jazz in the Park" type of events in the City __ ---··---···--···--··----·-___ ...... . 4•!% 17% F. Developing more public art within the City ..... . .. 20% 36% 40% Providing additional support services for physically & men!a!!y disabled residents ...... H'% 4'1% 29% H. Developing more housing choices within Carlsbad to give seniors additional options for living in Carlsbad as they get older.______ ·----------···--________ 24% 40% 30% L Work.ing with higher educational institutions, to deve!op new coHeges, universities and educational institutes in Carlsbad ............ ··--·--·-_________ . ___ . ---··---·----.......... 31% 32% 32% J. Promoting more opportunities for volunteers to give back to the community____ _ __ .40% 44% !1% K Cof!aborating more with local and regional non-profit organizations that serve 0-on~t Kno•,v 8~0 5~l& 4% 7% 3~;;, 4% 13% 7% so·· /o 5% the community-·--·----· .. _____ _ __ -·-··-·-···-···--·· --···---·--···--······-·-........ _ ·-·-··· .33% 43% 15% 9% 19 From: Lance Schulte [mailto:meyers-schu Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2015 6:44AM To: David de Cordova Cc: Don Neu; Jennifer Jesser; Jason Goff; Goddard Steven; Jean Camp; Sebahar Family Email; Kelsey Lundy Subject: RE: Ponto Townhouse Neighborhood Dave, Don & Jason: Thank you again for meeting Steven and me yesterday and discussing staff's recommendation and the Draft General Plan's land use in the Heart of Ponto. It was greatly appreciated. The San Pacifico Ponto Committee met immediately after our meeting with you, and Steven and ! shared your information and recommendations. Although it would be preferable to have R-15 in the Town home Residential (east of Ponto Drive) portion, the R-23 designation there is supported. Also, thank you for your recommendations to maintain the dominate commercial land use and orientation on the mixed-use portion (west of Ponto Drive). Limiting the residential uses in the Mixed-use portion to 12 dwellings wi!! preserve the vital commercial viability and orientation of this area. There is a pressing retail gap (estimated at over $28 million for just food/beverage, etc. needs within a 2-mile radius}. This lack of Visitor Severing commercial use in Coastal South Carlsbad-both for Citizens and visitors in the existing hotels in South Carlsbad-currently forces increased traffic and VMT to distant (and out-of- town) commercial areas, and reduces the economic potential of our existing South Carlsbad hotels. There will also be an increased and critical need for supportive high qua!ity commercial Heart for South Carlsbad to support local and regional beach visitors and the planned Ponto hotels. Creating a high-quality "there-there" is very important. This current need will be amplified when the Carlsbad Boulevard realignment creates a liner open space park along the coast, and the planned pedestrian links to the beach under Carlsbad Boulevard and other improved pedestrian connections to the beach are implemented. As the Heart of Ponto Vision Plan developing the mixed-use area and interconnecting open space Heart of Ponto properly, with high quality commercial with an eye to the long term will be very important. The San Pacifico Ponto Committee will be meeting with the developer very soon to start our formal discussions to see how they are proceeding on their development proposal revisions (based on City and Citizen comments and suggestions), and work with them toward common ground to Develop Ponto Right. Key Citizen concerns are faithfully implementing the qualities of Ponto Vision Plan to achieve appropriate and long lasting high quality development that befits Ponto's very special, precious coastal resource, and important coastal gateway to South Carlsbad; and is a wonderful addition to our great City. Thank you again. If you could please keep us informed of planning and public works proposals in Ponto, it would be greatly appreciated. The San Pacifico Ponto Committee will communicate back to you our progress in working with the current and future Ponto developers. Please also know you are always welcome to contact us to discuss issues, ask questions, and solicit our insights as citizens who Live Ponto 24/7. Again, thank you and kindest regards, Lance Schulte July 23, 2015 Planning Commission City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Sunny Creek Commercial Opporhmity Site: General Plan Land Use Designation Dear Chairman and Members of the Commission: Our firm represents Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Walmart"), the property owner of the property referred to in the General Plan Land Use element as "Sunny Creek Commercial". The Planning Commission, during its deliberations last night, took a "hand vote" to decrease the proposed density for residential units on the property from a land use designation of R23 to a designation of R15. Wa1mart does not support this recommendation and requests that the Commission reconsider this change in density to follow Staff's recommendation. The decrease in residential density removes approximately 40 dwelling units from the property and jeopardizes the economic viability of development. As you are aware, the Sunny Creek Commercial property is located within the City's Growth Management "Zone 15". Development within Zone 15 requires construction of substantial infrastructure. The high cost of the Zone 15 infrastructure, along ·with the City's requirement that twenty percent (20%) of the residential units be set aside as affordable housing, places a great financial burden on the Sunny Creek Commercial property and the higher density designation is necessary to allow· for successful development to occur. Staff's recommended R23 designation was based on input from the development community based on these factors. Development of the site will require review and approval by City staff, the Planning Commission and City Council and final density of the residential should be determined through that review process. W2ll8-RE _MGMT-CA-CARLSBAD:_STORE _,;5724 --1721626.1 Planning Commission City of Carlsbad July 23, 2015 Page2 The R23 designation is consistent with staff recommendation, consistent with the analysis in the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") and assists the City in meeting its low and moderate housing requirement established by the State. Accordingly, W almart requests that it be reinstated on the Sunny Creek Commercial property. Very truly yours, ~/;~_,<~NOl--~ Brell~ R. McManig I, for GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN, A Professional Corporation BRM: djb Enclosures cc: Jennifer Jesser,=~=~==-""'--'='-'==~'-""-'-' W2118-RE_MG!vfi'-CA-CARLSBAD;,_STORE .. #5724 --1721626.1 I, for one, do not have a Bluetooth enabled car and have no plans to buy one in the near nor distance future. In addition, having a ceU phone for more than 20 years, I have never, never, ever turned on the Bluetooth option. 6. Lastly there's the McClellan-Palomar Airport (CRQ) expansion I talked about in the July 18, GP meeting. For more than 10 years the County of San Diego has been publicly stating it would like to convert CRQ into a full blown Regional Airport (like John Wayne) and 0ffer Jarger jet service to aU points in the country. Now after the June CRQ workshop #3 and the four ( 4) options presented, it looks like it is going to happen, unless the public can stop it. As I stated in the Saturday (July 18, 2015) meeting, the pollution from the 100 passenger aircraft and ground transportation increase to support the County's projected 3,270,633 (August 1, 2011, CRQ Airport Report) impact aU the 2035 "General Plan's Combined Summer and Winter Emissions" reports and the "Climate Action Plan." As Carlsbad's new GP stand today there is no accounting for the projected one ( 1) plane taking off or landing, every four ( 4) minutes nor the 10 -15 million annual projected ground traffic vehicles to support the 3,270,633 passengers flying out of CRQ. I realize there is no decision on which of the four (4) options will be taken, but one thing is clear from aU the money spent thus far on the CRQ expansion study-the option to do nothing and stay as is is not a viable option. That said, the remaining three (3) options will support and allow CRQ to become a full blown Regional Airport like John Wayne with aU the pollution, noise and traffic issues. After all, the County and the FAA changed CRQ status form a General Aviation Airport to a Regional Airport in 2002. To learn more about the full impact CRQ will have on ALL of Carlsbad and its residents, go to - http://www.savecarlsbad.com/ Thank you for your consideration, ~/2 Graham R Thorley Page :Zof:Z Carlsbad Planning Commission July 23, 2015 Page2 • Local land use authorities need to address and plan for the viable reuse and redevelopment of golf courses as a component of the jurisdiction's General Plan update process in light of the changing nature of the golf industry. The combination of this golf course's particular problems sourcing water, recent water restrictions, and the dim future of golf courses in general results in the need to plan for future redevelopment of the Property. The area surrounding the Property is primarily residential and the Property itself is well suited for residential development. As of June 30, 2015, the Citywide Excess Dwelling Unit Bank Balance was 2,085. We ask that the Planning Commission recommend applying a portion of these available units to the Property so that it may be redeveloped for residential use. Given the City's view that Excess Dwelling Units can no longer be transferred to the Northeast Quadrant, in which the Property lies, the Growth Management dwelling unit limit for the Northeast Quadrant should be increased to allow residential development of the Property. Currently, the City proposes designating this Property as Open Space, category 3 -i.e., outdoor recreation, which allows golf course use and little else. The designation virtually forces CCL to use costly and scarce water to operate its golf course. The designation would thus result in a regulatory taking because it would not allow the "pursuit of useful activities." Skalko v. City of Sunnyvale (1939) 14 Cal.2d 213, 215-216. An action is a regulatory taking when it allows the physical invasion of property, ~' Cwynar v. City and County of San Francisco (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 637, 653-659; completely deprives the property owner of the value ofthe property; or results from an adverse balance of the economic impact and character of the action with the owner's "'investment-backed expectations."' Lingle v. Chevron USA. Inc. (2005) 544 U.S. 528, 538-540. The proposed plan is and does all these things: It will foreseeably bar useful activities; it calls for the physical invasion of property; and it will soon deprive the property owners of the value of their property. Even if its treatment of this property is not immediately a ''taking," it is, at a minimum, poor planning. Planning requires anticipating future needs, but the combination of the plan and the City's growth management system would lock in a designation that will become unworkable long before the horizon year of the plan. As indicated above, this problem also implicates the adequacy of the analysis of the EIR in two ways. First, Impact 3.9-3 addresses whether the plan would affect population growth. The EIR concludes that it will not because "the city's public hearing process" on the plan amendment will reduce allowable development so as not to exceed growth management limits. This is not exactly true, however, because the City will either have to pay to acquire the Property, which it will not want to do, or allow development of the Property. This is an inevitable consequence of the growth management system and Proposition E, so the EIR needs to recognize these eventualities. Second, if the City is going to require that this Property remain in use as a golf course, the EIR must -but did not-evaluate the effect on groundwater that drilling necessary wells will have. Carlsbad Planning Commission July 23, 2015 Page 3 CCL will litigate this if necessary, but we believe the best and simplest solution for our client, the City, and Carlsbad residents would be to revise the proposed General Plan, and then enact appropriate zoning, so as to allow development at some reasonable level. We respectfully request that the City make the proposed change and place the matter on the ballot for voter approval. The City can do so easily and cheaply, which would not be true for CCL. The alternative would be an inverse condemnation lawsuit that would cost the City millions of dollars. I am available to discuss how to best accomplish redevelopment of the Property. Sincerely, Paul E. Robinson HECHT SOLBERG ROBINSON GOLDBERG & BAGLEY LLP SGV cc: Ms. Kathy Dodson, City Manager (via e-mail) Ms. Celia Brewer, City Attorney (via e-mail) Ms. Jennifer Jesser, Planning Division (via e-mail) Mr. Brett Feuerstein (via e-mail) Mr. Elliot Feuerstein (via e-mail) 4816-8095-3894 v.l 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 From: DandO [mailto:dandd Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 10:00 AM To: Jennifer Jesser Cc: Don Neu Subject: Item for GP Consideration Tonight-1986 Ballot Argument for GMP and 40% OpenS Ms Jesser Please forward this email and 1 page att to the Planning Commission for their consideration tonight. Thank you Diane Nygaard Honorable Chair Scully and Planning Commissioners Att is a copy of the ballot argument submitted by the City Council of Carlsbad in support of the 1986 Growth Management Plan. It says: " Proposition E puts a permanent cap on the total number of residential units that can be built in Carlsbad; reduces the overall density of the city and assures that we will always be a low density residential community with 40°/o open space." The vision of 40% open space originated with the people of Carlsbad in 1986, was shared by the leadership of the city and continues to this day. Please carry this forward to the next generation by including a goal for 40 % open space in this update of the General Plan. Thank you. Diane Nygaard On behalf of Preserve Calavera j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j I r 1 r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J , j , j , j , j , j , j r J r J r J r J r J fj I j July 23, 2015 TO: The Honorable Matt Hall, Mayor, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Keith Blackburn, Mayor ProTem, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Mark Packard, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Lorraine Wood, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Michael Schumacher1 Council Member, City of"Carlsbad Commissioner Neil Black Commissioner Jeff Segal Commissioner Velyn Anderson Commissioner Kerry Siekmann Commissioner Victoria Scully Commissioner Marty Montgomery Commissioner Hap L'Heureux FROM: Jim Nardi, San Pacifico HOA President, on behalf of the Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee Re: City of Carlsbad Planning Commission Proposed Zoning Amendments to General Plan "The issues facing the future of Carlsbad are ... related more to protecting and enhancing the quality of life that the community has worked hard to create." This first statement on the City of Carlsbad's General Plan website, Carlsbad's master plan for addressing the continuously changing needs of our growing populace, is a reflection of the core values that have driven city planning since the 1950's. Bordered by the coast and on our northern and southern ends by expansive, beautiful lagoons that are home to a large variety of flora and fauna, Carlsbad has uniquely created managed growth that preserves and protects valuable open spaces and sensitive ecological environments that make our community so attractive to citizens and businesses. The Carlsbad City Council, Planning Commission in consultation and concert with Carlsbad citizens, set out to reaffirm and enhance these values that are the heart and soul of the General Plan. It is with that long history of civic pride, collaboration and love for Carlsbad that the Citizens of San Pacifico ask for your support in our concerns for the planning and development of Ponto-the southern Coastal Gateway to Carlsbad. With respect to "Ponto East and Ponto West"1 the Heart of Ponto, a careful review of the City shows that these parcels are one of the last few undeveloped parcels of land in all of Coastal San Diego County and it is uniquely situated with pristine coastal beach and lagoon access. Even in its minimally managed state it provides daily, open access to the entire community of Carlsbad for trails and enjoyment of undisturbed coastal views. We support your efforts to with careful though and grace develop this treasured land and wish to be constructive and collaborative partners in this process so that the end product is a lasting joy to our citizens and an exemplary legacy to present to future generations. Coming together to express our consensus concerns, we as a community have identified key issues we would like to see addressed as originally planned in the Ponto Village Beachfront Plan created just less than a decade ago. 1. We generally support the rezoning of Ponto East, the Townhome Residential to R-23, however would prefer a R-15 designation given the developers intent to apply for planning changes and density bonuses to increase density and their interruption of this Ponto Vision Plan Town home community with a proposed massive apartment block. High density housing seems less appropriate for limited coastal land. 2. Neighborhood preservation and enhancement goals are of great importance to our San Pacifico citizens. We support the zoning of Ponto West ("Heart of Ponto" in the Ponto Vision Plan) to General Commercial that limits the residential uses to 12 dwellings but feel the primary orientation is toward Visitor Commercial as there is very limited commercial opportunities for both Carlsbad Citizens and visitors in South Carlsbad-and Ponto represents the last opportunity to provide those services. We are aware of a developer's proposal and application to the city that seeks to change the Heart of Ponto's orientation to dense housing and a minimal, and likely unsustainable amount of commercial establishments. We feel this is inadequate and will not generate enough commercial presence and momentum to allow these establishments to thrive, nor would it create desirable synergies with the adjacent hotels and planned for high-quality resorts. 3· Open space and natural environment goals are of great importance to our Ponto citizens and we do not support relaxation of the minimum setback and easement rules. Not meeting the bare minimum setbacks would greatly limit all Carlsbad citizens and visitors the ability to enjoy the natural beauty of prime beachfront spaces that have previously been available to our citizens by large building masses intruding into the City's minimum open space setback standards and blocking public views along those setbacks. In certain public view corridors/ such as along Avenida Encinas perhaps expanded increased minimum setbacks should be considered to retain some portions of ocean views from public right-of-way. 4· Attached are proposed General Plan Policy updates for the Ponto area that we would like the City Council and Planning Commission to please consider adding to the General Plan. These updates we as Citizens think would help better Develop Ponto Right and help address the above issues. 5· Access to recreation (beach 1 walking trails) and potential of inadequate number of parking spaces is of great concern to our San Pacifico citizens. High density housing and the presence of commercial property will only increase the need for parking, which is already in very short supply along the stretch of Carlsbad Blvd. from Poinsettia Lane to La Costa Avenue. 6. Sustainability cannot be achieved without addressing proving a more balanced land use as suggested above, and mobility and traffic. Avenida Encinas is the only access way for a significant area of land use to/from the coast. It will, unless the planned second intersection north along Carlsbad Boulevard is developed soon, become the main artery for commercial/residential traffic for both East and West Ponto. There is no direct access from Poinsettia Lane, nor currently from Carlsbad Boulevard. Avenida Encinas is not in any'way configured to handle this increased vehicle volume at just 2lanes and with a railroad overpass bridge at 2 lanes 1 particularly given the funneling of significant pedestrian and bike travel along this corridor. A stop sign was needed to try to address vehicle speeding and impacts to pedestrian and bike safety, however research into other traffic calming improvements should be explored. The eventual build out of a high-quality boutique hotel (per current Ponto Vision Plan) at the southern Ponto parcel opposite the East and West Ponto properties will further complicate traffic and safety issues. 7· The nearest elementary school, Pacific Rim Elementary, is highly impacted and regularly turns away children to other district schools since it cannot accommodate any more. The introduction of high density housing into this exact area further compounds the problem, which is a severe disadvantage to the current citizens of Carlsbad and their children. This needs to be taken into consideration. This patch of pristine coastal land at the southern end of Carlsbad deserves to represent the City of Carlsbad as well as the northern entrance to the city does, with an open1 vibrant, walkable 1 enticing and community-focused development ... something that all of our citizens can continue to enjoy. We respectfully request that all of the above considerations be taken into account when assessing the possible zoning revisions to this property. The City of Carlsbad has an incredible opportunity to create a wonderful legacy for the community of thoughtful and appropriate development, and environmental stewardship that will last for generations to come. We sincerely hope that they reflect back on the values that have brought our beautiful city to this point, and continue to let those values govern our growth into the future. Sincerely, Jim Nardi, San Pacifico HOA President on behalf of The Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee Cc: Dave de Cordova, Principle Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Kathy Dodson, Interim City Manager1 City of Carlsbad Jason Goff1 Associate Planner1 City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Don Neu, City Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Attachment: Requested updates to Ponto General Plan policies Attachment: Letter to Carlsbad City Council and Planning Commission Requested updated to Draft General Plan-Land Use & Community Design Element page 2- 53 Ponte/Southern Waterfront (See"Figure 2-2) 2-P.86 Promote development of the Ponto area with high-quality and coastal priority land uses that are consistent with those envisioned in the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan. 2-P.87 Promote development of high-quality activity centers with restaurants, cafes and shopping in the Mixed-Use Heart of Ponto and Visitor Serving Commercial areas of Ponto. 2-P.88 At the center of the Heart of Ponto advance the planned use of excess road right-of-way as a central public open space and connection to the beach as envisioned in the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~ l1 l1 l1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 1 From: Steve Linke[~ Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2015 7:30PM To: Planning; Council Internet Email; Don Neu Subject: Mobility Element language revision proposal Carlsbad Planning Commission and City Council: The attached proposal to revise the current Mobility Element is a reasonable and pragmatic approach that contains the following innovative features: • Re-prioritizes Connector and Employment Oriented street typologies to their former vehicle- prioritized status, helping ensure that vehicle level of service is maintained • Includes a new "secondary priority" travel mode that encourages bicycle and pedestrian mobility enhancements on Connector/Employment Oriented streets, as long as the vehicle level of service is projected to remain at "D" or better (this would make nearly all streets in Carlsbad suitable for bicycle/pedestrian mobility enhancement and is fully compliant with state guidance on complete streets) • As the Transportation Department implements their Transportation Demand Management and Transportation System Management strategies, and as more bicycle/pedestrian mobility enhancements are installed on eligible streets, the level of service may increase on the Connector/Employment Oriented streets that previously would have degraded below level of service D, making them eligible for bicycle/pedestrian mobility enhancements in the future • Allows the City Council to maintain a list of streets/intersections that are exempt from the typology-determined prioritized mode of travel (either vehicle or bicycle/pedestrian) when there is appropriate justification, but eliminates the permanently codified exemptions to allow for changing conditions and technology • Requires developers to pay their fair share for bicycle and pedestrian mobility enhancements for all streets affected by the development, regardless of whether the typology is prioritized for vehicles or bicycles/pedestrians, and requires developers to pay their fair share for the appropriate enhancements on the streets/intersections on the City Council's exempt list Best regards, Steve Linke Carlsbad General Plan Update: Changes proposed for Mobility Element Steve Linke July 23, 2015 Table 3-1. Connector Street. Vehicles and buses PeEiestrians, anEI biC';cles are prioritized; pedestrians and bicycles are a secondary priority ve\:licles anEI buses are (3roviEieEI for, but not (3rioritiZ:eEI Primary purpose is to connect people and different areas and land uses of the city to each other directly or by connecting to/from arterial streets Bicycle lanes may sf:!e.u.la be provided Bicycle boulevards can be considered Pedestrians are typically s\:louiEI be accommodated on sidewalks adjacent to the travel way (minimum 5' \Viele siEiewall() MiEI block (3eEiestrian crossings anEI traffic calming Elevices s\:louiEI be consiEiereEI, but only at locations wit\:1 \:lig\:1 (3eEiestrian activity levels or major Elestinations/attractions Parking may be provided Table 3-1. Employment Oriented Street. Vehicles Bicycles, (3eEiestrians, and buses are prioritized; pedestrians and bicycles are a secondary priority vef:licles are (3FO'>'iEieEI for but not (3rioritiZ:eEI Direct connections to bus stops should be provided Enhanced bus stops should be considered that include shelters, benches, and lighting Bicycle lanes and sidewalks £Re.u.l.el. may be provided Pedestrian crossing distances sf:louiEI be are typically minimized Parallel on street Parking may be provided POLICIES Policy 3-P.4. Implement the city's MMLOS methodology by evaluating level of service (LOS) for prioritized modes. Maintain LOS D or better effiy for the prioritized modes of travel by street typology as outlined in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1. Also maintain a minimum LOS D for secondary priority modes of travel in applicable street typologies (Connector and Employment Oriented streets), as long as a minimum LOS Dis maintained for the prioritized modes. Policy 3-P.S PERFECT AS-IS--REQUIRES DEVELOPERS TO PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE TO SUPPORT POLICY 3- P.4. POLICY 3-P.28 ALSO REQUIRES DEVELOPERS TO IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CONNECTIVITY. Policy 3-P.7. Develop and maintain a list of LOS exempt intersections and streets approved by the City Council. For LOS exempt intersections and streets, the city will not implement motor vehicle capacity improvements to maintain the LOS standard outlined in Policy 3-P.4 for the prioritized modes of travel if such improvements would are beyomJ what is iEieRtifieEI as appropriate at bl:lilel OI:Jt of the GeReral PlaR; ho·.vever, other ROR vehicle capacity bl:liiEiiRg improvemeRts may be reql:lireel to improve mobility, to the e>cteRt feasible, aRd/or to implemeRt the livable streets goals aRd policies of this Mobility f:lemeRt. To be coRsidered LOS elCempt, aR iRtersectioR or street mi:Jst be ideRtified as bl:lilt OI:Jt by the City Coi:JRcil becal:lse: a. the proposes improvemeRts require acquiring the rights of way, when that is not feasible; or b. the proposed improvemeRts woi:Jid significantly impact the environment in an unacceptable way...a-M mitigatioR wol:lld Rot coRtribl:lte to the RiRe cere vaii:Jes of the Carlsbad Comml:lRity VisioR; or c. the proposed improvemeRts wol:lld result in unacceptable impacts to other community values or General Plan policies; or d. the preposeel imprevemeRts wol:lld require more than three through travel lanes in each direction. Policy 3-P.8. DELETE THIS DEFAULT LIST OF EXEMPT STREETS AND KEEP A SEPARATE LIST OUTSIDE OF THE GENERAL PLAN THAT IS FLUID (I.E., IT CAN BE ADOPTED AND CHANGED BY THE CITY COUNCIL AS CONDITIONS CHANGE OVER TIME). Policy 3-P.9 Require new development that adds traffic to LOS-exempt locations (coRsisteRt with 3 P.7) to implement traRsportatioR demaRd maRagemeRt strategies that redl:lce the reliaRce oR the ai:Jtomobile aRd assist iR achieviRg the city's livable streets visioR consistent with 3-P.7. j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j j r I r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J r J rl rl l From: Osman Khawar Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 11:17 AM To: Osman Khawar Subject: Carlsbads Open space. Dear Council member, ,, I am not usually active politically but do remember your comments around election time to preserve Carlsbads current status as a great place to live. I am concerned about the multitude of plans to take open space and convert to shopping or more residential areas. I implore you to keep Carlsbad the way it is-I live and work based in Carlsbad because of not in spite of the open space. I have several small businesses based in Carlsbad and wish to keep them here. Please: Approve the Planning Staff Report of the 2015 draft General Plan which designates for the Sunny Creek project: Medium Residential Density (R15) on 9.6 acres (up to 12 dulac) and Low Density (R4) on RLM6 and RLMS (the 22 acres adjoining). Osman Khawar MD: Physcian, Home owner, Business owner in Carlsbad. Inland South Dilaysis Inland North Dialysis. San Diego Institute of Medical Research. North County Dialysis. From: Dan Ness mai!to:dan Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 2:14 PM To: Council internet Email Subject: General Plan-please keep open space open -not developed Dear Carlsbad City Council, I'm proud to be a resident of Carlsbad, and open space is one major reason. Knowing that it is a major component of the General Plan is reassuring. Please continue to support keeping close to 40% open space. I'm especially concerned about the hyper-development proposed near Agua Hedionda and the so-called "85/15 plan." Please do not let this go forward. Regards, Dan Ness From: ruth wasserman ''-'-'-'="-'1 Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 2:46 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: The new general pian and traffic pollution To the Council: Please forward this as necessary to the Traffic Commission. Unless the Council chooses to act without their input. There is a three-way stop sign at the corner of El Fuerte (a major artery) and Chorlito St (a very minor outlet). I understand that 10,000 cars a day travel El Fuerte and have to stop once each way. personally have not seen 10 cars coming out of Chorlito in the time since Stator Bros opened. Now the sight lines for a car at Chorlito turning left is not good, but it is very good for a car turning right. So an excellent solution to this traffic pollution is to have a stop sign at Chorlito ONLY with a RIGHT TURN ONLY proviso. Those who want to go left can use Esturion Stand make the left more safely. This will markedly decrease pollution. Ruth Wasserman 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l1 l1 l1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l 1 l August 17, 2015 City of Carlsbad, Jennifer Jesser Page 2 of2 Given the projected build out increase in traffic volume on College Boulevard between Plaza Drive and Lake Boulevard from 39,000 ADT (with Cannon Road in) to 58,000 ADT (without Cannon Road), the following analyses and clarification is requested: Sincerely, a. Include in the EIR a roadway and intersection LOS Baseline condition for year 2035 for a comparative analysis of before and after effects oUhe removal of Cannon Road; b. Analyze at least two roadway network alternatives with and without Cannon Road for comparative analyses; c. Include an analysis of the intersection of Lake Boulevard at College Boulevard for year 2035 with and without Cannon Road; and d. Include an analysis of the segment of College Boulevard between South City limits and Vista Way for year 2035 with and without Cannon Road. e. The EIR shall clearly describe the analysis process and include resultant analysis tables and figures beyond those currently provided. The removal of Cannon Road is a specific and significant change to the Circulation Element with negative inter-jurisdictional effects (per the SANDAG SERIES 12 2035 model plot in Appendix F). f. Clarify Carlsbad's future construction plans for the Cannon Road -Reach 4 segment. What modes of transportation (motor vehicle, bicycle, pedestrian) will be accommodated on this segment? these comments, please feel free to contact me at or John Amberson at IIIII - David DiPierro City Traffic Engineer cc: Mayor Jim Wood Deputy Mayor Chuck Lowery Councilmember Jack Feller Councilmember Jerry Kern Councilmember Esther Sanchez John Mullen, City Attorney Michelle Skaggs Lawrence, Interim City Manager Peter Weiss, Assistant City Manager Rick Brown, Interim Development Services Director Scott Smith, City Engineer Jeff Hunt, City Planner John Amberson, Transportation Planner Lupe Walker, File On July 24, 2015, we made a public records act request to obtain the records suppm1ing Carlsbad's environmental consultant's CalEEMod conclusions. We received some records on August 12, 2015. For reasons below, the records do not support the consultant's conclusions. We request consultant's CalEEMod records provided to us on August 12, 2015 and this letter be included in the General Plan EIR administrative record.1 We object to any other consultant CalEEMod-related records being included in the record unless they are provided to us at least two weeks before the City Council acts on the 2015-2035 GP and GP EIR. Executive Summary The Carlsbad consultant July 2015 CalEEMod information presented to the Carlsbad Planning Commission in July 2015 did not apply the COlTect legal standards and is not suppm1ed by the consultant's CalEEMod July tables. Detailed discussion follows the below summary. • Consultant's comparison of CaiEEMod and Urbemis construction emission calculations misquotes the "relevant" Urbemis Final EIR data. • The Final EIR Urbemis data for the 2035 GP impacts (with and without the project impacts)-which the CalEEMod operational emissions are compared against--conflict with the Final EIR 2008 Urbemis data. • Consultant improperly compares CalEEMod results against Urbemis results. The two models have different inputs and rely on different emissions databases. Hence, they are not comparable. • To make its CalEEMod v Urbemis comparisons, consultant uses the wrong baseline. See the discussion below and Final EIR Table 3.2-10. • Contrary to CEQA and supporting case law, consultant fails to provide either CaiEEMod or Urbemis interim (2020, 2025, and 2030) air quality impacts. • Consultant's omission of the interim data conflicts with the Carlsbad Climate Action Plan approach. Planning commission staff testified at the July 2015 joint City Council and Planning Commission hearing that air quality data should be gathered periodically to measure Carlsbad's success in offsetting air quality emissions. 1 CalEEMod analysis we received on August 12, 2015 from Carlsbad consisted of77 pages of "CalEEAfod Version: Cal EE,,;fod 20 I 3.2. 2" with the following characteristics: (a) 7 pages of Operations Part l Winter analysis; (b) 7 pages of Operations Part l Summer analysis; (c) 11 pages of Operations Pzrt I Annual analysis; (d) 7 pages of Operations Part 2 Winter analysis; (e) 7 pages of Operations Part 2 Summer analysis; (f) 11 pages of Operations Part 2 Annual analysis; (g) 7 pages of Operations Part 3 Winter analysis; (h) 7 pages of Operations Part 3 Summer analysis; (i) 7 pages of Part 3 Summer analysis; (j) 11 pages of Operations Part 3 Annual analysis: and (k) 2 pages summarizing CalEEMod v. Urbemis construction emissions and CaiEEMod v. Urbemis Operational Emissions (relying on "Op I, Op2, and Op 3 Runs."). CCP § I 094.5(e) makes part of the administrative record evidence that could not have been reasonably produced at relevant hearings. 2 • Consultant CalEEMod tables fail to provide sufficient information to determine if consultant produces air quality emission data for all Carlsbad land. • Consultant's CaiEEMod tables continue to rely on 2008 traffic. Such data is 6 years old and gathered during the middle of the US economic slump when building in Carlsbad had cratered. Consultant has not shown that 2006 data is representative of Carlsbad 2014 traffic data counts. Detailed Discussion of Specific Consultant July 2015 CalEEMod Air Quality Analysis Defects Voiding its Representations to the Planning Commission and City Council • Consultant uses the wrong Urbemis data to compare CalEEMod Construction Emissions data. As detailed in Attachment A to this letter, consultant mistakenly intenningled the 2015 and 2016 Urbemis data that Carlsbad reports in its Final EIR.2 Accordingly-assuming the proper 2035 CaiEEMod data comparison is to an Urbemis baseline (a false assumption as noted below), the CalEEMod comparison misquotes the Urbemis data. For instance, for ROG (Reactive Organic Gases), the proper comparison in pounds per day for ROG should be: CalEEMod 247.38 v. Urbemis 8.87 [NOT Urbemis 222.76] and the proper comparison in pounds per day for CO (Carbon Monoxide) should be CalEEMod 66.31 v. Urbemis 44.15 [NOT Urbemis 73.4]. Note the drastic increase in ROG and significant increase in CO. And, the foregoing numbers are the MITIGATED numbers. • Common sense shows the consultant-reported Urbemis operational emissions analytic method and operational emissions data are inconsistent. Continued use ofthe Urbemis model, even for comparison, leads to nonsensical results. We now focus not on the construction air quality emissions above, which begin and end, but on ongoing operational air quality emissions. Turn to the last page of the July 2015 consultant CalEEMod analysis tables entitled "Carlsbad General Plan Update Operational Emissions. See Attachment D to this letter. The July table ends by comparing the new CalEEmod results against the old Urbemis results. But we begin by noting that Carlsbad's own EIR Urbemis tables are internally inconsistent-which voids the Carlsbad July 2015 comparison of CalEEMod data to Urbemis data (even if the proper comparison were to Urbemis data, which it is not). Note that Carlsbad Table 3.2-7 in Attachment B lists the alleged air quality "existing conditions (2008). "3 This table says that VOCs in 2008 were 20,027.24 pounds per day. Yet Carlsbad Table 3.2.10 (Attachment C) lists the 2035 VOC emissions without the General Plan 2 See Carlsbad Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR, Appendix 7g (unchanged and incorporated in the Final EIR). See Carlsbad Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR, Appendix 7g (unchanged and incorporated in the Final EIR). 3 As explained later in this letter, the Carlsbad reference to "existing conditions (2008)" can have two entirely different meanings: (1) the actual air quality emissions existing in 2008 or (2) the air quality emissions Carlsbad predicts will exist in 2035 without the new 2015-2035 development. For purposes, of the discussion in this bullet point section, the distinction is irrelevant because the 2008 and 2035 numbers are implausibly inconsistent. 3 as 13.808.45 pounds per day. Those two figures conflict. Carlsbad is saying that VOCs after 20 years will be greatly less than "existing conditions." Similar problems exist with the other pollutants listed in these tables. Yet, Carlsbad reports that the GP will cause housing units to increase 22%, population to increase 22%, commercial square footage to increase 56%, office space to increase 14%, industrial rtpace to increase 31%, hotel rooms to increase 4 7%, and jobs to increase 3 7%.4 A reasonable person would expect all Carlsbad air quality pollutant levels to increase greatly in 20 years, not decrease greatly, in the future. Even if Carlsbad had "0" new development, existing stores, offices, and businesses would add new shoppers and new air quality impacts. Then, Table 3.2-10 in Attachment C says that the VOCs in 2035 with the 2015-2035 GP development will be 16,213.92 pounds per day. Carlsbad says that despite 20 years of great growth, the VOCs will be less than the 2008 existing condition VOCs, especially remarkable since 2008 was the middle of the U.S. economic crash that halted North County building. For instance, McClellan-Palomar Airport had about 290,000 annual flights before the 2006 economic crash and now has about 155,000 annual flights. As business improves, annual flights will return to earlier levels and likely increase as a result of the new air carrier BIZ Shuttle offering flights to Las Vegas and Phoenix.5 Carlsbad then uses the implausible Table 3.2-10 VOC numbers (16,213.92 and 13,808.45) to conclude that the net new VOC emissions resulting from the 2035 General Plan Build out will be 2,405.47 pounds per day. Carlsbad then compares this figure to the July 2015 CalEEMod VOC tigure.6 See the short Carlsbad summary table at the end of Attachment D to this letter. Similarly and implausibly, Carlsbad compares other Table 3.2-10 pollutants against CalEEMod results. • The Consultant July CalEEMod-Urbemis Operational Analysis Compares Apples and Oranges. Now ignore the Urbemis defects noted above. Assume the CalEEMod results are compared to accurate Urbemis results. That comparison still makes no sense. Consider an analogy. Assume an economist uses the US census to compare the California Hispanic population in 1970, 1990, and 201 0. That comparison makes sense only if each census defined the term ''Hispanic" identically. If, however, one census included as "Hispanic" groups from Mexico 4 See Table ES-2 Estimated Total Development (To Buildout) on page ES-3 of Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR. The percentages were calculated by diving the New Development column by the existing column. 5 Recall also that Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations in §15154 provides: "TVhen a lead agency prepares an EIRfor a projet within the boundaries of a comprehensive airport land use plan .. the agency shall utilize the A ilport Land Use Planning Handbook published by Cal trans Division of Aeronautics to assit in the preparation of the EIR and relative to potential airport related safety hazards and noise problems. ·· As we have previously pointed out, the Carlsbad GP addresses certain issues in areas outside Palomar Ai;port but makes no effort to address on-abport safety issues such as those resultingfi"om aircraft landing 200 jeet jimn closed methane-emitting landfill that has in the past had several underground landfilljlres. 6 Carlsbad uses the terms Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) interchangeably. 4 and South America, but another census excluded these groups, the comparison would be meaningless. The California AQ agencies went to a new model because they saw certain flaws in Urbemis. See the footnote below for some Urbemis and CalEEMod differences.7 Accordingly, neither consultant's July 2015 AQ analysis methodology nor alleged facts support the July 24, 2015 c• statement to the Carlsbad Planning Commission that CalEEMod results do not differ substantially from the Final EIR Urbemis results. • Consultant uses the wrong environmental baseline. To know how worse the air will be "tomorrow" (in 2020, 2025, 2030, and 2035), we need to know how bad the air is today (2015) (referred to as the "baseline"). Developers have argued that environmental baselines should not be literally be based on today's air quality numbers. They argue that Carlsbad will develop with or without a 2015-2035 General Plan. Accordingly, say developers, the environmental impacts of a 2015-2035 plan should be compared not against 2015 conditions now but rather against the future conditions that would exist in Carlsbad in 2035 if no new GP is adopted. 7 The caleemod.com website describes some of the differences as follows: "How is CalEEMod different fi·om the URBEMJS model? Both models quantify emissions t!·om the various phases of construction and operation for land uses identified in the JTE Trip Generation :V1anual. The primary differences between the two models are the following features and tl.mctions that are included in CalEEMod, but not in the the URBEMlS model: • mobile source emissions based on CARS's EMFAC20 ll emission factors that incorporate Pavley standards and Low Carbon Fuel standards • calculates indirect criteria pollutant and GHG emissions from processes "downstream"' of the project under evaluation such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposaL vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use • calculates the emission reduction benefits from implementing the same GHG mitigation measures identified and recently by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) • in addition to quantifying C02 emissions. it includes two additional combustion GHG pollutants: methane and nitrous oxides • quantifies emissions from off-road equipment utilized during operation • includes more land use types, such as refrigerated warehouses. golf courses and swimming pools • quantifies emissions from parking lots and/or structures as a separate land use type • includes the usage of consumer products at non-residential facilities • updates warehouse trip rates • modifies methods for calculating fugitive dust from grading and site preparation • provides ability to insert spreadsheet f()r large projects (e.g., El'v1F AC2007, construction equipment • allo>vs for the user to select different vehicle classes for construction worker, vendor, and hauling trips • uses CARB's BURDEN model (a component of the EMF AC model) emission factors to provide more accurate characteristics (J]eet mix, vehicle miles traveled, etc.) of the affected area • uses \Veighted average trip rates to rei1ect accurate vehicle fl·om a specific land use type Defhuhs have been provided by the various air districts throughout the state to account for local requirements and conditions. The newer, improved, user-friendly model will be free of charge and updated periodically in the tl.1ture to include modifications, such as the inclusion of new emission factors from CARE!. 5 The California Supreme court resolved the "baseline" issue for narrowly defined specific projects in 2013.8 The Court held that use of a "future-only" baseline is ok only when an agency justifies its use by showing that use of an existing conditions baseline would be uninformative or misleading. For two reasons, Carlsbad cannot make (and does not try to make) this finding. First, the 2015-2035 GP alters future Carlsbad developments allowed. Hence, trying to use a future rather than 2015 baseline again raises the "apple and oranges" problem noted above. Second, unlike the specific rail project involved in the Supreme Court Neighbors.fbr Smart Rail case, in which future baseline conditions might be predicted for a sh011 term for one project, the Carlsbad GP involves hundreds of projects over 20-years. Now look again at Table 3.2-10 in Attachment C to this letter. Notice that to calculate 2015- 2035 GP impacts, the Urbemis table subtracts the estimated Build out impacts from the ''Estimated Emissions without Proposed General Plan (2035)" impacts. As the California Supreme Court said in Neighborsfor Smart Rail, Carlsbad may not use this future forecast without first justifying it. Moreover, comparing speculative GP development against speculative GP "non-development" makes no practical sense. The public wants to know three things. What are the actual baseline air quality pollutant levels today in 2015? What are the predicted conditions in 2020, 2025, 2020, and 2035? How much do the now and future pollutant levels exceed recommended AQ healthy levels. • Consultant violates CEQA by providing CaiEEMod data only for 2035, not also for 2020, 2025, and 2030. The consultant CalEEMod analysis perpetuates a CEQA non-compliance we have already noted. CEQA requires that a lead agency provide project impacts for the near, mid, and long term.9 Think about it. Many Carlsbad residents will move out long before 2035 8 Neighbors for Smart Rail v. E:rposition Metro Line Construction Authority (2013) 57 Cal. 41h 439 (involving extension of a light rail system from Culver City to Santa Monica). We agree with Neighbors on its first claim ... . (I) 1-Vhile an agency has the discretion under some circumstances to omit environmental analysis qfimpacts on existing conditions and instead use only a baseline of projected future conditions, existing conditions "will normally constitute the baseline physical conditions by which a lead agency determines ·whether an impact is significant. " (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15125, subd. (a).) A departure from this norm can be justified by substantial evidence that an analysis based on existing conditions would tend to be misleading or without informational value to EIR users. Here, however, the F;xpo Authority fails to demonstrate the existence of such evidence in the administrative record. " (at 446). 9 Neighbors for Smart Rail (fl7. 8) provides: ''[4] The CEQA Guidelines establish the default of an existing conditions baseline even for projects expected to be in operation for many years or decades. That a project will have a long operational life, by itse(f, does notjust{fy an agency's jailing to assess its impacts on existing environmental conditions. For such projects asfor others, existing conditions constitute the norm from which a departure must bejust{/ied--not only because the CEQA Guidelines so state, but because using existing conditions serves CEQA 's goals in important ways. [5] Even when a project is intended and e;"pected to improve conditions in the long term--20 or 3() years after an EIR is prepared--decision makers and members of the public are entitled under CEQA to know the short-and medium-term environmental costs of achieving that desirable improvement. These costs include not only the impacts involved in constructing the project but also those the project will create during its initial years of operation. Though we might rationally choose to endure short-or medium-term hardship for a long-term, permanent benefit, deciding to make that trade-off requires some knowledge about the severity and duration qfthe near-term hardship. An EIR stating that in :20 or 30 years the project will improve the environment, but neglecting, 6 and many others will move in.10 By failing to disclose 2020, 2025, and 2030 air quality impacts, Carlsbad writes a report for the minority of California residents who will be in Carlsbad in 2035. • Carlsbad's avoidance of2020, 2025, and 2030 non-climate change impacts conflicts with its Climate Action Plan approach of measuring impacts every five years. At the joint meeting of the Carlsbad City Council and Planning Commission on July 18. 2015 (video available on the Carlsbad website), Carlsbad planning staff proudly announced that its Climate Action Plan (part of the General Plan and General Plan EIR) target and measure air quality pollutants every five years to assess whether Carlsbad will meet its CAP goals. As staff rightly pointed out, you can't meet your goals unless (1) you know what present conditions are, (2) you impose CAP mitigation measures, (3) you regularly measure progress, and (4) if CAP progress is insufficient, you add CAP mitigation measures. Bottom line, you do not wait until2035 to see how you have done. In short, the Carlsbad Final GP and GP Final EIR air quality general pollutant analysis conflicts with the CAP analysis. • Consultant's .July 2015 CaJEEMod tables fail to provide sufficient information to determine if Consultant inputted into CalEEMod additional information that was not included in the Urbemis model. Footnote 7 to this letter summarizes major differences between the CaJEEMod and Urbemis models. CaiEEMod treats parking lots, warehouses, and withoutjust{fication. to provide any evaluation of the project's impacts in the meantime, does not "gi-vfeJ due consideration to both the short-term and long-term effects" of the project (Cal. Code Regs .. tit. 14, § 15126.2, subd. (a)) and does not serve CEQA ~~ i1~{ormational purpose well. The omission of an existing conditions analysis must be just{fied, even !f the project is designed to alleviate adverse environmental conditions over the long term. In addition, existing environmental conditions have the advantage that they can generally be directly measured and need not be projected through a predictive model. However sophisticated and well-designed a model is, its product carries the inherent uncertainty of every long-term prediction. uncertainty that tends to increase with the period of projection. For example, tffuture population in the project area is projected using an annual growth multiplier, a small error in that multiplier will itse(f be multiplied and compounded as the projection is pushed further into the future. The public and decision makers are entitled to the most accurate il1formation on project impacts practically possible, and the choice of a baseline must reflect that goal. [6} Finally, use of existing conditions as a baseline makes the ana(l,;s-is more accessible to decision makers and especial{v to members of the public, who may be familiar with the existing environment but not technically equipped to assess a projection into the distant future. As an amicus curiae observes, "[ ajnyone can review an EIR's discussion of current environmental [57 Cal.4th 456] conditions and determine whether [it} comports with that person's knowledge and experience ofthe world." But "[i}n a hypotheticaljitture world. the environment is what the statisticians say it is." Quantitative and technical descriptions of environmental conditions have a place in CEQA analysis, but an agency must not create unwarranted barriers to public understanding of the EIR by unnecessarily substituting a baseline ofprojectedfuture conditionsfor one based on actual existing conditions. (See Laurel Heights Improvement Assn. v. Regents of University ofCalifornia (1988) 47 Cal. 3d 376, 39.7 [EIR allows the public to "knmv the basis on which its responsible officials either approve or reject environmentally significant action," thereby promoting "informed se(f-government"j.) (Emphasis added.) 10 See http://www.census.gov/prod/200lpubs/p23-204.pdf"fVhy People i'vfove: Exploring the Afarch 2000 Current Population Survey March 1999 to j}Jarch 2000'' (Cunent Population Repmts by Jason Schachter 7 Plan and GP EIR, which we understand will be in September. We suspect that further review would show further CalEEMod v Urbemis defects. Is/ Ray & Ellen Bender Attachments: A Carlsbad's Consultant's July 2015 CalEEMod Summary of Construction Emissions B Carlsbad's Recirculated Draft/Final EIR Tables 3.2-6 and 3.2-7 Showing Existing Conditions (2008) C Carlsbad's Recirculated Draft/Final EIR Table 3.2-10 Comparing Urbemis 2035 and ''baseline" existing conditions D Carlsbad's Consultant's July 2015 CalEEMod Summary of Operational Emissions E Carlsbad's Consultant's July 2015 CalEEMod Analysis: Not physically attached but incorporated by reference since it is already in Carlsbad's possession and would needlessly lengthen this letter. 2015 Carlsbad Bender Supp Final EIR Letter re CalEEMod THE NEW ONE August 17 [ smart file General Plan_] bee: 9 10 Attachment A To Bender August 18, 2015 Supplemental Comments on General Plan and General Plan EIR Resulting from New EIR Information Presented by Carlsbad at the July 24, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Considering Adoption ofthe Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan and General Plan EIR [Shows Carlsbad Misapplied its Final EIR Urbemis Air Quality Data to its July 2015 CalEEMod Air Quality Data [See 2nd to last page of CalEEMod Carlsbad Data] The Carlsbad July 2015 CalEEMod Construction Emissions Table that Carlsbad relied on at the July 25, 2015 Planning Commission meeting compares the old Urbemis and new CalEEMod results as follows: Carlsbad General Plan Update Construction Emissions CaiEEMod URBEMIS ROG NOx 247.38 83,82 222.76 92.89 co 66.31 73.4 S02 PM10 '. 0.12 .16.68 0.14 184.38 PM2.S 4.85 39.64 '{ et the Cads bad Final EIR-on which the above table relies -reports the Urbemis results as follows: ]CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTIMATES ROG NOx co S02 PM1 0 Dust PM1 0 Exhaust PM10 PM2.5 Dust PM2.5 ~ f2015 TOTALS (lbs/day unmitigated) 8.87 92.89 44.15 0.14 323.21 3.69 324.81 67.50 3.40 .f015 TOTALS (lbs/day mitigated) 8.87 92.89 44.15 0.14 182.78 3.69 184.38 38.17 3.40 " ~16 TOTALS (lbs/day unmrtigated) 246.94 30.44 73.40 0.12 0.53 1.59 2.12 0.19 1.44 : 016 TOTALS (lbs/day mitigated) 222.76 30.44 73.40 0.12 0.53 1.59 2.12 0.19 1.44 .E'M2.2 68.97 39.64 1.62 1.62 l ·T~,~£~~~~·ffiwW~w~~~~&m~m~,&~Mm&~.d~AGMm~-*~MMMEOOnmmarn~~~~·~wmmnnrn~~~A-,~~m~znm~~MH~nm~~%~\>&~-~~mi~L~.,~m,w~¥z~.~~~~t~A~DM~-M~tmzma~~~mawwmmamamawwmwwwwwwwwmwww&nwww~ Notice that the CalEEMod table incorrectly reports the Final ErR Urbemis results. The CalEEMod table intermingles the 2015 and 2016 Urbemis results rather than consistently reporting the 2015 results. Accordingly, the July 2015 Table results mistakenly reported 222.76 rather than 8.87 pounds per day ofROG and 73.4 rather than 44.15 pounds per day of CO. 20 15 Carlsbad General Plan CaiEEMod EIR Comments Attachment A [smart file General Plan_] August 17, 2015 TO: The Honorable Matt Ha11 1 Mayor, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Keith Blackburn, Mayor Pro Tem 1 City of Carlsbad The Honorable Mark Packard, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Lorraine Wood, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Michael Schumacher, Council Member, City of Carlsbad Planning Commissioner Neil Black Planning Commissioner Jeff Segal Planning Commissioner Velyn Anderson Planning Commissioner Kerry Siekmann Planning Commissioner Victoria Scully Planning Commissioner Marty Montgomery Planning Commissioner Hap L'Heureux FROM: Jim Nardi, San Pacifico HOA President, on behalf ofthe Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee Re: City of Carlsbad City Council Proposed Amendments to General Plan "The issues facing the future of Carlsbad are ... related more to protecting and enhancing the quality of life that the community has worked hard to create." This first statement on the City of Carlsbad's General Plan website, Carlsbad's master plan for addressing the continuously changing needs of our growing populace, is a reflection of the core values that have driven city planning since the 1950's. Bordered by the coast and on our northern and southern ends by expansive, beautiful lagoons that are home to a large variety of flora and fauna 1 Carlsbad has uniquely created managed growth that preserves and protects valuable open spaces and sensitive ecological environments that make our community so attractive to citizens and businesses. The Carlsbad City Council, Planning Commission in consultation and concert with Carlsbad citizens, set out to reaffirm and enhance these values that are the heart and soul of the General Plan. It is with that long history of civic pride, collaboration and love for Carlsbad that the Citizens of San Pacifico, a community of about 500 homes and approximately 1,ooo plus citizens ask for your support in our concerns for the planning and development of Ponto-the southern Coastal Gateway to Carlsbad. With respect to "Ponto East and Ponto West", the Heart of Ponto, a careful review of the City shows that these parcels comprise the last few undeveloped parcels of land in all of Coastal San Diego County and they are uniquely situated with pristine coastal beach and lagoon access. Even in the parcels minimally managed state, they provide daily, open access to the entire community of Carlsbad for trails and enjoyment of undisturbed coastal views. We support your efforts to, with careful thought1 plan and develop this treasured land and wish to be constructive and collaborative partners in this process so that the end product is a Page 1. of 5 lasting joy to our citizens and visitors and an exemplary legacy to present to future generations. Coming together to express our consensus concerns1 we as a community have identified the following key issues we would like to see addressed in the Carlsbad General Plan and Local Coastal Program 1 and as outlined in the City adopted Ponto Village Vision Plan created just less than a decade ago. 1. We generally support the rezoning of Ponto East 1 the Town home Residential to R-23, however would prefer a R-15 designation given the developers intent to apply for planning changes and density bonuses to increase density. We do not support their proposed massive apartment block in the Ponto Vision Plan "Town home" community .. High density housing seems less appropriate for limited coastal and beach access land. 2. Neighborhood preservation and enhancement goals are of great importance to our San Pacifico citizens. We support the zoning of Ponto West ("Heart of Ponto" in the Ponto Vision Plan) to General Commercial that limits the residential uses to 12 dwellings, and feel the primary orientation for this site is toward Visitor Commercial as there is very limited commercial opportunities for both Carlsbad Citizens and visitors in South Carlsbad-and Ponto represents the last opportunity to provide those services. Citizens and visitors are forced to drive to Encinitas or Downtown Carlsbad for coastal commercial services which increase Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and congestion. We are aware of the developer's development proposal and proposed General Plan and Local Coastal Program Amendment applications to the city that seeks to change the Heart of Ponto's commercial and visitor servicing orientation to dense housing (estimated at 85%) with minimal and unsustainably designed residual amount of commercial establishments. We feel this is inadequate, will not generate enough commercial presence and momentum to allow these establishments to thrive1 creates land use incompatibility for the commercial uses, will not create desirable commercial Village synergies with the adjacent hotels and planned for high-quality resorts and beach visitors, and not serve the long term needs of Carlsbad citizens and visitors for coastal commercial access in South Carlsbad. 3· Open space, coastal access, and natural environment goals are of great importance to our Ponto citizens and we do not support relaxation of the minimum setback and easement rules. The developer's proposal to not meet minimum setbacks and recreational open space standards would greatly limit all Carlsbad citizens and visitors the ability to enjoy the natural beauty of prime beachfront spaces that have previously been available to our citizens. The proposed large building masses run counter to a pedestrian scale and open environment of the Ponto Village vision. In certain public view and access corridors, such as along Avenida Encinas and other coastal access pathways perhaps expanded increased minimum building setbacks Page 2 of 5 ' .. "~' should be considered to retain some portions of o_cean views from public right-of-way and public spaces. 4· Below are proposed General Plan Policy updates for the Ponto area that we would like the City Council and Planning Commission to please consider adding to the General Plan. We believe these updates would help better serve to Develop Ponto Right and be more consistent with the adopted Ponto Vision. '" a. 2-P.86 Promote development of the Ponto area with high-quality and coastal priority land uses that are consistent with those envisioned in the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan. b. 2-P.87 Promote development of high-quality activity centers with restaurants, cafes and shopping in the Mixed-Use Heart of Ponto and Visitor Serving Commercial areas of Ponto. c. 2-P.88 At the center of the Heart of Ponto advance the planned use of excess road right-of-way as a central public open space and connection to the beach as envisioned in the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan. s. Access to recreation (beach, walking trails) and potential of inadequate number of parking spaces are of great concern to our San Pacifico citizens. High density housing and the presence of commercial property will only increase the need for parking, which is already in very short supply along the stretch of Carlsbad Blvd from Poinsettia Lane to La Costa Avenue. Critical will be expanded parking requirements for mid to large residential units that correspond the unit's occupancy load for visitor serving rental (VRBO, etc.) that are allowed in the Coastal Zone. San Pacifico has experienced the increased demand for parking, and we have significant on-street parking which is critically missing in the proposed development. 6. Sustainability cannot be achieved without proving a more balanced land use as suggested above, and without addressing mobility and traffic concerns. Avenida Encinas is the only access way for a significant area of land use to/from the coast. It will, unless the planned second intersection north along Carlsbad Boulevard is developed soon 1 become the main artery for traffic for both East and West Ponto. There is no direct access from Poinsettia Lane, nor currently from Carlsbad Boulevard. Avenida Encinas is not in any way configured to handle this increased vehicle volume at just 2lanes and with a railroad overpass bridge at 2 lanes, particularly given the funneling of significant pedestrian and bike coastal access travel along this corridor. Avenida Encinas at Ponto Road is currently used as a roundabout for regional coastal access to the beach. A comprehensive traffic plan for coastal circulation is needed as the development fronts on this intersection. A stop sign on Avenida Encinas was needed to try to address vehicle speeding and impacts to pedestrian and bike safety, however research into other traffic calming improvements should be explored. The eventual build out of a high-quality boutique hotel (per current Ponto Vision Plan) at Page 3 of 5 the southern Ponto parcel opposite the East and West Ponto properties will further complicate traffic and safety issues. 7· The nearest elementary school, Pacific Rim Elementary/ is highly impacted and regularly turns away children to other district schools since it cannot accommodate any more. The introduction of high density housing into this exact area further compounds the problem, which is a severe disadvantage to the current citizens of Carlsbad and their children. This needs to be taken into consideration. We as citizens are meeting with the proposed developer to try to work with them to rethink their proposal to address these issues. We are hopeful. However we and all Carlsbad Citizens and Visitors, need to have the General Plan and Local Coastal Program policy and plans that as suggested help Develop Ponto Right. City Staff and the City Planning Commission have provided their recommendations which we support, and ask you to please consider adopting all the General Plan items mentioned in this letter. This patch of pristine coastal land at the southern end of Carlsbad deserves to represent the City of Carlsbad as well as the northern entrance to the city does1 with an open 1 vibrant1 walkable, enticing and community-focused village development ... something that all of our citizens can continue to enjoy. We respectfully request that all of the above considerations be taken into account when assessing the possible General Plan, Local Coastal Program, and zoning standard revisions for Ponto and these Ponto East and West properties in particular. The City of Carlsbad has an incredible last opportunity to create a wonderful legacy for the community with thoughtful and appropriate development, and environmental stewardship that will last for generations to come. We sincerely hope that we can all reflect back on the values that have brought our beautiful city to this point, and continue to let those values govern our growth into the future. Sincerely, Jim Nardi, San Pacifico HOA President on behalf of The Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee Cc: Kathy Dodson, Interim City Manager, City of Carlsbad Don Neu 1 City Planner, City of Carlsbad 1 Community and Economic Development Department Dave de Cordova, Principle Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department Page 4 of 5 Jason Goff, Associate Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department Gabriel Buhr, California Coastal Commission Page 5 of 5 Don Neu, City Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 DearMr.Neu City of Carlsbad AUG 1 ,7 2015 Planning Division We recently moved into the Arterro development built by Davidson. When we purchased our home, we noticed a vacant piece of vacant property and asked what the plans were for its use. We were told that the property was zoned for commercial office space and that made sense since it abutted the new La Costa Town Square, which is a commercial property. We paid approximately $1.1 million for our home and this home constitutes half of our net worth. We are extremely troubled to bear that there an effort to turn this vacant piece of property into dense multi-unit housing with 123 units. Assuming two cars per unit1 that pours on to El Camino Real an additional246 cars. We already are already suffering from the road noise on El Camino Real and feel that the existing road noise will have a detrimental affect on the value of our property. Adding an additional 246 cars to the existing traffic will significantly impact the value of our home and our enjoyment of our back yard as we live at the end of the cul-de-sac that abuts El Camino Real. We can't even have our windows open at night due to the road noise on El Camino Real where the multi-unit housing is proposed There is plenty of multi-unit housing across the street from this vacant property. There is no need to exacerbate the road noise and traffic by rezoning the property to build 123 units on a small plot ofland. We urge you to reconsider rezoning this vacant property as it wiil have a significant negative impact on the neighborhood, especially the Arterro development. It's not right to make a change this significant after we just purchased our homes. ~n::e:, Vl~~~~ Tom and Valerie Willardson 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 11 11 11 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 INTEGRAL August 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and City Councilmembers Carlsbad City Council 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, California 92008 t i ,._~ s Subject: Request for land use designation change-Palomar Oaks West Dear Mayor Hall and City Councilmembers: We are submitting this letter for the record, and to respectfully request reconsideration of the Planning Commission's recommendation regarding land-use and zoning for the Palomar Oaks West site in the City's General Plan Update. The basis for this request is that circumstances have changed since the Planning Commission adopted the staff's recommendation at the July 24, 2015 Planning Commission hearing. By way of history, Palomar Oaks West was included on the preferred map for R30 residential and EIR analysis as part ofthe General Plan Update at the direction of the 2012 City Council. In the period between the Council's action in 2012 and the recent joint hearing, staff raised concerns regarding potential hazardous material exposure. In response to these concerns we presented three (3) separate assessments regarding the hazardous materials conditions in the surrounding area. Each of those assessments concluded that there was no such risk, and specifically within 2500 feet of the site. At the July 22, 2015 Planning Commission meeting, the Fire Marshal was asked directly about the statement in the staff report (criteria #3) relating to hazardous material risk and industrial compatibility as it relates to Palomar Oaks West. The Fire Marshal told the Commission "there was no compatibility issue regarding residential use on the site and that hazardous material exposure risk was negligible". Further, there are no code provisions limiting the distance from industrial to residential, and that if the Planning Commission was so inclined to approve residential the Fire Department was not opposed to it. The outcome of the July 24, 2015 meeting was that the Commission supported staff's position on retaining Palomar Oaks West as industrial (PI). Additionally, the Commission recommended to Council a reduction of approximately 90 units of density designation on two properties (P A22 Robertson Ranch and Sunny Creek) that staff had supported at higher residential designations. From: Sieffert, Kristen [mailto:KSieffe~ Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2015 10:48 AM To: Jennifer Jesser Cc: David de Cordova; Don Neu; Glen Van Peski Subject: RE: Notice of Joint Public Hearing-General Plan Update Jennifer, I sent the below letter to the city council a couple of weeks back, but here are the main points for consideration on the zoning change: 1. We had many different options to consider when buying our home last August. We chose Arterro because of the plan that was presented to us and the sense of a "small neighborhood" feel, the fact that the land behind us would be relatively unused in evenings and weekends, and that we had potential business use for the office space to capitalize on the "walkability factor" being created by incorporating homes, business and commercial into this plot of land. 2. The land behind us that sits in between our homes and the proposed site for the multi-family development already has issues with people trespassing on the land to play and walk their dogs. Since the proposed multifamily residential community has ZERO outdoor areas for its residents (which there could be easily over 400), no pool, no grass areas, nothing at all, we anticipate that the trespassing issue will only get worse as these residents will have no outlet for outdoor activity. 3. Carlsbad traffic is getting extremely worse each and every day. The site for the proposed development is not in close proximity to jobs or business parks which means the traffic issue will be severely compounded. 4. When we contacted Terramar, who recently acquired La Costa Town Square and the adjacent vacant land, we were told they were certain the zoning change would be approved, as they would never had made the investment in the space had it not been so. a. lfTerramar knew this information, then the city and our developer, Davidson, had an obligation to alert the homeowners and provide us ample opportunity to reconsider our investment. b. Research has shown that the city has already agreed to give Terramar a subsidy of over 18 times the average subsidy (over $20 per square foot) in order to build this multifamily complex. 5. The city is considering the apartment building across La Costa Avenue as the adjacent residents and not sending ANY notices about this change to the Homeowners in Arterro, even though we are basically sitting on the same land. There is NOTHING to divide the new proposed development from the backs if our homes, and yet we are not being given any relevant information from the city regarding this change. 6. We paid over $1.2 million for our home (and invested an additional $200k), based on the plans we were presented from the builder. NO MENTION of a possible zoning change existed at the time we purchased our home. Had we known this was likely to occur we would have purchased in the Encinitas neighborhood of Fiore and not purchased this home. We urge the city to strongly reconsider this change. Based on the continued research we are doing and will continue to do and the conversations we are having with various executives involved, it is becoming more and more apparent that the lot in question was never going to be used for commercial and the intention all along was to change to multi-family residential. This withholding of information, and presenting information that was known to be inaccurate, is a clear violation of our rights. As a result we do feel that we have an obligation to engage the services of an attorney to make sure our concerns are being properly articulate and given the attention they deserve. Please don't hesitate to contact me with any questions. Letter sent to City Council on August 141h, 2015: I am writing in regards to the upcoming vote you will be participating in regarding a zoning change that directly impacts our neighborhood, hoping you will reconsider approving the change. In March of 2014, my husband and I purchased our home in the Arterro Development. When we made the purchase, we did a tremendous amount of research on the development behind Arterro, La Costa Towne Square, as it had not yet opened. All of the plans we reviewed from the builder and the city showed that the large vacant parcel within La Costa Towne Square was zoned for commercial office space. Considering the heavy traffic already existing on La Costa and Rancho Santa Fe, and the increasing numbers of theft and crime, having this space zoned as commercial made perfect sense. It would allow the neighborhood to maintain some level of peace during nights and weekends. Only after doing all of this research did we decide to invest the over $1.2 million to purchase our home. After moving in, an additional $225,000 was invested in landscaping. This situation is similar for the neighbor within our community. In light of our heavy monetary investment into our home, and the fact we made this investment based on what we were told would be happening on the plot of land right behind us, we are extremely troubled by the recent developments of the planning division of the City of Carlsbad to approve a zoning change to his land to allow for high density, multifamily housing. Not only will this change the landscape of our neighborhood, it will bring hundreds of new residents to a small plot of land that DIRECTLY abuts our home, it will increase the already dangerous traffic flow where near accidents occur daily, create pedestrian access from their units right into our cui de sac, and overall threaten the community in which we have come to call home. Had we known this would be occurring we never would have made the decision to buy this home and invest this level of money. We strongly believe the city is jeopardizing our investment and safety by making this decision. We are asking that you strongly consider the impacts this decision will have on the current residents in our community and our investment in Carlsbad. Having to move our young family out of our "forever" home because of a rezoning that should have been decided well before this community was built is a terrible outcome for us and our neighbors. We understand the vote now resides with the members of the City Council. Please make the right decision to protect our community when making this decision. Sincerely, Peter and Kristen Sieffert TO: FROM: David and Jean San Residents Rf: PUBUC Dear Honorable Honorable Pro Tern and Council in San off of t-".venlda Endnas. California to London to and have been that the Southern Hasan~~~~~~~~~~~~~·~ train the townhouse with sufficient the '""' 1"'""'"''""'""c and architecture. Additional '"'""1 """'" ncn.Joh""'',,. to consider block you or anyone in the From: Sanford Braver '~~~~~~~~~ Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2015 4:47PM To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto Beachfront development Hello, Members of Carlsbad City Council, Upon my retirement in 2011 from my long-time position as a Professor, our children having moved out of state, we could relocate to anyplace in the country. Our search was cursory, however, because it was so clear there was nowhere preferable to Carlsbad, especially South Carlsbad, near Ponto Beach. When we bought our home there, we knew development of the Ponto property was forthcoming, but our study of the Vision Plan convinced us that Carlsbad would retain the wisdom it was noted for and build rationally, including modest density housing, open spaces, ample parking, pedestrian features and sustainability. I now have learned that Shopoff has proposed significantly altering for the worse that Vision in its proposal. This project as Shopoff proposes is very bad for Carlsbad, and for the legacy the Mayor and City Council would leave. It would destroy the very things that make Carlsbad such a unique coastal community. I strongly urge you instead to adopt the considerations of the Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee, which carefully surveyed our community and represents my and all of our views in the development of this space. Sanford L. Braver, Ph.D. (Sandy) Professor Emeritus of Psychology Arizona State University From: Kyra Sarem [mailto:ksaremt 1•••• Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 10:50 AM To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: No new developments by ponto beach Hello Andrea, My name is Kyra Sa rem, and I have lived in Carlsbad with my family for 15 years, the first 5 of them in San pacifica. Currently I live in the bay collection, and ponto is our home beach, with all of my children participating in jr lifeguards. So much has changed in our neighborhood since we first moved to what was then, a sleepy beach town. I can appreciate the new hotels that have arrived but as a result, they have brought crowded freeways, and crowded beaches. I don't think our little town can handle anymore, we simply don't have the roads or large beachfront to handle more tourists and further housing developments. A few restaurants and a park would be appropriate because there is definitely a need for that. Please, no more houses, condos, hotels or tourists. All of Carlsbad breathes a collective sigh of relief when we get our roads and beaches back from the tourists at the end of September! I have four kids and it takes twice as long to get them anywhere in the summer. I don't want to think about what's going to happen if you jam more cars and people onto that 101. Thank you for your time, Kyra Sarem Sent from my iPhone From: Vicky Mann ''-'-'-"='-'-"-'-'=-'-''-'-'-"-'"-'-~ Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 1:52PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Develop Ponto Right! Dear Mayor Hall and City Council. My name is Vicky Mann and I have been a resident of Carlsbad since 1999 and an original homeowner in San Pacifico. Right now our community is a critical crossroads with respect to developing the land to the east of Ponto Beach/Campgrounds. We can either put there whatever is good for a developer or choose to make this a legacy project for your administration and make this project the jewel of San Diego County and beyond. Most importantly, this project can, if done right, help secure critical tourism dollars like Delmar and La Jolla are able to do. I urge you to keep with the original Ponto Vision Plan and zoning and make this land a place that we will all be proud of, will service the residents and tourists and help Carlsbad become a premium tourist destination! Let's keep Carlsbad special and not allow anything just mediocre! Thank you, September 11, 2015 Carlsbad Councilmembers 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Ponto Beochfront Village-Proposed Land Uses Carlsbad City Councilmembers, 11 As the applicant for Ponto Beachfront East and West projects, we are providing this letter to respectfully support the R-23 land use designation on the easterly parcel, and request a split land use designation of GC/R-30 on the westerly parcel to allow the Ponto Beachfront property to be developed consistent with the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan (the "Vision Plan"). First, we would like to confirm our support for the staff recommendation of an R-23 land use designation. During the Envision Carlsbad Planning Commission hearing there was some confusion as to whether we (the applicant) were requesting an R-23 or R-30 land use designation for this parcel. We are supportive of the R-23 designation as recommended by staff, and the R-23 designation is appropriate for the town homes as called for in the Vision Plan (see Pages 2-7 and 2-17 of the Vision Plan). Second, we are requesting a split land use designation of GC/R-30 on the westerly parcel, in order to implement the Vision Plan. Staff is currently recommending a GC land use designation for the parcel, which is inconsistent with the mixed use designation for the parcel in the Vision Plan. The split GC/R-30 land use designation would accomplish the following: "' Implement the Vision Plan with horizontal and vertical mixed-use on this parcel to create the core of the Ponto beachfront Village. Mixed use development is a stated Project Goal of the Vision Plan {Page 1-1 of the Vision Plan), and the "Mixed Use Center" is intended to be the core of the Vision Plan (Page 2-12 of the Vision Plan). In addition, this type of development is permitted by the Local Coastal Program (Page 1-15 of the Vision Plan). • Provide an appropriate and viable amount of commercial space. Our latest market study indicates that site attributes and retailing dynamics can only support 10,000 square feet of commercial space in this location. In addition, the interior commercial space, our current plan includes a public plaza that is approximately 2/3 acre and serves as a community focal point and a gateway to south Carlsbad (Page 2-3 ofthe Vision Plan). www.shopoff.com I Tel: 949-417-1396 I Fax: 949-417-1399 I info@shopoff.com I 2 Park Plaza, Suite 700, Irvine, CA 92614 12 o A split designation of R-30/GC will generate less traffic than the currently proposed GC land use designation. o Provide for a resulting density range of 13.3-18.9 dwelling units per acre, across the western site, which is in line with the Vision Plan. o A mixed use designation is consistent with Exhibits 1A and 18 of Council Resolution No. 2012- 219, which specifically calls for multi-family residential, mixed use and visitor-serving commercial/and use designations for the Ponto Beachfront property. Supporting documents that are referenced above are attached. Finally, we would like to point out that we have reached out to members of the community during the initial planning phase, and prior to submitting a formal application to the City. We continue to reach out and meet with our neighbors today. Our team has had many meetings with surrounding residents on the project, directly connecting with over 100 local residents, and we look forward to continuing to work with the community to make our project even better. We are committed to fulfilling the goals and develop the Ponto property consistent with the City's Vision Plan. We respectfully request to allow for an R-23/and use designation on the easterly parcel and a split designation of GC/R-30 on the westerly parcel. We appreciate your time and consideration in this matter. Please feel free to contact me at- -should you have any questions or wish to discuss. Sincerely, Brian Rupp Vice President-Development cc: Oscar Uranga, Shopoff Realty Investments Mike Howes, Howes Weiler & Associates Brenna Weatherby, Howes Weiler & Associates Don Neu, City of Carlsbad Jason Goff, City of Carlsbad Attachments --·--·--·--·----- 3 Village The Plan does not propose any change to land uses in the Village area. In November 2007, the City Council adopted revisions to the Carlsbad Village Master Plan and Design Manual; said revisions provided policies and standards to facilitate development that Will help create a strong identity for the Village, revitalize the area, and enhance the economic potential of the Village. No additional revisions to Village area land uses, policies or standards are proposed at this time. Other R~uested Land Use Change;z In addttion to the land use designation changes proposed by the Plan, the EC3 and Planning Commission considered a number of other land use change requests from property owners and interested parties {see Exhibit 9). After due consideration of these requests, the EC3 and/or Planning Commission did not ultimately recommend the requested land use changes. Next §teps Approval of the land use changes shown on the Plan is not requested at this time. However, City Council acceptance of this report is a critical step in the General Plan update process. With City Council direction to utilize the Plan in the preparation of General Plan update, staff will then be able to continue with drafting General Plan policies and conducting technical analyses for the program environmental impact report (PEIR). The land use changes shown on the Plan \/Viii be analyzed further during the General Plan update and PEIR process, and as a result, modifications to the Plan may be proposed to address environmental or other concerns that arise during the update process. Mer a draft General Plan and PEIR are completed (anticipated in spring 2013), the documents will be made available for public review and presented at public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council for adoption. FISCAL IMPACT: Acceptance of this report and direction to staff to proceed \/\lith the General Plan update is \1\iithin the Envision Carlsbad Phase 2 scope of work and consistent with the $1.344 million contract for consulting services previously approved by the City Council. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: Pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Section 15308, data collection, research, and resource evaluation activities are exempt from the requirements of CEQA, provided such activities do not result in a serious or major disturbance to the environment. The activities associated with Envision Carlsbad Phase 2 (public outreach, analysis, research, and preparation of draft documents) Will not involve or result in any disturbance to the environment; therefore, the acceptance of this report and direction to utilize the Draft Preferred Plan In preparation of the General Plan update are exempt from CEQA. A Program Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) will be prepared as part of Envision Carlsbad Phase 2, \Nhich will analyze the environmental impacts associated with the new General Plan, LCP, and Zoning Ordinance. The PEIR will be prepared consistent With CEQA. Pnor to City adoption of a new General Plan, LCP, or Zoning Ordinance, the PEIR must be adopted by the City Council. ~I BITS: 1. City Council Resolution No. 2916-2:19 , including Exhibit 1A-Draft Preferred Plan and Exhibit 1 B-Draft Preferred Plan Pro~ed Lmnd Use Change 2. Summary of the Development of the Preferred Plan 3. Draft Preferred Plan-Land Use Classification Summary 4. Draft Preferred Plan-Proposed R-30 Land Use Classification 5. 2010..2020 RHNA 6. Draft Preferred and the Excess Unit Bank 7. Draft Plan and Growth Management (Proposition E) 8. Summary of EC3 and Planning Commission Recommendations 9. Other Requested Land Use Changes 10. Envision Carmbad Community Feedback Report Land Use Concepts 11. Minules from meetings on March 28 and Apl1117, 2012 12. Minutes from Planning Commission meetings on May 2, May 16, June 20 and July 18, 2012 13. Staff Reports to the Planning Commission dated May 2, May 16, June 20 and Juty 18, 2012 (excluding correspondence; see Exhibits 14 and 15) 14. Correspondence attached to Staff Reports to the Ptanning Commission dated May 2, Mey 16, June 20 and July 16, 2012 15. Correspondence regarding the Aviara Resort site in Focus Area 10, attached to the July 18, 2012 Staff Report to the Planning Commission. 16. Correspondence received after the July 18,2012 Planning Commission meeting From: Jennifer Philion •.:..:..:.::===-"'-'! Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 4:49PM To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto Development Hi Ms. Dykes. I am a Carlsbad resident in the San Pacifico neighborhood. I am writing to request that the Planning Commission adopt the unamended recommendations for the Ponto beachfront develpment project. The Ponto area is such a unique and natural area of Carlsbad that I would hate to see it turn into a developers playground. I ask that the Planning Commission keep the area as a natural habitat and look to create an environment of shared community space and restaurants. As a resident, I do not support the increased housing density on the small plot of land, nor do I support the over 40 foot building height on the coastal property. I ask that you keep in mind that this Ponto area is a RARE treasure in Carlsbad and should remain that way. Thanks for your consideration! Jennifer Philion San Pacifico homeowner From: Cherie Mclarty cherie. Sent: Friday, September 11, 2015 4:02PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto plan I live in San Pacifico against the back walk and train tracks. My concern with the development plan is the building height next to the tracks. This will cause a tremendous increase in noise decibels for the adjoining neighborhood. Three story buildings do not come this close to the tracks anywhere within the city limits that I can think of. We will also lose the natural airflow from west to east and trap the train exhaust in the neighborhood. Please consider this and increase the space between the tracks and allowed building in east Ponto property. Thank you for your time. Cherie Mclarty From: Jane Naskiewicz •.:...:..:.:=o::.!.!.C=-'-'-"'-=.!.1..!::.!-'-'1 Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2015 10:57 AM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto Development Dear City Council Members, As a recent graduate of the Carlsbad Citizens Academy, I am very proud of our city and have a lot of confidence in your leadership, and believe you are balancing the growth and development well. My concern is with the proposed Ponto Project. What this particular investor Shopoff is proposing is not going to benefit the city in general, but is only a means to line their pockets. The city needs to have Ponto West stay General Commercial and Keep the zoning for Ponto East at R-23 OR LESS! The original Ponto Vision Plan was to make this area the gateway to the city and I trust you will keep that Vision as your legacy. The big draw to Carlsbad is the Beaches and yet there isn't adequate parking, nor is there any commercial/retail from the south entrance to Carlsbad all the way up to the Village. Chandlers is great, but with this many tourists visiting and residents, we need more shops, restaurants, gathering places for people to enjoy. Right now folks who live or vacation in the south end of Carlsbad are driving to Leucadia & downtown Encinitas to spend their money. Why don't we have a winery, brewery, yogurt shops, funky restaurants, etc? And right now there are serious traffic issues that must be addressed ... Why don't we have a left hand tum lane on the north bound side of the 101 at Avenida Encinas? It's really dangerous to pedestrians, and this is before you increase the density by 150+ homes. It feels like you take your life in your hands walking around that intersection of Ponto Rd and A venida Encinas. Each and every minute, there are 5 or 1 0 cars making illegal u turns On A venida Encinas at Ponto road, and there's a hill there so visibility is severely reduced. All so they can get to the public beach on the south side of the 101 ??? Not sure putting a round about there is the best solution either, because why let all that extra traffic come up a heavily used pedestrian street just so they can tum around and go back to another light? I trust that you will find solutions that work for all the residents and visitors of this area, and make it the beautiful Gateway to Carlsbad that it was meant to be. Kind Regards, Jane Jane Naskiewicz Keller Williams Realty From: Susan Neptune ailto:sue Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2015 3:32 PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: 100% Clean Energy It is time for the City of Carlsbad to commit to 100% clean energy. It is good for our city! It is good for our environment! YOU CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN! Susan Neptune -40+ years in Carlsbad Sent from my iPhone From: Eve Simmons lksimm Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2015 9:34PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Subject: 100% Clean Energy:) Honorable Mayor Hall and Carlsbad City Council, By now you've probably seen the delightful video done by students from Carlsbad High School, expressing their support for a 100% renewable energy goal in the city's Climate Action Plan (CAP). It's a noble and practical goal to be sure. I know you each want the best for your fair city and for our young people. Here's a perfect way to honor both. Let's join so many other cities in making sure our children have a safe future with an economically thriving city. Your legacy of leadership will do you proud. With Gratitude and Respect, Eve Eve Simmons for State Assembly 2016 From: Mark Martinez mailto: Sent: Saturday, September 12, To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: East and West Ponto Development Application September 12, 2015 Dear Mayor Matt Hall and Carlsbad City Council: My name is Mark Martinez and I am resident of the San Pacifico community in south Carlsbad. I am the descendent of a great grandmother that was born in California before it was a part of the United States and have in my short life span seen California developed in ways that were not in harmony with the natural environment or the reality of the desert in which we live. Such is the case unfortunately with the proposed Shopoff development for the south Ponto Beach entry of Carlsbad. The proposal not only ignores the approved Carlsbad General Plan, it is obvious that its intent is to maximize density ignoring traffic and infrastructure problems that have already greatly diminished the quality of life in our area. This isn't a question of "I've got mine, let's keep everybody else out." It is a question of forsaking an opportunity to provide the city of Carlsbad with a unique gateway on its southern border. The General Plan called for a largely commercial "village" like development that would be unique enough to attract both visitors and residents to restaurants, shops and a community center as well as provide a beautiful entry for the city as travelers proceeded north on Carlsbad Blvd to the Village. This was something that our predecessors saw as a necessity for the city as they laid out, vetted and approved the General Plan for South Carlsbad. Yesterday, the County Planning Commission approved a large scale development called Lilac Hills in the Valley Center/Bonsall area. This was another case where the General Plan which called for maintaining a low density rural character for the area in light of restricted water sources, commuter gridlock on 1-15 and brush fire danger was all but ignored. One of the dissenting Planning Commission members said that a hole was shot in the General Plan and the approval of the development would only set a precedent for more high density development in areas for which it is neither suited or supported by existing infrastructure. I strongly urge the Carlsbad City Council to reject the Shopoff applications that deviate from the approved General Plan for the South Ponto community when they meet on September 22. Thank you for your time. Mark Martinez From: Lindsay Cosco I..!..!.!:~=~~L!.>:.:~'4 Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2015 12:08 PM To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto development Hello, I am writing as a resident of the Ponto area (Waters End), and would like to express my family's opinion to keep the R-23 dwelling units/acre on Ponto east, and general commercial for Ponto west. Thank you very much. Have a great weekend! Lindsay From: Lisa Rood mailto:lisa Sent: Monday, September 14, To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto Village Vision-Save our Community Hello Andrea - I am writing to you as a plea to please help the members of the community ensure that Ponto Village is built with the best interests of all of the community, and in fact, all of San Diego, in mind. I am a resident of the San Pacifico community and have lived there for over 14 years now. The landscape, community support, preservation of nature and beautiful beaches are all key factors in making Carlsbad one of the most desirable cities in the state of California. As a family, we feel privileged to live here and regularly welcome friends and family to enjoy our city. The proposed plans which include high density housing, three stories high of building and minimal commercial space raises huge concern about the potential demise and negative impact on our community. PLEASE DO NOT SUPPORT THIS. The Coast Highway/Avenida Encinas is already a very highly populated intersection with lots of traffic and a constant stream of pedestrians. One of the beauties of our community is that individuals from all over Carlsbad and San Diego utilize our public beaches, public lagoon and trails. Building a high density structure and bringing in all the traffic that goes with it is a hazard to our environment, our property values, the safety of our community and does not align with the overall aesthetics of the. beautiful city of Carlsbad that we have all come to know. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ... If the city needs to support a development at all, please make it welcoming to all of Carlsbad and surrounding communities. Please support a commercial center that encourages residents of Carlsbad to meet and enjoy meals, shopping, etc. Create a village type of atmosphere which continues to place Carlsbad in a highly desirable destination city -one that folks from around the state of California and beyond speak of and recognize as a fun, attractive and enjoyable place that they look forward to visiting and gravitating to. Now is the time to make sure that the future of Coast Highway is set on a path for all of Carlsbad to enjoy ... and that this precious landscape is not dedicated to high density, three story buildings that become an eyesore for decades to come. Thank you for your support Andrea, Lisa Rood From: Marianne Powell L.!.!.!.:==~=-='-'-1 Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 2:11PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto Development-General Plan Update We are both retired and have been residents of Carlsbad for 16 years. We strongly urge you to adhere to the current staff recommendations for land use relative to Ponto Development: R-23 Dwelling units/acre or less for Ponto East and General Commercial for Ponto West. We support the recommendations of the Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee and the San Pacifico homeowners. Thank you for your consideration, John Powell Marianne Powell From: STephanie Newmann mailto:stevinewman Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 6:17PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto Development Dear Council, I am a very concerned citizen about the Ponto Development. This will overload this area which is already congested with beach traffic, homes, hotel, campground and senior park. Don't let it happen!! Instead make it something tourists and neighbors would enjoy. Outside eating, dog friendly areas, small shops. The outside eating would benefit hotel patrons, neighbors and campground people. Please it's getting so crowding here. Thank you, Stephanie Newman -- From: Tamara Dixon '.!.!.!.::'-=~ Sent: Monday, September 14, 2015 8:25PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Develop Ponta Right!! Dear Andrea, The future ofthe Carlsbad Southern Gateway, Ponto East and Ponto West needs to be developed correctly. It is inevitable that Carlsbad needs to address the growing population and the planning commission must also focus on the protection and beauty of our environment and enhancing the quality of life our community has worked hard to create. The core values that Carlsbad has embraced since 1950 is to create a managed growing population that will protect and preserve the open spaces for everyone to enjoy. It is crucial that the planning of Ponta East and Ponta West be consistent with Carlsbad 's vision. As a gateway to Carlsbad's southern coast, it is important that Ponto is developed right by disallowing tall, looming, high density and unsightly residential buildings. The developer has requested an absolute contrast of what the San Pacifico residents want. The proposed tall residential building masses will not only be an eyesore to the southern gateway of Carlsbad but will obstruct the ocean view of the residents of san Pacifico. Consistency of architecture and building heights need to be considered in order for San Pacifico and Ponto to blend in as a beachfront community. The developer has requested so many changes that, if passed, will be detrimental to this area. My biggest concern is how much the tall buildings will impact my view of the ocean. Please keep to the original zoning of Ponta West and Ponta East. Please inforce the Carlsbad general plan and local costal program as outlined in the city adopted Ponto vision plan created a decade ago. I do not support the developers proposal to build massive apartment blocks in the Ponto village. It blocks the ocean views ofthe existing residents in San Pacifico and will cause an over load of population which will have a negative impact on our daily life. Thank you. Tamara Dixon j ' /l j j j j j j j j j j j j j I I I J I J I J I J I J I J I J I J I J I J I J I J IJ j j September 14, 2015 TO: The Honorable Matt Hall, Mayor, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Keith Blackburn, Mayor Pro Tern, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Mark Packard, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Lorraine Wood, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Michael Schumacher, Council Member, City of Carlsbad Planning Commissioner Neil Black Planning Commissioner Jeff Segal Planning Commissioner Velyn Anderson Planning Commissioner Kerry Siekmann Planning Commissioner Victoria Scully Planning Commissioner Marty Montgomery Planning Commissioner Hap L'Heureux FROM: Chas Wick Please find below a copy of a letter that I agree with as to the Ponto Beach Development Project as it relates to your upcoming General Plan meeting coming up on Sept. 22 at 4 pm. I would ask that the City Council stick to your guns and follow your Ponto Vision Plan design/standards from 2005 when evaluating the Ponto Beach Development Project. Typically developers want to get as much use ($$$)out of their project design for any particular piece of property. They usually don't care about our City or its citizens in their development plans. We/ you have a great southern Gateway to the City project and we hope you will use the design standards you already have approved forth is project. We trust in you, as our last line of defense for this great Jewel of a City ... Carlsbad. Re: City of Carlsbad City Council Proposed Amendments to General Plan "The issues facing the future of Carlsbad are ... retated more to protecting and enhancing the quality of life that the community has worked hard to create." This first statement on the City of Carlsbad's General Plan website, Carlsbad's master plan for addressing the continuously changing needs of our growing populace, is a reflection of the core values that have driven city planning since the ~gsa's. Bordered by the coast and on our northern and southern ends by expansive, beautiful lagoons that are home to a large variety of flora and fauna, Carlsbad has uniquely created managed growth that preserves and protects valuable open spaces and sensitive ecological environments that make our community so attractive to citizens and businesses. The Carlsbad City Council1 Planning Commission in consultation and concert with Carlsbad citizens, set out to reaffirm and enhance these values that are the heart and soul of the General Plan. It is with that long history of civic pride, collaboration and love for Carlsbad that the Citizens of San Pacifico, a community of about soo homes and approximately ~~ooo plus citizens ask for your support in our concerns for the planning and development of Ponto-the southern Coastal Gateway to Carlsbad. Carlsbad City Council September 15, 2015 Page 2 • Local land use authorities need to address and plan for the viable reuse and redevelopment of golf courses as a component of the jurisdiction's General Plan update process in light of the changing nature of the golf industry. The combination of this golf course's particular problems sourcing water, recent water restrictions, and the dim future of golf courses in general results in the need to plan for future redevelopment of the Property. The area surrounding the Property is primarily residential and the Property itself is well suited for residential development. As of June 30, 2015, the Citywide Excess Dwelling Unit Bank Balance was 2,085. We ask that the City Council apply a portion of these available units to the Property so that it may be redeveloped for residential use. Given the City's view that Excess Dwelling Units can no longer be transferred to the Northeast Quadrant, in which the Property lies, the Growth Management dwelling unit limit for the Northeast Quadrant should be increased to allow residential development of the Property. Currently, the City proposes designating this Property as Open Space, category 3 -i.e., outdoor recreation, which allows golf course use and little else. The designation virtually forces CCL to use costly and scarce water to operate its golf course. The designation would thus result in a regulatory taking because it would not allow the "pursuit of useful activities." Skalko v. City of Sunnyvale (1939) 14 Cal.2d 213, 215-216. An action is a regulatory taking when it allows the physical invasion of property, ~, Cwynar v. City and County of San Francisco (2001) 90 Cal.App.4th 637, 653-659; completely deprives the property owner of the value of the property; or results from an adverse balance of the economic impact and character ofthe action with the owner's "'investment-backed expectations."' Lingle v. Chevron US.A. Inc. (2005) 544 U.S. 528, 538-540. The proposed plan is and does all these things: It will foreseeably bar useful activities; it calls for the physical invasion of property; and it will soon deprive the property owners of the value of their property. Even if its treatment of this property is not immediately a "taking," it is, at a minimum, poor planning. Planning requires anticipating future needs, but the combination of the plan and the City's growth management system would lock in a designation that will become unworkable long before the horizon year of the plan. As indicated above, this problem also implicates the adequacy of the analysis of the EIR in two ways. First, Impact 3.9-3 addresses whether the plan would affect population growth. The EIR concludes that it will not because "the city's public hearing process" on the plan amendment will reduce allowable development so as not to exceed growth management limits. This is not exactly true, however, because the City will either have to pay to acquire the Property, which it will not want to do, or allow development of the Property. This is an inevitable consequence of the growth management system and Proposition E, so the EIR needs to recognize these eventualities. Second, if the City is going to require that this Property remain in use as a golf course, the EIR must-but did not -evaluate the effect on groundwater that drilling necessary wells will have. CCL will litigate this if necessary, but we believe the best and simplest solution for our client, the City, and Carlsbad residents would be to revise the proposed General Plan, and then enact Carlsbad City Council September 15, 2015 Page 3 appropriate zoning, so as to allow development at some reasonable level. We respectfully request that the City make the proposed change and place the matter on the ballot for voter approval. The City can do so easily and cheaply, which would not be true for CCL. The alternative would be an inverse condemnation lawsuit that would cost the City millions of dollars. I am available to discuss how to best accomplish redevelopment of the Property. Paul E. Robinson HECHT SOLBERG ROBINSON GOLDBERG & BAGLEY LLP SGV cc: Ms. Kathy Dodson, City Manager (via e-mail) Ms. Celia Brewer, City Attorney (via e-mail) Ms. Jennifer Jesser, Planning Division (via e-mail) Mr. Brett Feuerstein (via e-mail) Mr. Elliot Feuerstein (via e-mail) 4847-2818-6152 v.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ~1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 From: Glenna Citron Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 9:46AM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: 100% Dear City Council Members, Please vote to include a 100°/o clean energy goal in the Climate Action Plan. The 100°/o goal will direct decisions that will benefit the city, businesses, and the environment for years to come. Seize this opportunity to lead Carlsbad toward a future we want. Thank you, Glenna Citron Exhibit 14 Report to the Planning Commission dated July 18, 2015 (incorporated by reference), previously distributed to the City Council as Exhibit 1 to City Council Agenda Bill #22,017, dated July 18, 2015 On file in the Office of the City Clerk Planning Commission Minutes Minutes of: Time of Meeting: Date of Meeting: Place of Meeting: CALL TO ORDER July 18, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION 9:00a.m. July 18,2015 FARADAY CENTER Chairperson Scully called the meeting to order at 9:00a.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Hall led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL EXHIBIT 15 CORRECTED J Page 1 Present: Chairperson Scully, Commissioners Anderson, Black, L'Heureux, Montgomery, Segall and Siekmann Absent: None STAFF PRESENT Don Neu, City Planner Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney Dave de Cordova, Principal Planner Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner Corey Funk, Associate Planner Carl Stiehl, Associate Planner Jason Geldert, Engineering Manager Farah Nisan, Senior Office Specialist Kathy Dodson, Interim City Manager Gary Barberio, Assistant City Manager Glen Van Peski, Community & Economic Development Director Debbie Fountain, Housing & Neighborhood Services Director Patrick Thomas, Public Works Director Craig Williams, Mobility Manager Will Foss, Building Official Mike Grim, Senior Planner Chris Hazeltine, Parks & Recreation Director Kyle Lancaster, Parks Superintendent Michael Davis, Fire Chief Paul Mendes, Police Captain Kevin Lehan, Police Sergeant Jeff Smith, Police Sergeant Corporal Reid Shipley Corporal Alonso Develasco Corporal Shawn Lawton Corporal Mike Larson Corporal Allen Severy Corporal Gary Marshall The Planning Commission meeting was adjourned and reconvened to the Joint Special Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission where Mayor Hall chaired the meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Interim City Manager Kathy Dodson introduced Don Neu, City Planner, David de Cordova, Principal Planner, and Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner to make the staff presentation. i ' i' Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2015 Page 2 1. EIR 13-02/GPA 07-02/ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02/SS 15-05/SS 15-06-GENERAL PLAN UPDATE-Request that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council: Certification of a Program Environmental Impact Report (including Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) for the proposed draft General Plan, Climate Action Plan and associated amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Local Coastal Program land use and zoning maps, and Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan; Approval of a General Plan Amendment to comprehensively update the General Plan, including the Housing Element; Approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance for consistency with the draft General Plan; Approval of a Zoning Map amendment for consistency with the draft General Plan; Approval of a Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendment to amend the LCP Land Use and Zoning maps and LCP implementation plan consistent with the draft General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance; Approval of an amendment to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to amend the Growth Management circulation performance standard; Approval of a Climate Action Plan; and Approval of an allocation from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. Mr. Neu began the presentation on the General Plan Update (GPU) Overview. Ms. Jesser gave a presentation on Land Use Designation changes, Housing Element Update and the Mobility Element. Mr. de Cordova concluded the presentation on the Housing Element, Mobility Element and the Climate Action Plan. RECESS Mayor Hall called for a recess at 10:40 a.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Mayor Hall called the meeting to order at 10:45 a.m. with all Commissioners and Council members present. Mayor Hall opened public testimony on Agenda Item 1 John Grant, 7358 Sea Farer Place, representing Tanya Lane, Shawn Scruten, Jane Lewinski, and Kelsy Lundz shared concerns with habitat preservation, open space and the quality of life in Carlsbad. Christine Crowley, 7450 Sundial Place, representing San Pacifico Development, San Sebastian Community, Phil and Letitia Schrupp, Karen Sebahar, Mike LaDouce, and Bobbie Peacock shared concerns with the General Plan Update going against the core values, all components of open space, increased housing density, parking, the Sustainability Element and the widening of Avenida Encinas, access from Carlsbad Boulevard to other properties, traffic on Ponto, neighborhood revitalization, connectivity, high density housing and noise. Bill Arnold, 3432 Don Ortega Drive, representing Rancho Carlsbad HOA, Russ Kohl, Claude Jones and Bryan Mace shared concerns with the Robertson Ranch Planning Areas 22 and property access from College Boulevard. Michael Sebahar, 7442 Sundial Place, representing Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee, San Pacifico Community, Phil Schupp, Laticia Schupp, Gail Norman and Pat Travis shared concerns with housing density, high rise building, open space, trails, and habitat preservation. Marne Bouillon, 540 Meridian Way, representing Santander Residents, Ponto Beachfront Community, Stephen Edward, Patricia Machri, Jim Vecchio, Jack Kubota and Jacques Dallery shared concerns with the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan Amendments and the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan. Stephen Gold, 4915 Refugio Avenue, representing the Sierra Club, Jeff Regan, Glenn Citrow and the Green Clun, Carlsbad High School, Dominick Sullivan, Caroline Allen and Jacqueline Penn shared concerns with the Climate Action Plan, a desire to add a goal to reach 100% renewable energy citywide, greenhouse gas emission and the livelihood of the community. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2015 Page 3 Alex De Taboada, 2349 Longfellow Road, representing the Sierra Club, Carlsbad High School Green Club, Caroline Allen, Arin Zwonitzer, Daniel Turner, A.J. Zwonitzer shared concerns that there should be a goal to reach 100% renewable energy. Madeleine Szabo, 5338 Forecastle Court, representing Friends of Carlsbad Scenic Corridor and Friends of Sunny Creek, the Kelly Family, Dona Wilcox, Karen Kelly, Joanne Sweeney, and Mike Krooplich shared concerns with the Sunny Creek density changes. Patricia Bleha, 3209 Fosca Street, and Howard Krausz, 3211 Fosca Street, representing North County Advocates, Mr. Krausz provided a handout on record to the Commission and shared concerns regarding the recirculation of the EIR, implementation of water supply and drought alerts. Tina Schmidt, 6545 Basalto Street, shared concerns regarding Cultural Arts, transportation shuttles to activity centers, land use development aesthetic designs and landscapes. Rob Mayars, 7803 Calle Lomas, representing North County Advocates shared concerns with open space, the Growth Management Plan and the Community Vision. Bill Hofman, 3156 Lionshead, representing the Kilroy Realty and Fenton Property shared support to staff recommendations. Ray Bender, 1015 Camino Del Arroyo Drive, provided a handout on record to the Commission and shared concerns with noise related to the Palomar Airport and modification to Policy 3-P.42, the compliance of the EIR with CEQA and housing requirements. Shawn Scranton, 7362 Escallonia Court, shared concerns with Ponto Beachfront. Don Christiansen, 3715 Longview Drive, shared concerns the water supply, renewable energy and battery storage. Michelle Miller, 2432 badger Lane, shared concerns regarding traffic and density at the Terraces of Sunny Creek. Michael McMahon, 2645 Sutter Street, shared concerns with the Climate Action Plan. Brian Bunnell, 925 Buena Place, stated concerns regarding changes for the property from R-3 to R-1 zoning. RECESS Mayor Hall called for a recess at 12:10 p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Mayor Hall called the meeting to order at 12:35 p.m. with all Commissioners and Council members present. Glenna Citron, 4915 Refugio Avenue, shared concerns with clean energy and the Community Choice and Aggregation should be added to the General Plan Update. Graham Thorley, 2539 El Gavilan Court, shared concerns with greenhouse gas emissions related to traffic and Palomar Airport. Cindi Vigne, 3880 Hibiscus Circle, stated her concerns with mixed use and commercial zoning in the Barrio on Carlsbad Village Drive. Sherry Alvarado, 3331 Tyler Street, representing Gil Alvarado, Julio Rameriz, Sarah Peterson, and Roy Sanchez, shared concerns regarding pedestrian crosswalks at the Senior Center from Chestnut Avenue to Pine Avenue, Roosevelt Street to Madison Street, and safe beach access. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2015 Page4 Jane Norman, 1545 Burgundy Avenue and 1785 Chestnut Avenue, representing Amy Wong, Allen Oshima and Gerry Gahan, stated concerns regarding density. Barbara Keston, 7476 Capstan Drive, stated her concerns with the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan on mobility, traffic, parking, high density zoning and water supply. Ellen Fawls, 538 Windsock Way, shared concerns regarding water supply, traffic on Ponto Beach and density. Lynda Halttunen, 7239 Plaza De La Costa, provided a handout on record to the Commission and shared concerns of noise from concerts at the La Costa Resort and the need for a Noise Ordinance. Paige Decino, 4155 Skyline Road, stated her concerns with renewable energy, open space, wildlife, climate change and native plant cataloging. Allen Sweet, 4444 Highland Drive, stated his concerns regarding trails and pedestrian priority over vehicles from the Mobility Element. Natalie Shapiro, 2202 South Coast Highway, Oceanside, representing the Buena Vista Audubon Society, shared concerns with the Climate Action Plan regarding open space and renewable energy. Katherine Kato, 3250 Sunny Creek Road, stated her concerns with the housing density in the North East quadrant. Casey Cinciarelli, Lyons Court, shared concerns regarding housing density. Socorro Anderson, 3420 Don Juan, stated concerns regarding affordable housing in the Village and Barrio. Ron Ashman, 5725 Kearny Villa Road, Suite D, provided a handout on record to the Commission and shared concerns regarding the Ponto Beachfront zoning ownership. Jack Henthorn, P.O. Box 237, provided a handout on record to the Commission and stated his support for the Palomar Oaks West site and commented on fire, flood and hazardous materials as they relate to the property. Gil Miltenberger, 2235 Encinas Boulevard, Suite 216, Encinitas, stated his concerns with the staff recommendation for the Palomar Oaks West property. Evelyn Montalbano, 2404 La Costa Avenue, stated her concerns with the NRG Cabrillo Power Plant, open space and renewable energy. Oscar Uranga, 2 Park Plaza, Suite 700, Irvine, stated that he supports the zoning of R-23 and not R-30 for the Ponto Residential site. Michael McSweeny, 9201 Spectrum Center Boulevard, San Diego, stated his concerns with the Housing Element to remove constraints, and requirements for inclusionary housing and affordable housing. Jackie Peacock, 2306 Lanyard Place, stated her concerns with the Climate Action Plan. Fred Sandquist, 6408 Crossbill Court, stated his concerns regarding the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan, open space and public safety. Gigi Orlowski, 3729 Bennington Court, stated her concerns regarding renewable energy. De'Ann Weimer, 6606 Fiona Place, representing the Aviara Premier Collection HOA, shared concerns regarding open space and zoning on Poinsettia Lane. Diane Nygaard, 5020 Nighthawk Court, stated her concerns with renewable energy and open space. Michael and Marja Selna, 4901 El Camino Real, provided a handout on record to the Commission and stated that they support the General Plan and zoning changes to the Marja property. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2015 Page 5 RECESS Mayor Hall called for a recess at 1:50 p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Mayor Hall called the meeting to order at 2:04p.m. with all Commissioners and Council members present. Mayor Hall asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on Agenda Item 1. Seeing none, Mayor Hall asked if there were any members of the audience who wished to speak on items not listed on the Agenda. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA Elizabeth Banks, 418 Chinquapin Avenue, stated her concerns regarding the Caruso Initiative. Sherry Alvarado, 3331 Tyler Street, stated that she can support the changes to the Carlsbad Village & Barrio Master Plan and thanked staff. Ms. Dodson introduced staff to respond to the issues raised. Mr. Neu stated that the objective of the GPU in the Ponto area was to implement the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan. Mr. Neu added that there were items studied during the GPU process at a higher density such as the R-30 designation considered throughout the process as a potential option. He also stated that it was done at the request of the property owner that the city consider the higher density. Mr. Neu stated that the staff recommendation to the Commission would implement the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan. He stated that a project application has been submitted by the property owner which will go through the normal review process, an environmental review on the project will be done should the land use changes occur, and the project design will go through a review process with the Planning Commission. Mr. Neu stated that Robertson Ranch Planning Area 22 located on the southeast corner of College Boulevard and Cannon Road is proposed to change from an office land use designation to an R-30 designation. Mr. Neu added that staff recommends the Planning Area 22 change and are well aware of the compatibility issues raised by Rancho Carlsbad representatives. He stated that if the land use designation is changed, staff will work to implement mitigation or project design feature that would address those issues. Mr. Neu stated that the initial plan of the Sunny Creek Commercial areas was to look at properties beyond just the commercial piece itself. Surrounding properties were included in the analysis. He stated that staff's recommendation is to consider just the commercial property and not recommending to change the adjacent properties from their current low density residential designation. Mr. Neu stated that staff is recommending changing 9.6 of the 17+ acre site to a residential category, which will help meet the housing element requirement for the higher density ranges. He replied to the residential care facilities issues and stated that a number of projects in the community are not counted as residential dwelling units, they are known as commercial living units as well as timeshare hotel units based on the municipal code. Mr. Neu added that the city has been through litigation in more recent years, and the city prevailed on that case, which validates the way of treating those as not residential dwelling units. For purposes of growth management, they are not treated as a residential dwelling unit. Mr. Neu also stated staff proposed land use changes that did not cause impacts to public facilities in terms of violating the growth management requirements and were analyzed in the EIR. He stated that aesthetics of development requests that additional emphasis be put in the land use community design element on that topic, is a possibility. Mr. Neu also stated that in terms of how the city has treated that issue historically, has been in the individual development plans or in zoning and other types of implementing standards in the area of residential single family. He added that there is a council policy that deals with architectural guidelines. Mr. Neu stated that some of the items being discussed that are specific could be included as policies in the General Plan, but in many cases, they are directed more at implementing measures or specific things that will be done in the next phase which will include updating the zoning code, or additional follow up ordinances. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2015 Page 6 Mr. Neu replied to a comment regarding the city needing to have a noise ordinance and stated that the noise regulations are primarily geared towards new development, as well as construction activities or manufacturing processes. He stated that the General Plan Noise Element does have a policy about revising the noise guidelines manual, however, it does not go as far to say consider a noise ordinance that would address other issues. Mr. Neu stated that the Planning Commission and City Council may consider and make some decisions to whether it is appropriate. He stated that staff has spent time with the county airport staff and public works staff to discuss provisions in the General Plan that address the expansion of the airport and requires the voters to authorize any expansion. Mr. Neu stated that the policies and the way that was placed in the city's codes address the physical or the boundary expansion of the airport. He also stated that staff has spent time with the city's legal staff and with county staff deliberating on what the city's abilities are to regulate the airport. Mr. Neu added that staff tried to clarify what Carlsbad's restrictions were on the land area expansion of the airport and address some of the compatibility issues. He stated that the General Plan and land use planning deals with uses in the vicinity of the airport and their requirement to be consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. He also stated that although it has been accomplished with the General Plan, operational topics were not discussed for the airport which were outside of the city's purview. Mr. Neu replied to concerns regarding the cleanup mapping changes and stated that they are characterizing them as changes where adjustments to boundaries are made, or in some cases, have a General Plan and zoning designation that does not match one another and/or match what has been built. Staff's recommendation was to change the zoning to be consisted with what was constructed and/or what the General Plan density was. Mr. Neu stated the process followed was to try to gain conformance with what was built as well as the densities that were planned for. Mr. Neu added that the Village & Barrio Master Plan will address the issues in the Barrio area south of Carlsbad Village Drive. Staff is not proposing changes to land use as part of this effort, but are proposing changes to that plan and to expand its boundaries. He stated that at this time, staff is reflecting changes that were made previously in terms of some density adjustments in the perimeter areas of the Barrio and trying to provide for infill development. Staff is not proposing to expand the commercial land uses, unless they come about in the Village & Barrio Master Plan. Mr. Neu stated the General Plan does propose or provide policies for rail crossings particularly in the Chestnut area as the city works with SANDAG and other agencies about potentially trenching the railroad through the northern part of the community. Mr. Neu added that staff's proposal regarding the units in the excess dwelling bank is to keep within the voter mandated total number of residential units. The Growth Management program establishes dwelling unit limits by quadrant and when projects have not reached those potential unit capacities, they go into the excess bank and can be reallocated. He stated that staff proposes to leave surplus units in the unused units bank with the recommendation made and expect additional units to be deposited. Mr. Neu stated that there will be a point in time where we will reach the unit cap. Mr. Neu replied to the affordable housing density ranges issues and stated that staff feels that we are in good shape in terms of getting the state certification should the element be approved locally. He also stated that additional sites analyzed, such as the development on Palomar Oaks Way and others that the community members supported or opposed, were studied to provide flexibility for the decision makers as to which would be supported based on community feedback and the benefits and negatives of each site. Mr. Neu stated that a master response in the EIR shows a significant number of comments made by the community regarding open space. He added that in order to gain the 2% to achieve the goal of 40% open space would require 500 additional acres beyond what is already expected through implementation of the Habitat Management Plan. Mr. Neu also stated that all land use changes proposed today are not looking to change any open space lands, all the properties that are proposing to change in some fashion were already designated for some type of development whether it be residential or non-residential. He stated that adjustments have been made in some cases to reflect resources. Mr. Neu replied to issues regarding BIA and affordable housing requirements stating that staff is proposing to remain consistent with City Council Policy 43 and for any of the projects receiving density increases, there will be a higher affordable or inclusionary housing requirement. That is something that the City Council or the Planning Commission can modify. He added that the way the policy is crafted right now treats an allocation of units as a financial incentive and in exchange for that, since the excess dwelling units are a finite resource, staff felt that it was appropriate to try to obtain a commitment for affordable housing that was above the city's 15%. CORRECTED Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2015 Page 7 Mr. Neu stated although the GPU does not provide enough information addressing the issues of enforcement of rules in open space, it is mentioned in the Habitat Management Plan. He stated that many preserves that are under active management such as those by the Center for Natural Lands Management provide rangers and have limited availability as it is a matter of resources. Mr. de Cordova stated that during the analysis of the Climate Action Plan, staff evaluated a full range of potential measures that could be included. He stated that the approach was to consider applicability to the community and that it could be achievable, measureable and enforceable. Mr. de Cordova also stated that there is an ability to adapt the Climate Action Plan to changing circumstances and the component for monitoring and measuring the progress in the implementation of each measure were bolstered during the revisions of the CAP. ADJOURNMENT Mayor Hall adjourned the Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting at 2:04 p.m. RECESS Chairperson Scully called for a recess at 2:41 p.m. to allow the City Council to leave the meeting. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Chairperson Scully called the meeting to order at 2:44 p.m. with all Commissioners present. Chairperson Scully closed the public testimony on Agenda Item 1. Chairperson Scully asked for each Commissioner to provide staff specific areas of concern or topics for the next meeting. DISCUSSION Commissioner Segall has some concerns about the Mobility Element regarding the Multi Modal Level of Service, prioritizing of bikes and pedestrians over vehicles on most streets. He stated that he would like to see the reach of Cannon Road going from the high school into Oceanside be taken out of put in the plan. Commissioner Segall stated his concerns with the lack of coordination of the signalization of traffic lights that increase GHG emissions, the testimony from the Ponto Beachfront residents, density and traffic issues, and what is expected of the plan regarding the issues. He concluded with Robertson Ranch PA 22 and its impact on Rancho Carlsbad. Commissioner Montgomery stated that he wanted to discuss some issues regarding open space and he would like the commission to deliberate on how open space is acquired in the future. He stated that he would like to see staff provide a recommendation that the Commission follow the recommendation from the ADHOC open space committee that was formed 6 years ago and utilize the weighted priorities that were set forth in that committee as a reference point. Commissioner Montgomery stated his concerns with the Ponto Beachfront issues and stated that staff should be more specific on a parcel by parcel basis and would prefer to follow it. He also would like staff to express the downside of setting high goals of reaching 100% renewable energy or 40% open space whether it is achievable and realistic. Commissioner Black stated that staff should consider the shifting in density in the Ponto Beachfront community. He stated that the water supply should be considered to what could be proposed for the future, and the cost CAP implementation. Commissioner Siekmann stated her concerns with the Mobility Element and education to the citizens. She also stated her concerns with the CAP, airport emissions and battery storage should be considered. Commissioner Siekmann stated that she did not see language in the CAP that states to close doors while heating and cooling during business hours to help reduce GHG emissions. She stated that a CAP commission or a committee would be helpful to the city and should be considered as it may generate great ideas. Commissioner Siekmann stated that she is in favor of 100% renewable energy. She stated her concerns with public safety and would like to protect the city's computer systems with sensitive information. She also stated her concerns regarding the implementation of solar trees in the parking lots owned by the city and an education plan to go along with the CAP. Commissioner Siekmann stated that she would like to see a program educating on the full cycle of construction and its effects on emissions. She asked if it is feasible to trench the railroad as it impacts so many citizens in the community and concluded with her concerns regarding Veterans Park and how it is divisible between other quadrants, water supply, and citizen science committee is a fabulous idea. Planning Commission Minutes July 18, 2015 Page 8 Commissioner L'Heureux stated his concerns with the Mobility Element and the issues between pedestrians and vehicles, the implementation of culture and design of the city, discussion on noise and whether the city should have a noise ordinance, discuss concerns on Ambrosia and Ponto Beachfront properties. Commissioner Anderson stated that she concurs with her fellow commissioners regarding issues with the Mobility Element, Ponto Beachfront, parking, 20% requirement for affordable housing on increased densities. Noise, locked parks and why they are not accessible as open space, feasibility of implementing specific quantifiable regulation on water meters. Chairperson Scully stated her concerns with the Mobility Element, locked parks and their impacts, changing of the inclusionary housing number from 15% to 20% as well as other issues raised by her fellow commissioners. COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner L'Heureux stated that it would be good to have a brief review about neighborhood parks. CITY PLANNER COMMENTS None. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS Mr. Ball stated that the Commission should segment their conflicts of interest, discuss and make a decision. ADJOURNMENT By proper motion, the Special Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission of July 18, 2015 was adjourned at 3:31 p.m. and continued to a date and time specific of Wednesday, July 22, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. to be held at the City Council Chambers at 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive. DON NEU City Planner Farah Nisan Minutes Clerk Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 Page 2 1. EIR 13-02/GPA 07-02/ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02/SS 15-05/SS 15-06-GENERAL PLAN UPDATE-Request that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council: a. Certification of a Program Environmental Impact Report (including Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) for the proposed draft General Plan, Climate Action Plan and associated amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Local Coastal Program land use and zoning maps, and Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan; b. Approval of a General Plan Amendment to comprehensively update the General Plan, including the Housing Element; c. Approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance for consistency with the draft General Plan; d. Approval of a Zoning Map amendment for consistency with the draft General Plan; e. Approval of a Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendment to amend the LCP Land Use and Zoning maps and LCP implementation plan consistent with the draft General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance; f. Approval of an amendment to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to amend the Growth Management circulation performance standard; g. Approval of a Climate Action Plan; and h. Approval of an allocation from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. Mr. Neu stated that the presentation would follow the elements as listed in the Updated General Plan, starting with the Vision Chapter. VISION Chairperson Scully asked if there were any questions regarding the Vision Chapter. Seeing none, the Planning Commission voted 7-0 to accept staff's recommendations. LAND USE AND COMMUNITY DESIGN Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner, provided more information based on comments and questions regarding specific sites in the city. Chairperson Scully asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Segall asked about the growth control point for Ponto. Ms. Jesser directed the Commission's attention to a slide on the screen which depicted the number of units evaluated with the EIR for the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan, the number of units evaluated with the draft General Plan and the EIR for the draft General Plan. Staff's recommendation is a lower number than both of those. Commissioner Segall asked if the confusion was because the proposed change showed R-23, but the city builds to the growth control point. Ms. Jesser stated that is was her understanding that there was some confusion as to the R-23 designation as well as what staff evaluated in the General Plan. There was also confusion regarding a current development project that was submitted by the developer requesting to develop more units than what is recommended as part of the General Plan. Mr. Neu added that the proposed developer submitted a letter asking to increase the density on the west side by adding a combination district which would be R-30 with general commercial. Staff is not recommending that change; it is a request from the developer that the Planning Commission consider that as part of the General Plan Update. Commissioner Segall further asked about 925 Buena Vista Place and the coloring of the map. Ms. Jesser clarified that the yellow indicates single family (R-1). The rendering show the General Plan designations, not the zoning. The property is designated in the General Plan for single family with the R-4 density range. The zoning on the property is R-3 which is inconsistent with that designation. Staff is recommending that the R-1 zone be applied to the property. Commissioner Montgomery asked how much residential the general commercial site on the west side of Ponto Drive can accommodate now compared to what would be allowed if the proposed R-30 designation is allowed. Ms. Jesser stated the southern piece of the general commercial property, staff is recommending that the city allocate some units to this particular piece. Based on the city's criteria for mixed use development, at a minimum, the site could potentially yield 12 mixed use units. The northern properties are currently designated residential, and because staff does not recommend allocating units on commercial properties for mixed use, staff is not recommending allocating units and instead reserving those units in the CORRECTED Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 Page 3 bank. Staff would evaluate that with a development application. Commissioner Montgomery asked if the R-30 proposal is only for the southern piece. Ms. Jesser stated yes. Commissioner Montgomery asked what the yield would be if that was added. Dave de Cordova, principal planner, stated that staff has not done the calculation for that. The application that is on currently on file is requesting a total of 191 units for both the east and west portion. If that is used to compare with staff's recommendation, the difference is about 55 units. Commissioner Montgomery asked about the original vision for the property. Mr. Neu commented that the corner of Avenida Encinas and moving north, was shown as mixed use with commercial and a plaza on the corner, and as you moved further north there was additional commercial. Commissioner Montgomery stated there was a potential for stores, restaurants, shopping along with mixed use. Commissioner Montgomery recalled that the southern part of the site was planned for a hotel site and not a commercial site. Mr. Neu stated that was correct and that the hotel site could have supporting commercial uses but the primary purpose was a hotel. Commissioner Montgomery commented that the Commission, during its review of projects in this particular area, the Visitor Serving Commercial Retail are going to be in the central portion of the site; and if projects come forward that do not provide that, in theory, the whole Ponto area will not have any of the commercial. If the Commission just ends up providing residential units at somewhat of a higher density, the Commission could in theory void the area of a needed commercial center. Mr. Neu stated that was correct, however there are policies in the Land Use Element for the Carlsbad Boulevard Corridor that include an option for an active waterfront. Commissioner Montgomery commented that it falls on the Commission to ensure that there is a real Visitor Serving Commercial area in this location. Ron Ball, Special Counsel, added that one of the ways to appropriately handle that is during the development phase where conditions on timing and location are placed on a development. Commissioner Montgomery commented on the future of the southern gateway, linear park, and the realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard, and asked if the commission is precluding any of those possibilities from moving forward with this General Plan Update. Ms. Jesser stated that in fact the recommended land use changes to the Ponto area are key to seeing those come to fruition. Commissioner Black asked how much open space was deleted with this plan on the power plant site. Ms. Jesser stated that she did not have the acreage for the Power Plant site itself. In the preferred plan, the schematic was very arbitrary with no acreage estimated. Staff is recommending defining those lines through a more specific site planning process. Mr. de Cordova stated that the General Plan policies will call out where the open space will be located and will be consistent with the recommendations of the Open Space Committee. Staff has not defined a specific number of acres or specific configuration, rather it will be determined at a later date with the specific planning process. Commissioner Black asked if it is staff's intent to not lose any open space by a certain degree or percentage. Mr. de Cordova stated the intent is to accommodate open space in keeping with what the Open Space Committee discussed. Mr. Neu added that as part of a specific plan and/or master plan, the Commission would have a say as to the amount and location of open space as more detail would be available at a later date. Commissioner Siekmann asked for clarification regarding the Ponto residential in Table 8.4 in Attachment 8 to the staff report. Ms. Jesser stated the table indicates what was evaluated and not what staff is recommending. Commissioner L'Heureux asked if a developer can propose all residential and no commercial for the central portion of the Ponto site. Ms. Jesser stated no. As the site is proposed to be designated, the city's policies that allow for mixed use specify that the primary use of the land must remain commercial. There are also formulas to determine the number of units that can be built based on 25% of the developable acres multiplied by the minimum density. Commissioner L'Heureux further asked if a developer can build all residential first and then no commercial later. Mr. Neu stated that on the entitlement of the project, there could be a timing condition requiring that the commercial component is built concurrent with the residential component. Regarding the Marja Acres site, Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he is concerned with how to get meaningful and successful access to El Camino Real. Mr. Neu stated that with the future El Camino Real road improvements, there will be a median and the Marja Acres site will have a right-out only exit. Commissioner L'Heureux inquired about the Palomar Oaks site and asked why residential does not work at that location. Ms. Jesser stated that based on the criteria, the Palomar Oaks site is one that did not rise as high as the others. In looking at it as planned industrial, the site does represent a potential loss of employment land in the future. Also, in consultation with Fire Department staff, conflicts were identified with having residential uses on the site and some of the surrounding uses that may be using hazardous materials. Commissioner L'Heureux asked if that conflict exists with the current homes in the area. Mr. Neu stated the Fire Marshal Randy Metz could respond. Commissioner L'Heureux asked how many units would be taken out of the bank to allow residential on this site. Ms. Jesser stated that as indicated on page Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 Page4 276 of the staff report packet, 209 units would need to be allocated to this property to allow for the R-30 designation. Ms. Jesser stated that with the other recommended sites, the city will be utilizing all but 33 in the existing excess dwelling unit bank. The Category 2 land use changes will generate some excess dwelling units. There will be about 312 units added to what currently exists that could be used to approve on other or different sites such as Palomar Oaks or Marja Acres. Staff does anticipate the existing dwelling unit bank to grow with the various Category 2 land use changes and future development projects. Commissioner Anderson asked what will happen to the existing public parking along the side streets in the Ponto area. Mr. Neu stated that to the extent that the Ponto area develops with on-street parking, some of that would be replaced. The other opportunity for parking would come with the Carlsbad Boulevard realignment project. Commissioner Anderson asked about the possibility of restaurants on the Power Plant site. Ms. Jesser stated that is a possibility with the Visitor Commercial designation. There is a policy in the General Plan that outlines what staff envisions seeing on that site in the future and that includes gathering spaces and outdoor dining. Any future development proposals will be encouraged to be consistent with the policy. A specific or master plan process will also be required which will determine specific uses on that property. Commissioner Siekmann commented that if discussions regarding the Power Plant continue, she should recuse herself from the dais due to her involvement as an intervener. Mr. Ball stated that instead of recusing herself, she should refrain from the discussions and if there is any vote, she should not participate in the vote. Mr. Neu commented that when the specific plan is developed for the Power Plant site, the Commission will see a land use diagram in the plan itself that would designate certain areas for Open Space and other areas for Visitor Commercial. For example, if there was a restaurant, the restaurant and the parking for it would be in the commercial portions and not in the open space. Gary Barberio, Assistant City Manager, commented that part of the reason for the change in the recommendation of the designation of open space on the site is because of the agreement between the city, NRG and SDG&E, which spells out the city's obligation on the redevelopment on the Encina Power Station site. Commissioner Anderson commented that she would like to hear from the Fire Marshal regarding the Palomar Oaks site. Randy Metz, Fire Marshal, stated the Fire Department has previously reviewed these sites in the past and has had concerns about one of the occupants directly to the east of the new hotel. Mr. Metz stated that it has been recommended determined that these properties remain as industrial properties. There is residential that overlooks this site and would be approximately 3/10 of a mile away from this site. While there is nothing prescriptive in the code that states residential cannot be any closer a specific distance to a hazardous materials handler, Fire Department staff would entertain an R-30 designation if the Commission desired, with proper mitigation factors due to Fire Department access and vegetation management concerns on this property as it relates to residential development. Chairperson Scully inquired about open space on the Power Plant site and what percentage was attached to the site out of the 38% stated in the draft General Plan. Mr. de Cordova stated there is no amount of open space that is counted today for that site. With the ultimate redevelopment of that site where the land uses are sorted out, that area will added to the city's inventory. Commissioner Segall asked for clarification regarding the letter submitted by the Shopoff Group relating to the Ponto area. Ms. Jesser stated that as part of the General Plan Update, staff evaluated R-30 on a portion of the site and staff is recommending the R-23 designation. The applicant is requesting, for the southern General Commercial portion, that there be a combination of R-30 and General Commercial but to keep the R-23 designation on the eastern part of the site. Commissioner Segall asked what that means in terms of building height. Mr. Neu stated that staff is contemplating implementing the RD-M zone. He added that this area is in a master plan area, but because of that, there is a proposal concurrent with the application to make adjustments to the master plan in that area to create some development standards. That proposal will be acted on with the application and not with the General Plan Update. Commissioner Segall asked if the developments on the central and southern parts of Ponto pay for the realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard. Mr. de Cordova stated that it is typical for developments that have frontage improvements to pay for those improvements. Commissioner Segall asked if that is something that should be included in the General Plan. Mr. de Cordova stated that there are policies in the Mobility Element that do require new Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 Page 5 developments to pay their fair share of any improvements. Commissioner Segall further asked for clarification regarding the access point for the Palomar Oaks site. Ms. Jesser directed the Commission's attention to the slide and pointed out the access point for the site. Commissioner Montgomery asked if the city is providing more housing than what is required by the state. Mr. de Cordova stated that there are the state requirements that cover from now unm 2021. There is also the longer term requirement to plan for housing until 2035. Built into this update is a combination for both of those requirements. As projects develop, the sites that are evaluated and identified today may not be there the next time the housing element has to be reviewed. There is also a mid-cycle requirement to re- inventory the sites. Mr. de Cordova reminded the Commission that the city should have enough sites to meet the current requirements but to also look at the longer term. The city has shown it can meet the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Commissioner Montgomery asked if there is not a specific requirement for the long term or if it is just a projection. Mr. de Cordova stated that from a housing element perspective it is a 10 year planning window and an 8 year housing plan. Commissioner Montgomery asked what the impacts might be by eliminating some of the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank draws have on the housing element. Mr. de Cordova stated that the city not only has to show that there is enough housing overall but also show there is enough housing at the right densities to accommodate all income groups. Commissioner Montgomery asked if staff is recommending a lower number of units for the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank for Ponto. Ms. Jesser stated the report reflects what was outlined in the presentation. Commissioner Black inquired about the Oaks North site and asked about the recommended designation. Ms. Jesser stated that staff evaluated changing that site from Planned Industrial to R-30 but based on similar concerns to the Palomar Oaks West site, staff is recommending that the site remain Planned Industrial. Commissioner Black asked if the Commission has latitude to change the designation from R-30 to R-23. Ms. Jesser stated yes but reminded the Commission that the northeast quadrant has a capacity limitation. If the Commission chooses to change the recommendation, one of the other sites in that quadrant would have to be removed from the update process. Commissioner Siekmann commented that during the meeting on Saturday July 18, Ms. Kato spoke her concerns regarding the potential of all of the excess dwelling units being used up before she has an ability to development her property. Ms. Jesser stated staff is not proposing to take away any development potential on any properties. Commissioner Siekmann asked about school capacities in the Ponto area. Ms. Jesser stated that as part of the EIR for the General Plan, staff evaluated the full build out of all of the land use changes and existing development potential in the city. As indicated in Table 3.11-9, Carlsbad Unified School District anticipates an increase in elementary and middle school students, but a decrease in high school students; however, it has been identified that there will be excess capacity at build out of the General Plan. The reason for this is a shift in demographics for the city. The student population is expected to remain or decline and Carlsbad is also experiencing an increase in older housing as well as an increase in the population of seniors. Commissioner Siekmann commented that the speakers were specifically asking about Pacific Rim. Ms. Jesser stated the General Plan looked at the schools at a district level rather than site specific. Commissioner Siekmann also asked about a speaker's comment regarding a property in the Barrio on Oak Avenue being zoned commercial instead of industrial. Ms. Jesser stated that for this process, it was not something evaluated in the EIR; however, it could be a General Plan amendment in the future. Commissioner L'Heureux commented that Attachment 8 to the staff report includes a series of specific actions staff wants the Commission to take on certain sites and asked when the discussions should take place. Mr. Neu stated Attachment 8 covers the zoning action as well as the General Plan action, with the General Plan including the text and the mapping. Ms. Jesser stated staff's recommendations for the non- residential changes are reflected in Table 8.3. In regard to the residential changes, staff's recommendations are reflected in Table 8.13. Commissioner L'Heureux stated that on Table 8.3, he can support staff's recommendation for Oaks North. Regarding Sunny Creek, he stated that he has a problem with that site being residential or commercial. Commissioner L'Heureux stated he can support staff's proposal of commercial being 8 acres minimum with the balance being residential. Commissioner Anderson asked why old Rancho Santa Fe Road was not designated as open space. Mr. Neu commented that it does appear to show as right-of-way, but it can be changed to open space as it is a trail. Ms. Jesser concurred and stated it can be changed on the map. Commissioner Anderson commented that there was a discussion on July 18 regarding the property behind the senior mobile home park where the neighbors would like to see it designated as senior housing. Mr. Neu stated the challenge at this level Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 Page 6 is that there is not a category that restricts it to senior housing. The property owner is actually working on a senior housing project on the site. Because the site is within the Robertson Ranch Master Plan, a master plan amendment could specify that the site be used for senior housing. Commissioner Anderson asked about placing specific restrictions on water meter allocations. Kirsten Plonka, Utilities Engineering Manager, stated the issue is currently being addressed based on the drought level. Right now, the city is in a level 2 which does not restrict water meters; if it is moved to a level 3, those restrictions will be put in place. Typically the wholesalers designate the allocations to the county water authority and the member agency follow in kind. Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney, stated that the San Diego County Water Authority has asked the various agencies to pass a model drought ordinance, which Carlsbad passed a few years ago. There are three water districts in the city but the city controls only Carlsbad Municipal Water District. Commissioner Montgomery commented that the northeast quadrant is an impacted quadrant as far as housing units, and the Sunny Creek site is proposing the largest share of housing. Commissioner Montgomery asked for the original yield of residential units on this site as compared to what is being proposed. Ms. Jesser stated that the site that is currently designated as Local Shopping Center is a commercially designated site with no residential yield on that property today. If the Commission approves staff's recommendation, the land use change would allocate residential potential on that site. When staff was asked to evaluate the potential for residential on this site, the property owner at the time wanted a configuration with 6 acres of Local Shopping Center on the corner. Staff's recommendation is to require a minimum of 8 acres of Local Shopping Center but not define the boundaries between the commercial and the residential at this time and instead apply a combination designation with policies in the General Plan that require that the boundaries be determined by a site planning process. Commissioner Montgomery inquired if El Camino Real will continue to be designated as a scenic corridor. Ms. Jesser stated it will remain as a scenic corridor with setback requirements, which will apply to the Sunny Creek site. Commissioner Montgomery asked if the affordable housing requirement for Sunny Creek would move to the moderate category if this site was changed to have a lower residential density with the L designation. Ms. Jesser stated that the designation below R-23 would be R-15, to be able to count this site as a site that could accommodate moderate income housing, the requirement would be a minimum of 12 units per acre. The site could be designated as R-15 with the requirement for the 12 units per acre minimum. RECESS Chairperson Scully called for a 30 minute recess at 6:30p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Chairperson Scully called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. with all Commissioners present. Commissioner Montgomery commented that the city is proposing an excess of proposed dwelling units for this housing cycle plus the next. Commissioner Montgomery proposed the following changes: Robertson Ranch PA22 from R-30 to R-23; the Sunny Creek site should be R-15 for the residential portion of the combination residential and commercial site instead of R-23; and the Marja Acres site should be zoned at R-15 instead of R-4. Mr. Neu commented that the Marja Acres site falls into the Tier B category and staff was suggesting that the Commission could approve the recommendation of R-15 with the policy language regarding 12 units to the acre. Commissioner Montgomery stated that he was thinking of a designation that allows 12 units per acre. Mr. Neu commented that for housing element purposes, staff feels the R-12 designation results in some units in the moderate income category. He stated that whatever the Commission approves, staff will make sure the numbers meet the quadrant caps as well as the housing element goals. Commissioner Montgomery also proposed changing the General Plan recommendation for 925 Buena Place to allow R- 3. Mr. Neu suggested that the zoning be changed to R-1 instead. Commissioner Segall asked, regarding Sunny Creek, if R-15 is considered medium density and if the property would be considered viable if there were fewer units. Ms. Jesser stated that the R-23 density is being used for the city's moderate income housing obligation. If the density for that site is dropped from R- 23 to R-15 with the provision of a minimum of 12 units per acre, it would still be in the moderate category. Commissioner Segall asked if mixed use is still do-able on 9 acres. Ms. Jesser stated that it would be a minimum of 8 acres, mixed use would be a permitted use, units would not be allocated out of the bank for Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 Page 8 Power Plant Site Commissioner Siekmann recused herself from the dais due to a conflict of interest because of being an intervener against the Power Plant. The Commission voted 6-0 to accept staff's recommendation. Commissioner Siekmann returned to the dais. The Commission voted 7-0 to accept and approved staff's recommendations for the remaining properties. MOBILITY ELEMENT Doug Bilse, Traffic Engineer, gave a presentation regarding the Mobility Element, assisted by Craig Williams, Mobility Manager, and Chris Gray, a consultant with Fehr and Peers. Commissioner Segall stated he had significant issues with the entire Mobility Element. He commented that he was trying to understand why the vehicle travel lanes are becoming narrower and the bike lanes are becoming wider. If more vehicle lanes are needed to ease congestion, making the existing lanes narrower only slows traffic down and makes congestion worse. Commissioner Segall asked for an explanation on how making the lanes narrower eases congestion. He also stated that giving bikes a higher priority is one of his fundamental problems with the prioritization with bikes and pedestrians on many of the city streets. Mr. Bilse stated that most of the traffic in the city falls into one of the top five categories of the new typology used. He stated that those 5 categories can be prioritized for automobiles. Road diets or a reduction in a lane would be done strategically to improve for the primary user. Mr. Bilse stated that in some cases safety trumps the efficiency of driving. Commissioner Segall asked how safety is defined. It has been his experience that as the vehicle travel lanes have been made narrower, the cyclists are traveling with two or three across in the bike lane typically straddling the lane. He feels that by doing this, the city is not addressing safety but instead creating a bigger problem. Mr. Bilse stated that the standards are still in flux, and the city is leaning towards installing a buffer lane between the bike lane and travel lane, which is perceived to be safer. He stated that sometimes the perception of safety is enough to get people to bike and to promote it. Mr. Bilse stated the bike community supports the use of the buffers. Commissioner Segall stated that it is his belief the lack of coordination of the signals on any of the streets combined with the narrowing of lanes is causing more of a traffic problem than new development. Mr. Bilse stated the city has too many signals for the population. The traffic management program works best for peak hours. Commissioner Montgomery asked about cycle tracks and shared-use paths in specific areas of the city. Mr. Bilse commented that the General Plan is what enables the Commission to do things and provides guidance on when certain methods should be used. It has to be very selective and it has to make sense. Commissioner Montgomery asked if there are specific streets that it will be used on. Craig Williams, Mobility Manager, stated it really is intended to illustrate ways to make roads safer for cyclists, a toolbox so to speak. Commissioner Montgomery asked if staff is proposing a shared-use path along the future realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard. Mr. Bilse stated no. Commissioner Montgomery commented that the citizens of Carlsbad requested an active waterfront, and he asked if this was the correct forum to bring forward ideas such as bike rental stations. Mr. Neu stated that along those lines, the Draft Village and Barrio Master Plan includes such language in the Village section of the plan. Mr. Bilse stated the General Plan is not the best place to put a specific request such as that. He commented that Policy 3P-37 includes language for incentives such as parking standards for implementing travel demand management programs which minimize the reliance on single occupancy vehicles during peak hours. This would include the entire Carlsbad Boulevard corridor. Commissioner Black asked how staff determines if a secondary road needs an extremely wide bike lane. Mr. Bilse stated that state law requires that 3 feet be provided for between a vehicle and a bike. Commissioner Black asked how the shared roads are working as far as safety. Mr. Williams stated that sharrows serve several purposes: it serves as footprint in areas where a bike lane does not continue such as an intersection, it is a guideline for where cyclists should ride, and it also serves as a tool for motorists to warn them of the potential of cyclists. The sharrows are on roads that are more heavily used by cyclists. Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 Page 9 Commissioner Siekmann asked for clarification regarding the basis of the change of moving away from Level of Service (LOS) and moving towards streets that allow bikes and pedestrians, that cyclists are just as important as cars. Chris Grey, Fehr & Peers, stated it is partially due to the Complete Streets Act which was enacted in 2008. Commissioner Siekmann asked if there are educational opportunities for the public on these huge changes in the mobility element. Mr. Bilse commented that technology allows staff to reach a broader audience and as such, he will utilize the city's website for communication and education materials. Commissioner Siekmann commented on how this element is tied to the Climate Action Plan. Commissioner Siekmann commented on the lack of a policy or a goal for an education program. Mr. Bilse stated he would look into it. Commissioner Siekmann further commented that accessibility for the beach should also include accessibility for the disabled. Mr. Bilse stated that staff is currently working on that. Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he is aware that there will be 5 street segments that will be considered exempt, and asked for clarification on when there are projects that will have direct traffic impact to those 5 exempt street segments. Mr. Bilse stated the General Plan dictates how wide the streets will be but does not get into the level of detail for specific intersection. Staff can forecast and monitor the traffic situations on those particular intersections. Mr. Neu stated that conditions will be included on projects and those conditions will be monitored. Commissioner Anderson commented that she has concerns about the buffers as well as prioritizing bikes and pedestrians on so many streets. She further commented that staff should also review the identity streets. Commissioner Anderson also stated she is concerned about the use of sharrows as well as beach accessibility for the disabled. Mr. Bilse asked if the Commission wished to make suggestions for changes to the table. Mr. Ball asked for Mr. Bilse to give his recommendation for the available options. Mr. Bilse stated it would be staff's recommendation, based on input from the community, would be to change east- west corridors such as Tamarack, Poinsettia, and Carlsbad Village Drive. Mr. Neu added that staff will return with the final recommendation. Commissioner Anderson stated that she is concerned about sharrows, about taking lanes away and pushing traffic onto Palomar Airport Road which is a priority arterial for east-west traffic. Now the city is accepting a potential failure level of service for Palomar Airport Road, which she feels will push traffic onto the roads that will have been put on a road diet and create new problems. Commissioner Segall commented that staff could think outside the box and work on a different east-west road, such as Grand Avenue, instead of selecting Carlsbad Village Drive. He also stated that he is concerned about the wording in Policy 3P-13 stating that staff should " ... evaluate the trade-offs between safety, auto service levels, and bicycle and pedestrian transit service levels." Mr. Bilse stated that if there is no history of collisions, it would be part of the evaluation for traffic impacts. Mr. Neu stated that from the comments received from citizens as well as the comments expressed by the Commission, staff is aware of the concerns that there are a number of roads that are not vehicle prioritized. He suggested that the Commission review the Typology Table on page 3-11 of the draft General Plan, one approach would be for the Commission to recommend to change certain roadway typologies to vehicle priority or the commission could select certain streets. Staff could then review those recommendations to make sure those changes do not cause other impacts and return with the final recommendations. Commissioner Segall commented that he does not think it is realistic to think that people will bike to work given the number of hills in the city. He commented that he does not like the term "prioritization." Commissioner Segall feels that vehicles should remain a priority with pedestrians and cyclists as secondary. He feels that the city should not try and change all of the infrastructure to try to accommodate a few people. Chairperson Scully stated she agrees with Commissioner Segall. She commented that she has a serious issue with prioritizing some streets for pedestrians or bikes particularly when there is an emergency especially around the schools. Commissioner Montgomery asked why a section of Poinsettia Lane and a section of Aviara Parkway are considered an employment priority. Mr. Bilse stated those are marked that way because they are connectors from the freeway to employment centers. Commissioner Montgomery stated that the Commission should recommend giving auto priority to employment oriented streets, which would be Poinsettia Lane and Faraday Avenue. Because the Mobility Element is so connected to the Climate Action Plan, the Commission should not broad brush every street that is designated as purple in the table as an auto primary designation. He suggested that Aviara Parkway, Alga Road, Poinsettia and Faraday should Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 CORRECTED Page 10 be auto primary as well as Marron Road. Commissioner Montgomery commented that the Village should remain as recommended by staff. Commissioner Segall stated that he feels Carlsbad Village Drive and Carlsbad Boulevard should not be considered as priorities for bikes as he is totally opposed to that because those are both emergency routes. He further added that unless it makes sense because an area is flat, the city should continue to prioritize streets for vehicles which does not mean bike lanes cannot exist. Commissioner Segall stated he is totally opposed to the exhibit. Fire Chief Davis stated that in regard to the Village area, there is nothing that will be done to hinder primary response routes. Staff is working with consultants to find a way to build up the Village but allow for safety services, both police and fire. Chairperson Scully commented that she believes the Commission is more concerned with the south Carlsbad areas. Commissioner Segall added that he is concerned with the Village too as it is considered an alternative route. Commissioner Siekmann commented that she lives right near the Coast Highway and she sees so many people riding bikes and walking that the priority in that area is the bicycle rider and the pedestrian. She stated that she does not want to be known as the access road for the interstate. The whole idea for the city has changed so it is the place that people want to visit and the place for people to recreate. She feels to change that road to auto priority is going backwards from the EC3 idea of an active waterfront. Commissioner Siekmann stated that this is a complete change in how people look at the roads of Carlsbad and other communities, and it is completely tied to the Climate Action Plan and the environmental impact report. Every change the Commission makes goes deep. She further commented that there are many younger people that want to bike to work and are interested in sustainability. Commissioner Siekmann suggested that the Commission open up a little to new ideas and to not be so auto-oriented. Commissioner Siekmann commented that not all the options were suggested. She stated that she agrees with Commissioner Segall's idea of changing Grand Avenue to a bike priority road instead of Carlsbad Village Drive as well as changing the connector streets priority. Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he is completely unqualified, other than being a 45 year resident of the city, to determine how a street should be designated. He stated that the city has a professional staff and the Commission should give them credit. The Commission should provide staff some direction. Mr. Neu suggested that perhaps it would be better served for staff to provide some policy language as to what is meant by the word "prioritize" to indicate that it does not exclude the other modes of transportation that are not the priority but focusing improvements on the prioritized mode. He commented that the roads will be built out under the existing circulation plan, and some of the roads now have a higher priority for modes of transportation other than vehicles and the city needs to adapt the roads to those other modes. Mr. Bilse stated there was a very strategic effort in finding ways to improve roads for pedestrians and cyclists without taking away traffic lanes. Commissioner L'Heureux commented that part of the problem seems to be with the new terminology, lack of education, knowledge, or understanding on the Commission's part. He asked if it is worth a great deal of time, effort and money to make these changes to the benefit of such a small number of citizens. Mr. Bilse stated that it is his opinion that road diets and road restrictions should be its own policy. He would recommend to keep the map and table as they are presented because they provide staff with the tools to make improvements. Commissioner Segall asked about removing Reach 4 for Cannon Road into Oceanside. Mr. Bilse stated that Cannon Reach 4 is no longer a viable alternative as it no longer meets the city's project purpose. It cuts through habitat and an ecological preserve. Mr. Bilse also stated that the City of Vista has also removed Cannon Reach 4 from their General Plan. He further commented that the project is also unfunded, and the traffic analysis in the EIR did not analyze that section of Cannon Road. Planning Commission Minutes July 22, 2015 Page 11 Commissioner Segall asked what secure parking refers to in Policy 3P-35. Mr. Bilse stated it would be a bike rack or other form of secure parking for bicycles. Mr. Neu stated this meeting would be continued to July 23 and at a time specific. Chairperson Scully stated the meeting on July 24 will begin at 2:00 p.m. ADJOURNMENT By a 7-0 vote, the meeting of July 22 was adjourned to July 23 at 4:00p.m. DON NEU City Planner Bridget Desmarais Minutes Clerk Planning Commission Minutes Minutes of: Time of Meeting: Date of Meeting: Place of Meeting: CALL TO ORDER July 23, 2015 PLANNING COMMISSION 4:00p.m. July 23, 2015 COUNCIL CHAMBERS Chairperson Scully called the meeting to order at 4:00p.m. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Montgomery led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL CORRECTED Page 1 Present: Chairperson Scully, Commissioners Anderson, Black, L'Heureux, Montgomery, Segall and Siekmann Absent: None STAFF PRESENT Don Neu, City Planner Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney Bridget Desmarais, Administrative Secretary Maria Emery, Senior Office Specialist Ron Ball, Special Counsel Kathy Dodson, Interim City Manager Gary Barberio, Assistant City Manager Kyle Lancaster, Parks Superintendent Chris Hazeltine, Parks & Recreation Director Glen Van Peski, Community & Economic Development Director Brett Cosgrove, Police Officer Mike Davis, Fire Chief Liz Ketabian, Parks Planner Debbie Fountain, Housing & Neighborhood Services Director Jason Geldert, Engineering Manager Mike Grim, Senior Planner-Environmental Management Pat Thomas, Public Works Director CONTINUED PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING Don Neu, City Planner, stated that Principal Planner Dave de Cordova and Senior Planner Jennifer Jesser would give presentations on the various elements of the General Plan. Staff would then be available to answer any questions. OPEN SPACE, CONSERVATION AND RECREATION ELEMENT Chairperson Scully asked about school parks and accessibility. She commented that within the past year, the schools have locked down the parks and access is very limited. Mr. de Cordova stated that the use agreements call for joint use but not during school hours. Kyle Lancaster, Parks Superintendent, stated that after school hours, any gates are to be unlocked with the hours consistent with regular park hours. There were a few times in the past when custodians and school administrators did not open the locks; however the gates should remain open after school until 10:00 p.m. On weekends, the gates should be open between 8:00a.m. to 10 p.m., which are regular parks hours. Chairperson Scully commented that the gates are locked after school hours, most likely to deal with vandalism. Mr. Lancaster stated he would contact Carlsbad Unified School District to follow-up. Chris Hazeltine, Parks and Recreation Director, stated that Aviara Oaks specifically is one of the most heavily used school sites, and Parks staff would hear Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2015 Page 2 about it. Mr. Hazeltine added that additional staff has been hired to check each facility every night to make sure the gates are locked. Commissioner Anderson asked if easements under power lines are always considered open space. Mr. de Cordova stated that is generally true for major transmission lines. Mike Grim, Senior Planner, stated to qualify as open space on the open space map, the area has to be designated as open space in the General Plan and/or zoning, or have an open space easement on it. Mr. Grim commented that effectively it is open space as many of those areas are used as trails; however, it is not counted in the city's inventory of open space. Commissioner Anderson asked about the goal of lagoon clean-up, mitigation and funds set aside for that effort. Commissioner Montgomery commented that the city, through City Council, has issued grants to both the Agua Hedionda Lagoon Foundation and Batiquitos Lagoon Foundation for various purposes including acquisition of open space, clean-up efforts, and monitoring water quality. The foundations also receive grants from several other entities. Commissioner L'Heureux commented that in the Growth Management Plan, there is a standard of 3 acres of community park or special use area per 1000 people. He asked how that figure is arrived at and if it is still appropriate. Mr. Hazeltine stated it still is a good standard and it is still an accepted standard. Commissioner L'Heureux asked how the Parks and Recreation Department is balancing the need for neighborhood parks versus the need for community parks. Mr. Hazeltine clarified that there is not a requirement for a neighborhood park within a certain geographic distance within the city. The Growth Management Plan dictates that the city has "x" number of acreage per quadrant. From a park and recreation service delivery perspective, Mr. Hazeltine commented that staff feels the city is very well served and has the resources required to have a robust recreation experience. Commissioner L'Heureux further asked if private HOA parks are open to public. Mr. Hazeltine stated those parks are only open to the specific development. Commissioner Siekmann asked about the planned linear park along coast highway and if it will add to the park totals. Mr. Hazeltine stated that it depends on what the development looks like along the boulevard. There is plenty of space using the city's right-of-way to create a very special experience with a realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard absent of using any state lands. Mr. Hazeltine added that the city is currently moving forward with plans using the city's right-of-way, and that space will add to the city's open space. Commissioner Siekmann commented on how important disabled access will be for the beach. Commissioner Black asked for an explanation on what will be different in the new General Plan regarding water quality and efforts to keep waters clean. Mr. de Cordova stated that water quality is an area that is heavily regulated and restricted by the state in terms of what cities must do and the city planning for water quality. The city has a very robust Storm Water program and staff dedicated to those efforts to ensure the lagoons and waterways are clean. The new General Plan has a series of policies included in the Open Space element. Commissioner Black stated that after the recent heavy rains, the local news showed beaches in San Diego that were closed because of pollution or that debris wash up on the beach. He asked why that does not happen in Carlsbad. Mr. Grim commented that the community takes much better care of the open space so there is very little litter, there are habitat management preserve managers and park staff that go out into the open space areas that might drain into a waterway and clean those areas out. Mr. Grim added that Utilities staff have very innovative debris catchment basins in many of the storm inlets which keeps the debris out of the storm drains. Commissioner Montgomery asked why the presentation indicated 35 acres less than what was stated in the document. Mr. de Cordova stated there are several factors that are involved and much of it has to do with the GIS programs as well as changes made by the Commission yesterday to the Land Use Element. Commissioner Montgomery asked if staff has projected what the total number of acres would be for open space with the natural buildout of the city. Mr. de Cordova stated staff did not make projections nor did they try to estimate what it will be. He stated that the best guess is that it will be more than 38% just shy of 40%. Commissioner Montgomery asked if the Commission should be considering open space for specific sites and areas in the city as many people have submitted comments and requests for certain areas to be designated open space. Mr. Neu stated that if the Commission were to add open space at this time, land would be taken out of a category other than open space whether it be planned industrial or residential. There are some constraints with that as the city would need to leave an economic return of property to a property owner. Staff feels there are limitations as to what can be done at this time. Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2015 CORRECTED Page 3 Commissioner Segall asked if there is anything that needs to be done from what was learned after the fires regarding open space, habitat management and safety. Mr. Grim stated that, from his perspective as overseer of the Habitat Management Plan, it is a balance. The fire showed that the fire suppression plans that are currently in place do work. Going forward on a regional level, speaking with the wildlife agencies, Mr. Grim commented that the city wants to be more proactive in regard to fire management within the preserves themselves. Commissioner Segall asked if there is a way to understand what open space really means. Mr. de Cordova stated that in order to be counted as open space, a property has to have an open space zoning designation, an open space general plan land use designation or it has to be bound by an open space easement or restrictive covenant. Commissioner Segall commented that people have different views of what open space is. Mr. Neu commented that the updated General Plan has 4 categories of open space in the Open Space. Chairperson Scully asked if there are any open space acquisitions in the process or in the future. Mr. Grim stated there is a committee that meets quarterly and is always open to talk to any willing sellers; however it is a challenge. Mr. Grim added that the city is ready to acquire land for open space. Commissioner Anderson inquired about the strawberry fields and flower fields remaining economically viable and asked who determines that. Mr. de Cordova stated that policy language comes from Proposition D that was passed by the voters in 2007. The idea is that those properties remain in agriculture as long as it is feasible. The economic viability is determined by the land owner. Commissioner Anderson commented that there seems to be a lot of undeveloped properties in the city that will never be developed and are not counted in the 40% open space. She stated that if those properties added up those properties not currently counted as open space, such as property under easements, school space, etc., were counted, there could be more than 40%. Mr. de Cordova commented that many staff hours have been spent researching records in order to accurately and consistently calculate open space. Commissioner L'Heureux commented that his pet peeve is that the name of Veterans Memorial Park sounds like a cemetery. Liz Ketabian, Park Planning Manager, stated it has always been known as Veterans Memorial Park but it has not gone through the official naming process. Commissioner L'Heureux stated he is confused with the downside of having a goal of 40% open space in the General Plan. Mr. Neu commented that from staff's perspective and for implementing the plan, it perpetuates the confusion. Staff is reluctant to put a specific number in the plan if it was not achievable. Staff would like to proceed knowing that the city will do its best to obtain more open space whether it is through the entitlement process or through acquisition. Commissioner Montgomery made a motion which was duly seconded by Commissioner Black to modify the language to include a goal of 40% for open space. Commissioner L'Heureux commented that 40% open space has always been an estimate of the city, a general idea. He agrees with staff that the city is committed to getting as much open space as possible. Commissioner Siekmann agrees with Commissioner L'Heureux. She thinks it would send a bad message to take land from housing or employment in order to meet a goal of 40% open space. Commissioner Segall commented that it depends on how a policy is worded whether it is acceptable. Commissioner Montgomery amended his motion stating the citizens' of Carlsbad coinciding with their overriding views and intents prefer that the city aspire to 40% open space without detriment to other balanced interests and policies of the city. Commissioner Segall suggested staff return with language tomorrow. Mr. Neu stated that if the majority of Commission is interested in specific language, a vote can be made to have staff return with language tomorrow. Commissioner Anderson stated she would support something which states it is the goal of the city to maximize open space. She does not like requiring 40% .. Commissioner Montgomery commented that the goal of 40% aligns with the community values that have been in place since 1987. Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2015 Page 4 Mr. Neu added that policy 4P-6 on page 4-49 deals with the adjustment of open space boundaries. Staff feels the policy protect the city in terms of not losing open space. Commissioner Siekmann commented that is already 25% which is undevelopable, combined with the 15%, the city is already at 40%. The Commission voted 1-6 (Chairperson Scully, Commissioners Anderson, Black, L'Heureux, Segall and Siekmann) on the motion as stated Montgomery. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to approve the Open Space Conservation and Recreation Element to include the new proposed policy for open space as proposed by staff. NOISE ELEMENT Chairperson Scully asked if staff had any recommendations regarding whether the Commission should address comments on a site specific basis, or if it should be handled by a general condition. Mr. Neu stated the proposed Noise Element has policies focused primarily at new development. There is a Noise Guidelines Manual which contains policies and suggestions for how to design a property to mitigate the noise impacts. He further added that there are zones that have performance standards as well as items in the Airport Plan that deal with compatibility of land uses and different noise contour areas. There is not a noise ordinance. Regarding the issue of nuisance type noise, Mr. Neu stated that if the Commission felt it necessary, a policy could be added to the noise ordinance that addressed pursuing the development of a noise ordinance. That recommendation would go to the City Council who would ultimately decide if that is appropriate. Commissioner Anderson commented on a concert at the Omni Resort that went on for three days. She added that she would support whatever can be done so that so many people are not impacted. Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he feels there should been a noise ordinance as part of the element. He stated he is concerned about infill development and making projects compatible with existing homes, especially in the Village area and along the railroad right-of-way. Commissioner L'Heureux asked if it is true that landscaping works as noise attenuation. Commissioner Siekmann stated that she feels a noise ordinance is very important especially in the coastal area particularly for vacation rentals. Commissioner Black asked what a "fly friendly program" is. Mr. Grim explained stated it is a voluntary noise abatement program at McClellan-Palomar Airport. Commissioner Black also asked what the allowed decibels are inside a park during a concert such as Jazz in the Park. Mr. de Cordova commented that there is a good chart in the General Plan on page 5-6 that describes the relative noise levels for certain activities. Commissioner Black commented that he feels having an ordinance based on noise is a good thing but it is a slippery slope. Commissioner Montgomery stated that he is not in favor of any noise ordinance. He stated he would only be in favor of that with special events and with airport issues, specifically any expansion at the airport and how noise is controlled. Commissioner Segall stated he does not want to be site specific with restrictions. He stated a noise ordinance would have to be citywide. Debbie Fountain, Housing and Neighborhood Services Director, stated that currently there are no noise restrictions on events. She commented that it is an issue of balancing the need for outdoors events and the needs of the residents. Ms. Fountain stated it is a challenge to set standards that could be enforced. Chairperson Scully asked if the new vacation rental ordinance will address some of those issues. Ms. Fountain stated that ordinance requires a permit. As part of that permit, the owner of the unit has to agree to good neighbor policies, and those policies include issues related to noise, trash, parking and other issues that impact a neighborhood. Each year, there will be a permit issued for a vacation rental, and if the city receives a large number of complaints that are not addressed by the owner, that permit would not be issued the next year. Mr. Ball commented that the city does have police powers to adopt a noise ordinance without an amendment to the General Plan. He further commented that a noise ordinance is very expensive to enforce. Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2015 Page 5 Commissioner L'Heureux asked for clarification regarding quiet zones in reference to the trains. Mr. de Cordova stated that in the revisions to the General Plan, there is a new policy which proposes that the city coordinate with other agencies and private entities to investigate methods of implementing a railroad quiet zone. He stated it would require improvements such as hardening of existing railroad crossings and the installation of safety features. Commissioner Anderson commented that it troubles her to have noise talked about in the General Plan and not have anything specific except with regard to construction. Mr. Neu stated that if the Commission desired to have a noise ordinance, it would be a policy and the City Council would have to concur. The process to develop a noise ordinance would be very technical and would involve a lot of considerations. He commented that the Commission does have discretion to add that as a policy to the Noise Element. A motion was made by Commissioner L'Heureux, and seconded by Commissioner Anderson, that the Commission add a policy to the Noise Element to have a formal noise ordinance. The Commission voted 5-2 (Siekmann and Montgomery). Commissioner Siekmann commented that the resolution should be amended, not the General Plan. Mr. Neu stated that Mr. Ball was suggesting an alternative by amending the resolution instead of including it in the General Plan. Commissioner L'Heureux withdrew his motion and Commissioner Anderson withdrew the second. Commissioner Montgomery commented that he feels it would be best to keep the noise ordinance out of the General Plan. Commissioner L'Heureux stated that there is a Noise Element and a community vision. The Noise Element is supposed to reflect and implement that vision. He stated he believes it is appropriate to put the noise ordinance in the General Plan. Commissioner Montgomery stated he is completely opposed to any noise ordinance on the residents themselves. Commissioner L'Heureux restated his previous motion, seconded again by Commissioner Anderson, that the Commission include as a policy a formal noise ordinance as part of the General Plan. The Planning Commission voted 3-4 (Scully, Black, Montgomery and Siekmann). Commissioner Siekmann made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Black, that the Commission amend the resolution to recommend that City Council consider adopting a noise ordinance. The Planning Commission voted 4-3 (Anderson, L'Heureux, and Montgomery). The Planning Commission voted 6-1 (Montgomery) to approve staff's recommendation including the new policy wording. PUBLIC SAFETY ELEMENT The Commission voted 7-0 to approve staff's recommendation. RECESS Chairperson Scully called for a 30 minute recess at 6:45 p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Chairperson Scully called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m. with all Commissioners present. Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2015 Page 6 ARTS, HISTORY, CULTURE AND EDUCATION ELEMENT The Commission voted 7-0 to approve staff's recommendation. ECONOMY, BUSINESS DIVERSITY AND TOURISM ELEMENT The Commission voted 7-0 to approve staff's recommendation. HOUSING The Commission voted 7-0 to approve staff's recommendation and to include the revisions to residential land use designations as reflected in the Land Use and Community Design Element. SUSTAINABILITY Chairperson Scully stated she likes the idea of community gardens, farmers markets, the proposed North 40 project, and that new developments are being proposed with more sustainable products and features. Commissioner Anderson commented on the new policy regarding water runoff and drainage basins. She added that it would be beneficial to the public to have signage as an educational purpose. Commissioner L'Heureux stated he is happy that the suggestions from the community have been incorporated in the Draft General Plan. Commissioner Siekmann asked if the vision stated on page 9-3 includes the Climate Action Plan. Mr. de Cordova stated yes. Commissioner Black commented that there is very little mentioned about alternative sources of water, and asked where else will the city will get water. Pat Thomas, Public Works Director, stated the vast majority of water used in the city is imported and purchased from the County Water Authority. He stated the 10 day emergency supply comes from the Maerkle Reservoir. Mr. Thomas stated that as for other guarantees of water, the city is somewhat dependent on the County Water Authority. Mr. Kemp clarified that what Mr. Thomas is referring to, only covers the areas within the Carlsbad Municipal Water District. Commissioner Black asked if there are plans for developing an alternative water supply. Mr. Thomas commented that staff is currently researching options; unfortunately it will take many years to develop a plan. Commissioner Montgomery asked if the city has the ability as a city to tap into the ocean to establish a secondary source of water. Mr. Thomas stated that the city will be purchasing some of the water from the desalination plant. To develop another desalination plant, Mr. Thomas stated would be an extensive undertaking. Commissioner Segall asked if seawater can be used in irrigation. Mr. Thomas stated that vegetation does not seem to react well to it. Commissioner Segall commented that policy 9.P-4 singles out the Crossings golf course and asked why all municipal sites are not included. Mr. Neu stated that the golf course is thought of to be a larger water user. Mr. de Cordova commented that regarding other municipal sites the Parks & Recreation Department has been very diligent in reducing their water usage. Commissioner Segall asked which element includes discussion regarding plug-ins for the electric vehicles. Mr. de Cordova commented that it is a prominent feature included in the Climate Action Plan and it also ties back to the Mobility Element objectives. Commissioner Segall further commented that he thinks it should be a policy for all new projects. Commissioner Black asked if development will halt if the city moves to a Stage 3 drought level. Mr. Thomas stated it would come through the County Water Authority and it would be done more on a regional basis. The Stage 3 drought level would halt the issuance of water meter permits. Commissioner Anderson asked if policy 9-P3, discussed on page 226 of the staff report, regarding the development of a water sub-metering ordinance for multi-family rental and mixed use, refers to retroactive or new construction. Mr. Neu stated it would be determined at time there is a new ordinance so it would apply to new multi-family residences so each unit would have its own meter. Planning Commission Minutes July 23, 2015 Page 7 Commissioner Montgomery asked if there are plans to extend recycled water availability. Mr. Thomas stated there is a Recycled Water Master Plan, and the city is in the process of implementing Phase 3 of the program which includes expansion of the plant, construction of a new reservoir, and multiple locations are planned to extend the recycled water pipeline including in to the northwest quadrant. Commissioner Black asked about using recycled water on plants and any associated odors. Mr. Thomas commented that some plants and grasses do not react well to the water because of the high levels of salinity. Regarding any odors, Mr. Thomas commented that chemicals are added to the water at the plant to deal with that issue. Commissioner Anderson asked if recycled water is used on the athletic fields. Mr. Thomas stated yes and there are regulations to address any issues including signage, the purple sprinkler heads and pipes, and time of use. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN Staff gave a presentation on the Climate Action Plan. By a 7-0 vote, the meeting of July 23 was adjourned to July 24 at 2:00 p.m. DON NEU City Planner Bridget Desmarais Minutes Clerk Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2015 Page 2 by 2020. She referenced to Chapter 2 of the CAP on page 2-6, table 2-2 that shows the grand total of Carlsbad's GHG emissions which is 705,734. She compares residential GHG's that total to 176,000, commercial GHG emissions to 178,000 and industrial GHG emissions that produce 46,000 in total of 401,000 out of 705,000 GHG emissions. Commissioner Siekmann stated that 57% of our GHG emissions come from electricity or natural gas and the city should promote solar by hosting events and by working with other cities. Table 3-1 in the CAP, from 2005-2035, the goal is to reduce our GHG emissions levels by 49%, which is also required by the state. She asked how we can become a leader that is stated in the Carlsbad Core Mission's Value. Page 5-23 in the revised document, section 4-6, where it states that efficient lighting standards is the city's goal to replace 50% of the incandescent and halogen light bulbs citywide. She inquired if it were possible to replace 100% of light bulbs in 20 years and suggested that the parking lots owned by the city should have solar panel trees to help reduce GHG levels of emissions. Commissioner Siekmann stated that the CAP does not address the issues of a tremendous amount of vehicles running and releasing levels of GHG emissions during drop-off and pickup times at every school in Carlsbad. She stated that better alternatives should be thought of that have never been thought of before such as, an USER bus, programs to promote kids walking to school with parents, better scheduling of drop- efts and pick up times, or utilizing zero emission vehicles. She added that the city could build a relationship and work with Car Country Carlsbad to help the community transition to zero emission vehicles by hosting events and to promote businesses closing their doors during artificial heating and cooling times. She recommends for businesses who want to keep their doors open during business hours should switch to solar panels. Page 5-28 states the goal is to increase 15-25% vehicle miles to zero emission vehicles, page 5-35-Table refers to the CAP GHG Reduction Measure Summary, Measure Letter L, states "increase zero emission vehicles traveled" which is the largest number in the whole table. Commissioner Siekmann added that if we were to work with Car Country Carlsbad, or other car dealerships to promote more zero emission vehicles used, it could help increase Measure Letter L. The City of Carlsbad could become a leader by doubling the percentage of GHG emissions level reduction to more than 35%. She also added that the CAP is a global issue therefore the City of Carlsbad should work with other surrounding cities to become stronger in promoting zero emission vehicles as well as educating the public with paid advertising on how to plan trips together and developing relationships with private enterprises. She concluded her presentation by thanking staff for the information provided and that she will be happy to do anything she can do to help the city in this action. Chairperson Scully asked if staff would like to respond to Commissioner Siekmann's presentation. Dave de Cordova, Principal Planner, stated that the community can do multiple things to help reduce GHG emissions. Commissioner Black asked if staff would consider an addition to the water policy on page 5-37, referencing water storage, to have the ability to find other sources of water beneath the ground, below aquafer water, as it gets into the basin and the cannon wells area. Patrick Thomas, Public Works Director, stated ground water, as a potential future source, is addressed in the water management plan and would be consistent if that was included in the Sustainability Element. Commissioner Montgomery asked if we can quantify carbon dioxide emissions, and as we can guestimate what we have produced, can the effects of this plan truly have engineering measures or is it based on probabilities or trends. Mr. de Cordova stated that the revised document provides a table that measures each GHG emissions reduction measure and suggests performance metrics by which we can measure the effectiveness of each of the measures listed in the table. Commissioner Montgomery asked if the changes to the CAP are measurable. Mr. de Cordova stated yes, there are methodologies in place to measure change as two emissions inventories for 2005, and one for 2011 have measured the change in GHG emissions that are associated with the community. Mr. de Cordova stated that some challenges arise from the correlation of increases and decreases in GHG emissions to the individual measures and this plan calls for doing emissions inventory every three years to see how we are tracking the change. Commissioner Montgomery asked if the market place could deliver to the possibility of all cities adopting the Community Choice Aggregation by becoming 100% renewable energy. Mr. de Cordova stated no. Commissioner Montgomery stated his concern with the Community Choice Aggregation becoming a political statement by agreeing to develop green energy but not solving the problem with solar panels on every commercial building. Mr. de Cordova stated that the Community Choice Aggregation is not a measure in the CAP. Commissioner Montgomery clarified that it was brought up for 100% renewable energy. Mr. de Cordova stated yes. Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2015 Page 3 Commissioner Segall refers to page 2-6 of the CAP, where it states the single largest polluter is on-road vehicles. He added that GHG emissions can be reduced immediately if the signal lighting system is synchronized with new technology. He also stated that there are more traffic issues which cause GHG emissions from stopping at every light and the release of hazardous materials that pollute the roadway produced by brakes from stopping at every light, more frustrated and dangerous drivers because they're tired of stopping to which they run yellow lights and that's a safety issue. Commissioner Segall stated that one of the single biggest things we can do to reduce GHG emissions is to focus on synchronizing our traffic lighting system. He would like to see something in the CAP that addresses the issues. Mr. de Cordova stated that the CAP will be linked with the General Plan Update (GPU) in chapter 3, section 2 where it identifies the General Plan policies and programs that will assist in reducing GHG emissions and those are Mobility Element policies that include transportation systems management. The objective is to maximize the efficiency of the transportation system that includes beJter coordination of the traffic signal system and recognizes the emissions impact associated with that. Commissioner Segall asked for clarification on the GPU Mobility Element addressing his issues while it is linked to the CAP but does not reference what the vehicle GHG emissions reductions should be. Mr. de Cordova stated that there is a quantification that relates to traffic systems management as well as transportation demand management. He also stated that there are general plan policies in the Mobility Element of the GPU that point to traffic system improvements as well as in the CAP. Mr. de Cordova referenced page 3-24, table 3-13 and stated that the GHG reductions that are expected to achieve through the implementation of the mobility element policies are listed. Commissioner Segall inquired about his reference to the transportation improvements and how the small number compares to parking and other policies. Mr. de Cordova stated that it is all as part of the overall package. Commissioner Anderson asked if the addition of more stop signs installed to reduce traffic would contribute or decrease GHG emissions. Mr. de Cordova stated that there is a chart that shows the relations and variables between vehicles, speed and safety. He also stated that the installation of additional stop signs have no relation to reducing GHG emissions, they are to respond to neighborhood or community concerns with vehicle speeds and/or safety. Commissioner Anderson asked if the option would have been considered to put in roundabouts to help reduce GHG emissions. Mr. de Cordova stated that there are a number of ways to calm traffic by using various traffic calming techniques to help reduce GHG emissions. Commissioner Anderson asked if the challenge in measuring GHG emissions within the city is difficult due to the exclusion of GHG emissions produced from the airport and highways and what is quantified in the city from other impacts. Mr. de Cordova stated that the measurements are from what we have influence over and the types of emissions that we as a jurisdiction can control directly or indirectly through our land use authority. He also stated that the intent is to isolate what Carlsbad's share of GHG emissions is overall a global issue, and anything out of our boundaries is out of our control. Commissioner L'Heureux asked if the CAP will be integrated in the GPU once is has been adopted and if it will be updated, republished, kept current, and how the public will be notified of the most current plan. Mr. de Cordova stated that an annual report will be presented to the City Council every year or every 3 years to update the emissions inventory that will evaluate and identify to what measures will be added and deleted to help staff stay on track to achieve the goals. Mr. de Cordova also stated that the General Plan can be amended anytime therefore it will undergo constant review through the feedback mechanism. Commissioner L'Heureux inquired about future penalties related to a deed with the self-assessment and what enforcement will take place to make sure that this is to be complied with. Mr. de Cordova stated that it will be up to the City Council and the decision makers, as it will be enforced and expected to make every good faith effort to meet the goals. Ron Ball, Special General Council, stated that the penalties are not specified as the state will pass more legislation sometime in the future to determine what the consequences will be for a community that does not meet the goals of the CAP or the goals that the state has set up for the localities. Mr. Ball clarified that it is unclear what the remedies will be taken into action due to the CAP being a state wide program. Chairperson Scully inquired about the preliminary project review checklist listed on page 5-3. Mr. de Cordova stated the implementation occurs at the project level stage if it complies with the plan, it will be reviewed on a project by project basis to ensure compliance where the streamlining mechanisms focus on. Chairperson Scully asked who determines what gets complied. Mr. de Cordova replied stating that the Planning Commission is required to review the environmental impact associated with the project. Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2015 Page4 Commissioner L'Heureux asked Mr. de Cordova to define the terms 'large commercial' listed on page 5-3 on table 5-2 in the Draft CAP. Mr. de Cordova responded stating that the checklist is preliminary to later be finalized and the language is to give the Commission a feel of how it works. Commissioner Siekmann asked if 100% of all lightbulbs be changed in 20 years. Mr. Neu stated that it may be a great goal however, critics may question if the goal is reliable to get the GHG emissions within the state thresholds. Mr. Neu also stated that the low percentages presented are meant to be conservative and not over estimate or rely on a particular measure to get within our required area. Commissioner Siekmann asked if the goals were intentionally set low to avoid future issues with the state. Mr. de Cordova stated that staff is working to establish a mixture of measures for the CAP by estimating what can realistically be achieved. Commissioner Siekmann also asked why the CAP is set on the conservative side if the city wants to become a leader in green technology. Mr. de Cordova stated that staff produced the CAP to an achievable and realistic level. Commissioner Siekmann asked if there were future plans of energy producers to develop solar projects or if there will be a market available for the demand of renewable energy sources relating to the Community Choice Aggregation. Mr. de Cordova stated that he did not have enough knowledge on the complexity of the energy industry, however, as it relates to the Community Choice Aggregation, an addition to the policy was proposed in the Sustainability Element. Commissioner Black questioned once everything has been adopted, and the Planning division has a review checklist to work with when a project is under consideration, if the review checklist then becomes a finding in the resolution. Mr. de Cordova stated yes, it is expected that there will be a finding in the resolutions that the project meets the requirements of the CAP. Commissioner Black asked if the review checklist was for informational purposes or if that will be something that denies a project due to lack of requirements met. Mr. de Cordova replied stating that it would be challenging to make the findings for an approval if a project does not meet the standards of the city or if it does not mitigate significant environmental impacts. Commissioner Segall asked if incandescent light bulbs will be phased out as most light bulbs utilized are LED now. Mr. de Cordova stated yes. Commissioner Segall wanted to clarify that the review checklist can be changed at any time without approving an amendment to the CAP document. Mr. de Cordova stated no, the Commission should not be concerned with the contents of the checklist as it is there to illustrate how staff will implement the changes and one of the early actions needed is to fully develop the checklist. Chairperson Scully asked when the streets light bulbs were changed. Mr. de Cordova stated that the city received grant funds in 2008 to have the street light bulbs changed to more energy efficient bulbs. Mr. Thomas clarified that the light bulbs were changed to the induction type lights similar to a fluorescent light as opposed to a low/high pressure sodium lights. Mr. Thomas also stated that the budgeting for funds has begun this year to have the induction type lighting changed to LED. DISCUSSION Commissioner Siekmann stated she is thrilled that the city has a CAP, however, she would like to see more added to it and can support the Sustainability Element. Commissioner Black added that he agrees with Commissioner Siekmann that the CAP is a great plan and feasible in a conservative way. He can support the project. Commissioner Montgomery stated he can support the CAP on the basis of his own criteria. He feels that it's important to embrace efficient technologies and energies that come forward as it has been shown in human history a leap of progress leads to a cleaner and a more sustainable world. Commissioner Montgomery felt that it is the right step to move forward with technology and efficiency, not necessarily targeting carbon dioxide emissions, but to pollutants, health issues, water quality and lifestyle issues. He concluded that although the city is not 100% renewable energy, 40% open space is a fantasy within the next 20 years, however, it is a possibility within a century .. Commissioner Segall concurs with his fellow commissioners and is pleased that the CAP is conservative as it is a new concept in the state. He can support the CAP. Chairperson Scully stated she can also support the CAP. She feels that it is a good starting point as staff has mentioned that it will be adapted and revised consistently over time based on new research and new Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2015 Page 5 technology, which will help educate the public on what actions to take. She can support the CAP and the Sustainability Element. Commissioner Anderson stated that she can also support the CAP and likes the idea of an attainable goal rather than an aspiration. Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he would like to see the implementation, however, it may be beneficial to the city to initiate dialogue discussing issues involving school districts or other entities to comply with the CAP and supports leadership. He thanked staff for all of the tremendous amount of work put into the CAP and he can support it. Chairperson Scully proposed that the Commission vote for each element, the Sustainability Element and the CAP. Sustainability Element Chairperson Scully asked if the Commission had any further discussion on the Sustainability Element. Commissioner L'Heureux clarified that there was a modification by staff to Policy 9-2.1. Commissioner Anderson asked if the elimination of synthetic turf to recreational uses involves commercial properties or community parks listed in volume 4 of the final EIR report on page 3-12. Mr. Neu stated yes, there are limitations on where turf grass is used based on the water ethic in the landscape manual that limits the use of turf unless it is an appropriate use for the type of landscaping. Commissioner Anderson asked if the city had a policy about artificial turf or if there should be one. Mr. Neu stated that he does not believe there is a policy that addresses it, however, there has been legislation about the homeowner's associations and the ability to have artificial turf. He added that it may not be necessary with the exception related to the playing fields. He also stated that there is a process by which the water budget, or allotment, that the design is supposed to work with in the landscape manual and there are directions about the appropriate use of turf. Mr. Neu concluded stating that there will be revisions made to the landscape manual based on the governor's recent actions and limits on types of irrigation systems and where it can be utilized. Commissioner Segall clarified the modification to Chapter 4 of the final EIR on page 4-65 to include revisions to policies 9-P .1 and 9-P. 7 The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the Sustainability Element. Climate Action Plan Commissioner Siekmann stated that she is in favor of the CAP. Commissioner Montgomery commented to staff regarding future building requirements and remodels to include a tool where it lists achievable criteria to comply with the CAP. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of the CAP. Mobility Element Craig Williams, Mobility Manager, distributed the PowerPoint slides to the Commission and made a presentation. Ron Kemp, assistant City Attorney introduced Mike Hogan to the Commission and stated that he was hired to advise on the CEQA issues. Mike Hogan, Attorney, stated that the Commission's comments on the Sustainability Element indicate that they understand the Mobility element is only a piece to a larger puzzle and in particular, state laws and regulations that have to be implemented at the local level beginning with the CEQA. Mr. Hogan stated that there are changes within those state laws AB32 dealing with climate action, SB743 encouraging infill development the complete streets act and there are a whole series of state laws, policies and plans that require us at the local level to make changes in how we go about evaluating our mobility element. It is an Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2015 CORRECTED Page 6 important change, in state law, and among other things, how we prepare the EIR in connection with individual projects as well as this General Plan. He concluded stating the changes in the Mobility Element considered by the Commission reflect state requirements to be implemented in individual communities. Chairperson Scully asked if there were any questions for Mr. Hogan. Commissioner Segall asked if the new concept of the multi-modal levels of service (LOS) is now required. Mr. Hogan stated yes, the guidelines will not state the phrase "multi-modal levels of service", and instead the standards will read "significant impact of transportation will occur if the project adversely effects the entire transportation system". Commissioner Anderson asked for clarification on whether the state 'Nith the removal of level of service as an evaluation and if they are in the process of developing a nevl method which we do not have yet of California is in the process of developing a new method of evaluating Level of Service, which we do not yet have. Mr. Hogan stated that it is not forbidden to consider levels of service, as it is still a consideration. He added that the state is requiring the city to become less auto centric, less focus on the car alone and equal focus on other modes of transportation. Chairperson Scully asked if the typology chart and the map that shows the new definitions of the streets are still in use. Mr. Thomas stated yes, they are recommending that they be included in the Mobility Element that is going forward. Commissioner Montgomery inquired about the transition from now to a future that is envisioned. Mr. Williams stated that early on, there some words and phrases that were held on to help people understand. The roadway system has been built that is tuned toward cars and an old functional classification mantra, while the standards required minimal accommodations, including relatively narrow bike lanes and sidewalks on most streets. Mr. Williams stated that this is how investments should be made going forward to try to make them better than they are now as they are not attractive to those who walk and bike. Commissioner Segall inquired about the errata sheet. Mr. Neu stated that staff has prepared an errata sheet that covers all changes made during deliberations to later distribute to the Commission once the Mobility Element has been discussed. He also stated that any changes discussed will be added to the same errata sheet to reflect the motions. Commissioner Segall stated that a correspondence submitted by Steve Linke, dated July 23, references the priority of vehicles and buses while pedestrians and bicycles are a secondary priority. Mr. Thomas stated the new description of several of the streets were changed to the connector, employment, identity, and coastal streets. He added that the old circulation element had the arterial streets, which were retained in the description of the new Mobility Element consisting of 6 lane streets and secondary arterial streets, which were lower level streets carrying lower volumes of traffic in 4 lane streets. Mr. Thomas clarified that Mr. Linke's correspondence suggests the priority of vehicles and buses to remain first priority rather than changing the description of the Mobility Element. Commissioner Segall feels the Mobility Element was rushed and he cannot support it. He stated that the proposal initiates the write off of four major segments with no mitigation to a developer's addition of traffic with no fee implementation. Mr. Thomas replied stating that developers pay traffic impact fees that go into improving all roads and a modification to the traffic impact fee program may be implemented in the future to include the improvements for bicycles and pedestrians. Commissioner Anderson asked if golf carts have been considered as an alternative. Chris Gray, Fehr & Peers, stated that golf carts are prohibited on the streets if the speed limit is more than 35 miles per hour. Commissioner Anderson asked for clarification on policy 3pxx. Mr. Gray stated that the city will have to comply with the requirements of SB743 and should monitor its performance. Commissioner Anderson stated that she is not in favor of the priority table as it is written in the element. She encouraged that a discussion with bike lane users should be held prior to any modifications and she is not able to support the Mobility Element the way it is written. Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he feels the Mobility Element was poorly written due to the lack of knowledge, examples, information or how the public can relate although it may work for the traffic engineers who understand the language. Commissioner L'Heureux cannot support the Mobility Element. Commissioner Siekmann stated that she is in favor of the Mobility Element as it supports the priorities to all walkers, cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers. Mr. Williams stated that the Complete Streets Act requires any circulation element developed after 2011 to include clear direction on other modes besides cars. Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2015 Page 7 Commissioner Siekmann inquired about the transportation override. Mr. Gray stated that the transportation override is for other impacts, regional facilities, and freeways and does not include other intersections. He added that exempted facilities were identified based on the findings in the modeling. Mr. Ball stated that the city is not giving up on exempted road segments and requires new development that adds traffic to LOS exempted location to implement transportation demand management strategies as mentioned in 3-P-11. Mr. Ball recommended to add wording that states the implementation of transportation or to pay the cost required to implement transportation demand management strategies. Commissioner Siekmann thanked staff. Commissioner Black stated that he wished to see a Mobility Element implemented and would choose to view a chart rather than a map when selecting streets. He feels that he should not choose between north and south Carlsbad because of various obstructions due to traffic or bicycle accident, etc. Commissioner Black also stated that traffic signals be applied to cyclists as well. He concludes that streets are not well designed and the Mobility Element should help to avoid future pedestrian accidents. Commissioner Black supports the Mobility Element. Commissioner Montgomery concurs with Commissioner Black. He stated that a charting or typology system can direct someone on how to make improvements needed in that total mobility issue and suggests a prioritization chart created that staff can direct to developers or those that impact streets. Commissioner Montgomery also stated that the chart can demonstrate how cost, influences or designs go towards pedestrians and cyclists. He concluded that if there were impacts based on the findings within the chart, it will be the priority of improvement on the streets, however; not to give the priority to other modes of mobility. Chairperson Scully concurs with Commissioner Montgomery. She feels that the roads should be more pedestrian friendly based on everything that was written on the future of an older community. Commissioner Scully stated that accessibility to major streets should be a priority to vehicles and not cyclists as some may infringe and not abide traffic laws. Commissioner Scully can support the Mobility Element if the consideration of some changes are implemented. Commissioner Segall feels that staff should go back to the drawing board to complete and implement some changes to the Mobility Element for it is too important to rush and should be presented to the City Council without any errata sheets. Mr. Neu suggested to call for a brief recess to discuss options with staff. Commissioner L'Heureux stated that the focus on the chart is the main issue and that discussion can be focused more on other topics of discussion. He asked for staff to be more descriptive and to add more detail in the explanation of school streets, employment streets etc., and other measures of the element. Commissioner L'Heureux stated his concerns with pedestrian safety on major roads and crosswalks. RECESS Chairperson Scully called for a recess at 4:45p.m. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER Chairperson Scully called the meeting to order at 5:53 p.m. with all Commissioners present. Mr. Neu stated that staff will need time to go back to analyze some of the data as the Commission has discovered that other parts of the Mobility Element are interrelated. He stated that the way some of the analysis was done was contingent upon roads being classified in a certain way. Mr. Neu also added that staff would like the opportunity to go through the rest qf the materials without the Commission making preliminary decisions on the Mobility Element and to return with the parameters of what the Commission may have the ability to recommend different changes on. He stated that if there were changes beyond that, there may be a need to do additional analysis which would lead to recirculation of the EIR and additional public review. Mr. Neu proposed another option to consider is to cover all other policies of the element and staff can present more refinements to the element based on the comments heard from the Commission. Commissioner Montgomery asked if all of the elements to the GPU becomes significant to recirculate the EIR for re-review. Mr. Neu stated that it could potentially mean a significant amount of work if the Commission's desire was to make wholesale sweeping changes to the GPU. He stated that staff would like to determine the parameters of change that can be made so that the Commission can make some judgement based on that information as it would relate to the CAP as well. Mr. Neu specified that the best Planning Commission Minutes July 24, 2015 Page 10 Commissioner Montgomery stated that he appreciates the public submitting comments regarding the EIR for over a year. Commissioner Black inquired about policy 9-P. 7 in the Sustainability Element on page 227 of the staff report that refers to water. He stated that the policy is too narrow in scope and he believes an investigation of just the areas that are mentioned are just aquafer and there are many more geological considerations that should be analyzed such as artesian water. Mr. Ball recommended that he make a motion. Commissioner Black made a motion to change the language on Page 227 to policy 9-P.7 in the Sustainability Element to investigate the feasibility of developing full functioning ground water systems as well as sub-ground water systems. The Planning Commission voted 7-0 to support the amendment. Commissioner Black stated he can support the EIR. Commissioner Siekmann stated she can support the EIR. Commissioner L'Heureux stated he can also support the EIR with the various amendments and changes and the old writing considerations. Commissioner Anderson stated that she is satisfied with the EIR. Chairperson Scully stated that she can also support the changes to the EIR. The Planning Commission voted 7-0. Ms. Jesser stated that the memorandum summarizes the documents where the revisions have been made by the Commission's discussion as well as some direction received from Mr. Ball to Resolution No. 7111. Commissioner Montgomery inquired about the status of the northeast quadrant excess dwelling unit banking. Ms. Jesser replied stating the number of units being allocated from the bank was reduced from 116 to 98 from Robertson Ranch Planning Area 22 and the number of units for Sunny Creek was reduced from 182 to 115. She also stated that a total of 85 units will remain in the bank. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Anderson and duly seconded by Commissioner L'Heureux that the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7111, RECOMMENDING that the City Council CERTIFY the Environmental Impact Report EIR 13-02, including the approval of Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, based on the findings contained therein. ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7112, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of General Plan Amendment GPA 07-02, Zoning Ordinance Amendment ZCA 07-01, Zone Change ZC 15-02, Local Coastal Program Amendment LCPA 07-02, and a Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan amendment SS 15-06, based on the findings contained therein. ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7113, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of a Climate Action Plan SS 15-05, based on the findings contained therein. ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7114, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of an allocation from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank, based on the findings contained therein and including the changes listed in the Errata sheet dated July 24, 2015. VOTE: 7-0 AYES: Chairperson Scully, Commissioner Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner L'Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery, Commissioner Segall and Commissioner Siekmann NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None {City of Carlsbad CITY COUNCIL ERRATA SHEETS All Receive -Agenda Item # 15 For the Information of tt)e: CllY COUNCIL . ACM _L CA V' CC v" Date .,/:nl1s City Manager v GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND CLIMATE ACTION PLAN Memorandum September 22, 2015 To: City Council From: Don Neu, City Planner Re: Errata Sheet for the General Plan Update and Climate Action Plan In addition to the recommended revisions described in the project agenda bill, staff is recommending that the City Council include the following revisions: 1. Resolution No. 2015-243 a. Revisions to the Draft General Plan, per attached Errata Exhibit A 2. Resolution No. 2015-244 a. Revisions to the Draft Climate Action Plan, per attached Errata Exhibit B Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-4600 I 760-602-8560 fax Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission --------------------------------------------------- For the purposes of air quality analyses, the URBEMIS and CalEEMod modeling programs accomplish the same objective for estimating criteria pollutant emissions; however, the modlels apply slightly different calculation methodologies and motor vehicle databases. For example, the CalEEMod model accounts for state and federal regulations relatedl to motor vehicle emission reductions, resulting in lower mobile emissions during operation. For reasons such as these, the URBEMIS model tends to result in highe:r emissions estimates for the majority of criteria air pollutants during operation. A-2 The comment requests that the CalEEMod results be provided in the administrative record for the Proposed Project. The CalEEMod modeling results will be included in the General Plan EIR administrative record. No additional CalEEMod analysis will be provided because the URBEMIS analysis provided in the FEIR adequately analyzes the criteria pollutant emissions and associated air quality impacts of the Proposed Project as required by CEQA, and additional analysis is not warranted. The CalEEMod results were provided for infom1ational purposes only at the specific request of the ~~:;ommenter to be responsive to the commenter' s notion that CalEEMod would generate emissions estimates that would alter the significance conclusions reached in the FEIR. As shown in subsequent responses, the significance conclusions reached in the FEIR would not change regardless of what model is employed. A-3 The comment and associated bullet points summarize the detailed comments in the comment letter. Dudek disagrees with the bulleted comments for reasons outlined in responses A-4 through A-14. Responses to individual bulleted comments listed in comment A-3 are provided in subsequent responses A-4 through A-14. A-4 The comment incorrectly states that the wrong URBEMIS data was used in the comparison to the CalEEMod data for construction emissions. An accurate comparison of maximum daily construction emissions was made in the comparison summary as provided as part of Attachment A of the commenter' s letter. The SDAPCD thresholds of significance for construction and operational emissions are based on the maximum daily emissions that would occur at any point during the construction or operational period, regardless of what year the maximum daily emissions would occur in. Therefore, it does not matter if the maximum daily construction emissions as referred to in this comment, occur during the 2015 or 2016 calendar year. The comparison made between the URBEMIS and CalEEMod results show the maximum daily emissions that would occur for each pollutant, regardless of 2 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission what year the maximum event occurs in. As such, the comparison provided for disclosure purposes is correct. To further address the commenter's statement, Table 1 is provided which shows the estimated construction emissions by year. / ·t·· . •. JIIIpdeh : .• URBEMIS I CaiEEMod I URBEMIS I CaiEEMod I URBEMIS I CaiEEMod I Table 1 Estimated Daily Construction Emissions (pounds/day) :.Voe . ;J,. ~~Qk.M.;:.J. ... : ... • CQ ·r, :,_,J:;,,-.so~; .d 2015 Emissions 8.87 I 92.89 I 44.15 I 0.14 I 6.85 I 83.82 I 66.31 I 0.12 I 2016 Emissions 222.76 I 30.44 I 73.40 I 0.12 I 247.38 I 45.66 I 58.75 I 0.10 I Maximum Daily Emissions* 222.76 I 92.89 I 73.40 I 0.14 I 247.38 I 83.82 I 66.31 I 0.12 I PJIII1o. l PMz.5 184.38 I 39.64 16.68 I 4.85 2.12 I 1.62 6.77 I 3.43 184.38 I 39.64 16.68 I 4.85 *As reported in the emissions comparison summary, and included in Attachment A of the comment letter (Bender 2015). Additionally, as the commenter states, the emissions provided in Table 1 show the "mitigated" emissions reported in each model. "Mitigated" as it is shown in the model outputs does not indicate mitigation measures have been applied to the construction scenario, resulting in reduced emissions. Rather, "mitigated" in terms of the construction modeling for the Proposed Project only refers to compliance with SDAPCD rules and regulations, such as the application of dust control measures and architectural coating limits in compliance with SDAPCD Rules 55 and 67.0, respectively. Moreover, the construction scenario was analyzed for the 2015 and 2016 calendar year because at the time the analysis was conducted, this was the earliest construction of new development under the General Plan Update could feasibly begin, which would result in the highest potential construction emissions if buildout of the General Plan Update would occur at a steady rate over the buildout period. Over time, construction equipment fleets would turn over to more efficient engine technologies, including the use of lower-emitting engines, thus resulting in lower emissions in future years. As such, using near-term years for construction would result in the most conservative estimate of construction emissions. 3 September 2015 j Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission ----------------------------------------------- A-5 The comment states that the reported operational emissions analytical method and emissions data are inconsistent because near-term emissions are higher than future year emissions. The reported emissions in the FEIR are an accurate portrayal of air quality trends into future years; therefore, there is no inconsistency. Due to continual improvements in engine technology, fuel efficiency, vehicle fleet turnover (i.e. retiring older, less efficient vehicles and replacing them with newer, cleaner units), ever-increasing stringency in federal, state and local air quality regulations and standards, and attainment requirements as set forth under the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), air quality continues to improve despite continued development and population growth. This downward trend in pollutant emissions across the board is illustrated through EPA data as provided on the EPA "Air Quality Trends" data page 1. The EPA states the following: "EPA estimates nationwide emissions of ambient air pollutants and the pollutants they are fl)fmed from (their precursors). These estimates are based on actual monitored readings or engineering calculations of the amounts and types of pollutants emitted by vehicles, factories, and other sources. Emission estimates are based on many factors, including levels of industrial activity, technological developments, fuel consumption, vehicle miles traveled, and other activities that cause air pollution. Emissions information is developed with input from state and local air agencies, tribes, and industry. EPA tracks a range of emissions data, including how much of each poillutant is emitted from various pollution sources. Table [2] shows that emissions of the common air pollutants and their precursors have been reduced substantially since 1980 [despite continual development and population growth] (EPA 2014)." 1 "Air Quality Trends" available at: http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/aqtrends.html 4 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission 1 P,ollql~nt , co NOx voc PM1o PMz.s SOx Source: EPA 2014 Table2 National Emissions Estimates for Common Pollutants and Their Precursors (million tons per year) :1~80 ·- 19s5· , ~·-199o_ r-: 1995: : ·_::20Qif .:·· -.--2005 178 170 144 120 102 81 27 26 25 25 22 20 30 27 23 22 17 16 6 4 3 3 3 4 N/A N/A 2 2 3 3 26 23 23 19 16 14 2013 59 13 14 3 2 5 The EPA also states that "between 1980 and 2013, gross domestic product increased 145%, vehicle miles traveled increased 95%, energy consumption increased 25%, and U.S. population grew by 39%. During this same time period, total emissions of the six principal air pollutants dropped by 62%" (EPA 2014-emphasis added). The Proposed Project's emissions reflect this overall trend in air quality. Using the commenter's example ofVOC emissions, as shown in Tables 3.2-7 and 3.2-10 of the recirculated draft EJR and included as Attachments B and C of the comment letter (Bender 2015), the 2008 emissions are estimated to be 20,027.24, and the 2035 emissions without the Proposed Project are estimated to be 13,808.45. This reduction in emissions over time refl.ects the improvement and efficiency factors described above resulting from continual vehicle fleet turn-over, improvements in engine technology and efficiency, fuel efficiency, and ever-increasing stringency in federal, state and local air quality regulations and standards. Emission factors used by the air quality model reflect these reductions for future years. Again, for these ·same reasons, air quality throughout the country, the State of California, and San Diego County has improved dramatically since the 1970s and 1980s despite increasing development and continual population growth. Regarding McClellan-Palomar Airport, the McClellan-Palomar Airport has an Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan developed and adopted by the San Diego County Airport Land Use Commission. The County of San Diego owns and manages the operation of the airport. The General Plan would continue to guide development in the city in a way that is consistent with the land use compatibility policies in the 5 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission ----------------------------------------------- McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The EIR evaluates the impacts of the draft General Plan, and the EIR is not required to evaluate or mitigate the impacts of operation of the existing airport. Additionally, the County of San Diego will be the lead agency for environmental review of any new airport master plan or airport-related projects. Airport-related projects would also be subject to individual, sitt~-specific environmental review under CEQA. A-6 The comment states that the two model results are not comparable because the underlying assumptions of the models are different. Dudek is aware and acknowledges the differences between the two models. The CalEEMod results were provided for infonnational purposes only at the specific request of the comrnenter and are not intended to provide an apples-to-apples comparison nor are they intended for incorporation into the EIR analysis. The model result comparison was provided at the specific request of the commenter and to demonstrate that although emissions are estimated somewhat differently in each model, the significance conclusions in the FEIR would not change regardless of the model employed. Additionally, the majority of differences between the models as listed in the comment's footnote 7 are related to estimating GHG emissions. GHG emissions were not included in the Proposed Project's air quality analysis in section 3.2 of the EIR; therefore, the functional differences between the models related to GHG emissions would not apply. For the purposes of air quality analyses, the URBEMIS and CalEEMod modeling programs accompllish the same objective for estimating criteria pollutant emissions; however, the models apply slightly different calculation methodologies and motor vehicle databases. For example, the CalEEMod model accounts for state and federal regulations related to motor vehicle emission reductions, resulting in lower mobile emissions during operation. For reasons such as these, the URBEMIS model results in higher emissions estimates for the majority of criteria air pollutants during operation. A-7 The comment states that the wrong environmental baseline was used in the EIR analysis. As stated in Section 3.2 of the FEIR, "Information and analysis have been compiled based on an understanding of the existing ambient air quality of the SDAB and review of existing technical data, aerial maps, and applicable laws, regulations, and guidelines. Traffic data and trip generation information was derived from the project's traffic impact analysis prepared by Fehr and Peers for the year 2008 (existing conditions) and 2035 (both with and without buildout of the proposed General Plan). The existing conditions data is included in this discussion for 6 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission disclosure purposes only, while the 2035 data is utilized to assess project-related impacts." The Supreme Court's decision in Neighbors for Smart Rail v. Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority (57 Cal. 4th 439) addressed the question whether an EIR for a proposed light rail development project could analyze the project's impacts against only a future baseline (i.e., conditions that would exist in 2030) prior to construction of the project or instead was required to follow CEQ A's general rule to evaluate a project's impacts against the conditions that exist at the time an EIR is prepared. The Neighbors for Smart Rail decision does not apply to the EIR for the Proposed Project because the Proposed Project analyzes an update of the city's General Plan, as opposed to a project-level analysis for a development project as in the Neighbors for Smart Rail case. The General Plan establishes goals and policies that are intended to guide future development in the city, but does not propose or authorize any specific development projects. The EIR identifies the maximum amount of future development allowed under the draft General Plan and evaluates the potential impacts of the total amount of development allowed (i.e., buildout). All future development projects allowed under the General Plan will be subject to site-specific environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168 when they are proposed for implementation. Therefore, information regarding the short- term and mid-term impacts that may occur from development allowed under the General Plan will be provided in the next tier of environmental review, as individual development projects are proposed over the course of the planning period and undergo site-specific environmental review. To analyze air quality impacts during interim years would be speculative because buildout of the General Plan Update is dependent on unknown development patterns, market demand, housing type and product, and other factors. As stated in the comment's footnote 9, Neighbors for Smart Rail, "the public and decision makers are entitled to the most accurate information on project impacts practically possible, and the choice of a baseline must reflect this goal." The best information available at the program level was utilized to analyze air quality impacts, and only information at full buildout (2035) can adequately be analyzed with the information available at the time the analysis was conducted. An existing conditions scenario was analyzed and disclosed for informational purposes. Additionally, the SDAPCD thresholds used 7 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission --------------------------------------------------- under CEQA to determine Proposed Project impacts are based on the net increase in criteria air pollutants as a result of project implementation. A-8 The comment states that the analysis did not include an evaluation of impacts during interim years. See response A-7. A-9 The comment states that the EIR's air quality analysis is not consistent with the Climate Action Plan's analysis. The intent of the Climate Action Plan is to provide a road map for how the City of Carlsbad will reduce GHG emissions over time in pursuit of a ci1ty-wide GHG reduction target. To accomplish this, the Climate Action Plan includes a city-wide inventory of GHG emissions that includes all emission sources throughout the city, as well as periodic evaluation of progress toward long- term reduction goals, as specified in Section 15183.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Conversely, the air quality analysis in section 3.2 of the FEIR focuses on future development allowed under the Proposed Project and is not intended to serve as an emissions inventory for the City. As stated previously, to analyze air quality impacts during interim years would be speculative because buildout of the General Plan Update is dependent on unknown development patterns, market demand, housing type and product, and other factors. The best infonnation available at the program level was utilized to analyze air quality impacts, and only information at full buildout (2035) can adequately be analyzed with the known information at the time the analysis was conducted. Similar to the Climate Action Plan's periodic monitoring to evaluate progress toward achieving GHG emission reduction targets, future development projects allowed under the General Plan will be subject to site-specific environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168 when they are proposed for implementation. Therefore, information regarding the short-term and mid-term air quality impacts that may occur from development allowed under the General Plan will be provided in the next tier of environmental review, as individual development projects are proposed over the course of the planning period and undergo site-specific environmental review. The site-specific environmental review will analyze and, where necessary, provide mitigation for air quality impacts to ensure conformance with SDAPCD thresholds for erite:ria pollutants on an on-going basis. 8 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission A-10 The comment highlights some of the differences between the URBEMIS and CalEEMod model and indicates that different inputs may be used for each model. Dudek is aware of and acknowledges the differences between the two models; however, the same land use inputs were used in the CalEEMod model as those used in the URBEMIS model. Where specific land uses did not reflect the exact land use provided in URBEMIS, the best representative land use in CalEEMod was applied. The CalEEMod results were provided for informational purposes at the specific request ofthe commenter. The results are not intended to provide an apples-to-apples comparison nor are they intended for incorporation into the EIR analysis. Instead, the model result comparison was provided at the specific request of the commenter and to demonstrate that although emissions are estimated somewhat differently in each model, the significance conclusions as provided in the FEIR would not change regardless of the model employed. Regarding golf course uses, because a new golf course is not proposed as part of the Proposed Project, golf course emissions were not analyzed in the program-level analysis provided in the FEIR. As stated previously, all future development projects allowed under the General Plan will be subject to site-specific environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168 when they are proposed for implementation. A-ll The comment states that the traffic data utilized for the air quality existing conditions analysis is outdated. SANDAG's 2050 Regional Travel Demand Model (Series 12) was used for the traffic modeling; the base year for this model is 2008, which was the most currently available data at the time the analysis was done. For the purposes of air quality analysis, trip generation -which is based on project- specific land uses -is used to determine mobile-source emissions regardless of where these newly-generated trips are occurring. As such, segment volumes as discussed in this comment are not relevant to the air quality analysis. For similar reasons, because CEQA only requires a disclosure of project-specific impacts (and in this context, project-specific trip generation), an analysis of traffic transiting through the City's jurisdiction is not required under CEQA as part of the Proposed Project analysis. A-12 This comment summarizes the commenter' s opinion regarding the EIR' s analysis of air quality impacts relative to the proposed General Plan Update. 9 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission ----------------------------------------------- As previously stated, the General Plan establishes goals and policies that are intended to guide future development in the city, including goals and policies to improve air quality within the City's jurisdiction, but the General Plan Update does not propose or authorize any specific development projects. The EIR identifies the maximum amount of future development allowed under the draft General Plan and evaluates the potential impacts of the total amount of development allowed (i.e., build-out). The air quality analysis provided in the EIR fulfills CEQA's intent as a program-level analysis; the EIR is not intended to provide a project-specific analysis of air quality impacts. As a program EIR, the EIR document focuses on the overall effects of the General Plan Update in the planning area. Individual development projects will be subject to project-level environmental assessment. The project-level environmental review will focus on site-specific impacts and necessary mitigation measures. Additionally, as discussed in response A-5, due to continual improvements in engine technology, fuel efficiency, vehicle fleet turnover (i.e., retiring older, less efficient vehicles and replacing them with newer, cleaner units), ever-increasing stringency in federal, state and local air quality regulations and standards, and attainment requirements as set forth under the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) and the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), air quality continues to improve despite continued development and population growth. This downward trend in emissions across the board is illustrated by EPA data. 2 A -13 The comment summarizes comments A -4 through A -11. See response A -7 for information regarding the analysis baseline. See recirculated draft EIR Section 3.2, Methodology and Assumptions, for information related to data sources and assumptions including model defaults utilized. Regarding the differences between URBEMIS and CalEEMod, Dudek is aware and acknowledges the differences between the two models; however, CalEEMod results were provided for information purposes only, at the specific request of the commenter. The results comparison is not intended to provide an apples-to-apples comparison nor are the results intended for incorporation into the EIR analysis. The results comparison wa~ provided at the specific request of the commenter and to demonstrate that although emissions are estimated somewhat differently in each model, the significance conclusions as identified in the FEIR would not change regardless of the model employed. 2 "Air Quality Trends" available at: http://www.epa.gov/airtrends/aqtrends.html 10 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission A-14 Comment noted. This concludes Dudek's responses to the letter received from Ray and Ellen Bender, dated August 18, 2015. Sincerely, 1'0 . Lf_~ /0//.#AJ <J.Affr'vt__- Brian Grover Environmental Project Manager 11 September 2015 Technical Memorandum Subject: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Friday July 24, 2015 Catlsbad Planning Commission ----------------------------------------------- REFERENCES Bender, Ray and Ellen. 2015. "Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Saturday [sic] July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission. CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2015. "Frequently Asked Questions". http:/ /caleemod.com/ EPA (Environmental Protection Agency). 2015. "Air Quality Trends. Last updated October 8, 2014. http://www.epa. gov/airtrends/aqtrends.html 12 September 2015 Comment Letter A August 18, 2015 [Delivered to Carlsbad Council Members, Planning Commissioners, aod Planning Staff via email transmittal to City Clerk Donna Heraty and General Plao Project Maoager Jennifer Jesser on August, 18, 2015 with Request to Distribute to the Addressees Below] Ray & Ellen Bender 1015 Camino del Arroyo Dr. San Marcos, CA 92078 Email: benderbocan@aol.com Phone: 760 752-1716 Carlsbad General Plan Articles: Carlsbad.Patch.com [Complete articles list at: http://patch.com/users/raymond-bender-79afd24d] Council Members: Matt Hall, Keith Blackburn, Mark Packard, Michael Schumacher, and Lorraine Wood Carlsbad Planning Commissioners: Velyn Anderson, Arthur Neil Black, Stephen "Hap" L'Heureux, Marty Montgomery, Victoria Scully, Jeff Segall, and Keny Siekmann Interim City Manager: Ms. Kathy Dodson Attn: Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner & Project Manager for 2015-2035 General Plan EIR City Planner: Don Neu City Clerk: Ms. Donna Heraty 1200 Carlsbad Village Carlsbad, CA92008 Re: Bender Comments on Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR CalEEMod Air Quality Information First Presented by Carlsbad at the Saturday July 24, 2015 Carlsbad Planning Commission Background: As noted in our prior Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan EIR comments, the EIR modeled air quality impacts using the outdated Urbemis modeL TI1e San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) has not used it since 2011. At the July 24, 2015 Planning Commission meeting held to consider the General Plan (GP) and GP EIR, the Carlsbad environmental consultant stated that Carlsbad has now rerun the relevant air quality data using the CalEEMod (California Environmental Estimator Model) that SDAPCD has used since 2011. The consultant stated that Urbemis and CalEEMod produce somewhat different results but not enough to alter the GP EIR conclusions. 1 A-1 On July 24, 2015, we made a public records act request to obtain the records supporting Carlsbad's environmental consultant's CalEEMod conclusions. We received some records on August 12, 2015. For reasons below, the records do not support the consultant's conclusions. We request consultant's CalEEMod records provided to us on August 12, 2015 and this letter be included in the General Plan EIR administrative record.1 We object to any other consultant CalEEMod-related records being included in the record unless they are provided to us at least two weeks before the City Council acts on the 2015-2035 GP and GP EIR. Executive Summary The Carlsbad consultant July 2015 CalEEMod information presented to the Carlsbad Planning Commission in July 2015 did not apply the correct legal standards and is not supported by the consultant's CalEEMod July tables. Detailed discussion follows the below summary. • Consultant's comparison ofCalEEMod and Urbemis construction emission calculations misquotes the "relevant" Urbemis Final EIR data. • The Final EIR Urbemis data for the 2035 GP impacts (with and without the project impacts) -which the CalEEMod operational emissions are compared against --conflict with the Final EIR 2008 Urbemis data. • Consultant improperly compares CalEEMod results against Urbemis results. The two models have different inputs and rely on different emissions databases. Hence, they are not comparable. • To make its CalEEMod v Urbemis comparisons, consultant uses the wrong baseline. See the discussion below and Final EIR Table 3.2-10. • Contrary to CEQA and supporting case law, consultant fails to provide either CalEEMod or Urbemis interim (2020, 2025, and 2030) air quality impacts. • Consultant's omission of the interim data conflicts with the Carlsbad Climate Action Plan approach. Planning commission staff testified at the July 2015 joint City Council and Planning Commission hearing that air quality data should be gathered periodically to measure Carlsbad's success in offsetting air quality emissions. 1 CalEEMod analysis we received on August 12, 2015 from Carlsbad consisted of77 pages of "CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod 20 13.2.2" with the following characteristics: (a) 7 pages of Operations Part I Winter analysis; (b) 7 pages of Operations Part I Summer analysis; (c) II pages of Operations Pzrt I Annual analysis; (d) 7 pages of Operations Part 2 Winter analysis; (e) 7 pages of Operations Part 2 Summer analysis; (f) II pages of Operations Part 2 Annual analysis; (g) 7 pages of Operations Part 3 Winter analysis; (h) 7 pages of Operations Part 3 Summer analysis; (i) 7 pages of Part 3 Summer analysis; U) 11 pages of Operations Part 3 Annual analysis; and (k) 2 pages summarizing CalEEMod v. Urbemis construction emissions and CalEEMod v. Urbemis Operational Emissions (relying on "Opl, Op2, and Op 3 Runs."). CCP § 1094.5(e) makes part of the administrative record evidence that could not have been reasonably produced at relevant hearings. 2 IA-1 Cont. I A-2 A-3 A-2 Cont. • Consultant CalEEMod tables fail to provide sufficient information to determine if consultant produces air quality emission data for all Carlsbad land. • Consultant's CalEEMod tables continue to rely on 2008 traffic. Such data is 6 years old and gathered during the middle of the US economic slump when building in Carlsbad had cratered. Consultant has not shown that 2006 data is representative of Carlsbad 2014 traffic data counts. Detailed Discussion of Specific Consultant July 2015 CalEEMod Air Quality Analysis Defects Voiding its Representations to the Planning Commission and City Council • Consultant uses the wrong Urbemis data to compare CalEEMod Construction Emissions data. As detailed in Attachment A to this letter, consultant mistakenly intermingled the 2015 and 2016 Urbemis data that Carlsbad reports in its Final EIR. 2 Accordingly-assuming the proper 2035 CalEEMod data comparison is to an Urbemis baseline (a false assumption as noted below), the CalEEMod comparison misquotes the Urbemis data. For instance, for ROG (Reactive Organic Gases), the proper comparison in pounds per day for ROG should be: CalEEMod 247.38 v. Urbemis 8.87 [NOT Urbemis 222.76] and the proper comparison in pounds per day for CO (Carbon Monoxide) should be CalEEMod 66.31 v. Urbemis 44.15 [NOT Urbemis 73.4]. Note the drastic increase in ROG and significant increase in CO. And, the foregoing numbers are the MITIGATED numbers. • Common sense shows the consultant-reported Urbemis operational emissions analytic method and operational emissions data are inconsistent. Continued use of the Urbemis model, even for comparison, leads to nonsensical results. We now focus not on the construction air quality emissions above, which begin and end, but on ongoing operational air quality emissions. Turn to the last page of the July 2015 consultant CalEEMod analysis tables entitled "Carlsbad General Plan Update Operational Emissions. See Attachment D to this letter. The July table A-3 Cont. A-4 ends by comparing the new CalEEmod results against the old Urbemis results. But we begin by A-5 noting that Carlsbad's own EIR Urbemis tables are internally inconsistent-which voids the Carlsbad July 2015 comparison ofCalEEMod data to Urbemis data (even if the proper comparison were to Urbemis data, which it is not). Note that Carlsbad Table 3.2-7 in Attachment B lists the alleged air quality "existing conditions (2008). "3 This table says that VOCs in 2008 were 20,027.24 pounds per day. Yet Carlsbad Table 3.2.10 (Attachment C) lists the 2035 VOC emissions without the General Plan 2 See Carlsbad Recirculated Portions of the Draft EJR, Appendix 7g (unchanged and incorporated in the Final EIR). See Carlsbad Recirculated Portions of the Draft EJR, Appendix 7g (unchanged and incorporated in the Final EIR). 3 As explained later in this letter, the Carlsbad reference to "existing conditions (2008)" can have two entirely different meanings: (1) the actual air quality emissions existing in 2008 or (2) the air quality emissions Carlsbad predicts will exist in 2035 without the new 2015-2035 development. For purposes, of the discussion in this bullet point section, the distinction is irrelevant because the 2008 and 2035 numbers are implausibly inconsistent. 3 I A-4 I Cont. A-5 Cont. as 13.808.45 pounds per day. Those two figures conflict. Carlsbad is saying that VOCs after 20 years will be greatly less than "existing conditions." Similar problems exist with the other pollutants listed in these tables. Yet, Carlsbad reports that the GP will cause housing units to increase 22%, population to increase 22%, commercial square footage to increase 56%, office space to increase 14%, industrial space to increase 31%, hotel rooms to increase 47%, and jobs to increase 37%.4 A reasonable person would expect all Carlsbad air quality pollutant levels to increase greatly in 20 years, not decrease greatly, in the future. Even if Carlsbad had "0" new development, existing stores, offices, and businesses would add new shoppers and new air quality impacts. Then, Table 3.2-10 in Attachment C says that the VOCs in 2035 with the 2015-2035 GP development will be 16,213.92 pmmds per day. Carlsbad says that despite 20 years of great growth, the VOCs will be less than the 2008 existing condition VOCs, especially remarkable since 2008 was the middle of the U.S. economic crash that halted North County building. For instance, McClellan-Palomar Airport had about 290,000 annual flights before the 2006 economic crash and now has about 155,000 annual flights. As business improves, annual flights will return to earlier levels and likely increase as a result of the new air carrier BIZ Shuttle offering flights to Las Vegas and Phoenix. 5 Carlsbad then uses the implausible Table 3.2-10 VOC numbers (16,213.92 and 13,808.45) to conclude that the net new VOC emissions resulting from the 2035 General Plan Build out will be 2,405.47 pounds per day. Carlsbad then compares this figure to the July 2015 CalEEMod VOC figure.6 See the short Carlsbad summary table at the end of Attachment D to this letter. Similarly and implausibly, Carlsbad compares other Table 3.2-10 pollutants against CalEEMod results. • The Consultant July CalEEMod-Urbemis Operational Analysis Compares Apples and Oranges. Now ignore the Urbemis defects noted above. Assume the CalEEMod results are compared to accurate Urbemis results. That comparison still makes no sense. Consider an analogy. Assume an economist uses the US census to compare the California Hispanic population in 1970, 1990, and 2010. That comparison makes sense only if each census defined the term "Hispanic" identically. If, however, one census included as "Hispanic" groups from Mexico 4 See Table ES-2 Estimated Total Development (To Buildout) on page ES-3 of Recirculated Portions of the Draft EIR. The percentages were calculated by d:iving the New Development column by the existing column. 5 Recall also that Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations in §15154 provides: "When a lead agency prepares an E1Rfor a projet within the boundaries of a comprehensive airport land use plan .. the agency shall utilize the Airport Land Use Planning Handbook published by Caltrans Division of Aeronautics to assit in the preparation of the E1R and relative to potential airport related safoty hazards and noise problems." As we ha:ve previously pointed out, the Carlsbad GP addresses certain issues in areas outside Palomar Airport but makes no effort to address on-airport safety issues such as those resulting from aircraft landing 200 feet from closed methane-emitting landfill that has in the past had several underground landfill fires. 6 Carlsbad uses the terms Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) and Reactive Organic Gases (ROG) interchangeably. 4 A-5 Cont. A-6 A-5 Cont. and South America, but another census excluded these groups, the comparison would be meaningless. The California AQ agencies went to a new model because they saw certain flaws in Urbemis. See the footnote below for some Urbemis and CalEEMod differences.7 Accordingly, neither consultant's July 2015 AQ analysis methodology nor alleged facts support the July 24,2015 statement to the Carlsbad Planning Commission that CalEEMod results do not differ substantially from the Final EIR Urbemis results. • Consultant uses the wrong environmental baseline. To know how worse the air will be "tomorrow" (in 2020,2025, 2030, and 2035), we need to know how bad the air is today (2015) (referred to as the "baseline"). Developers have argued that environmental baselines should not be literally be based on today' s air quality numbers. They argue that Carlsbad will develop with or without a 2015-2035 General Plan. Accordingly, say developers, the environmental impacts of a 2015-2035 plan should be compared not against 2015 conditions now but rather against the future conditions that would exist in Carlsbad in 2035 if no new GP is adopted. 7 The caleemod.com website describes some of the differences as follows: "How is CalEEMod different from the URBEMIS model? Both models quantify emissions from the various phases of construction and operation for land uses identified in the ITE Trip Generation Manual. The primary differences between the two models are the following features and functions that are included in CalEEMod, but not in the the URBEMIS model: · • mobile source emissions based on CARB 's EMF AC20 11 emission factors that incorporate Pavley standards and Low Carbon Fuel standards • calculates indirect criteria pollutant and GHG emissions from processes "downstream" of the project under evaluation such as GHG emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use • calculates the emission reduction benefits from implementing the same GHG mitigation measures identified and recently adopted by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) • in addition to quantifying C02 emissions, it includes two additional combustion GHG pollutants: methane and nitrous oxides • quantifies emissions from off-road equipment utilized during operation • includes more land use types, such as refrigerated warehouses, golf courses and swimming pools • quantifies emissions from parking lots and/or structures as a separate land use type • includes the usage of consumer products at non-residential facilities • updates warehouse trip rates • modifies methods for calculating fugitive dust from grading and site preparation • provides ability to insert spreadsheet for large projects (e.g., EMFAC2007, construction equipment list) • allows for the user to select different vehicle classes for construction worker, vendor, and hauling trips • uses CARB's BURDEN model (a component of the EMF AC model) emission factors to provide more accurate characteristics (fleet mix, vehicle miles traveled, etc.) of the affected area • uses weighted average trip rates to reflect accurate vehicle activity from a specific land use type Defaults have been provided by the various air districts throughout the state to account for local requirements and conditions. The newer, improved, usercfriendly model will be free of charge and updated periodically in the future to include modifications, such as the inclusion of new emission factors from CARB. 5 A-6 Cont. A-7 A-6 Cont. golf courses differently-as well as potential large projects bringing to mind the Aqua Hedionda initiative now circulating in Carlsbad that could result in building a large shopping center in Carlsbad within 5 years. Also, the July 2015 CalEEMod tables include a "Landscape" category. Have the Carlsbad golf course emissions been included in that category. • Carlsbad General Plan Draft and Final EIR air quality analysis rely on incomplete old traffic qata in EIR Appendix F. The beginning of Carlsbad Final EIR Appendix F refers to "Traffic Segment Volumes" on major Carlsbad roads based on 2008 data. No doubt studies that EIRs rely on will always precede the EIR. But due to the US economic recession, major differences in traffic volumes likely occurred between 2008 and 2014 when the recession had substantially abated. Traffic data markedly determines air quality conditions. Also, we understand that the Carlsbad analysis ignores "through Carlsbad traffic" when calculating the environmental air quality baseline.U Yet the State of California within the last 3 years completed its 1-5 Freeway Improvement EIR, on which Carlsbad commented. It would seem that Carlsbad had readily available recent traffic data to use in its CalEEMod calculations. Conclusion If the above comments have confused any readers, please picture the average Carlsbad citizen trying to read the Carlsbad EIR air quality analysis. CEQA requires Carlsbad to produce an informative document. Instead, readers received a Final EIR saying in essence: );;> Carlsbad lies in an air quality non-attainment area for certain pollutants. );;> The 2015-2035 GP developments will worsen air quality. );;> Worse impacts will further impair resident and worker health, but Carlsbad cannot say by how much. );;> Growing the City is so important that the Council will adopt a CEQA Statement of Overriding Considerations. );;> Hence, expect gridlock traffic on certain streets at times and traffic-associated air quality health risks Carlsbad deems acceptable to promote growth. );;> Carlsbad need not tell residents and workers how air quality will affect them in 2020, 2025, and 2030. The Carlsbad Final EIR air quality analysis suffers the severe defects noted above. Moreover, seldom do the EIR air quality analysis clearly state the assumptions they rely on (such as the proper calculation of the air quality baseline), the specific data sources being used (as opposed to a general reference to a long study, such as the Fehr traffic study) or analytic concerns. For instance, the consultant July 2015 CalEEMod tables) fail to explain how CalEEMod differs from Urbemis and what steps the consultant took to cure any "gaps" in the needed air quality analysis. Thank you for your anticipated thoughtful review of the information we have brought to your attention above. Note that this letter reflects only one week of analysis as we wished to provide this letter to Carlsbad substantially before the Council's consideration of the 2015-2035 General 11 We did not see in the consultant's July 2015 CalEEMod tables an indication that traffic transiting Carlsbad was considered. 8 A-10 Cont. A-11 A-12 A-13 I ftr14 IA-11 Cont. Plan and GP EIR, which we understand will be in September. We suspect that further review would shciw further CalEEMod v Urbernis defects. Is/ Ray & Ellen Bender Attachments: A Carlsbad's Consultant's July 2015 CalEEMod Summary of Construction Emissions B Carlsbad's Recirculated Draft/Final EIR Tables 3.2-6 and 3.2-7 Showing Existing Conditions (2008) C Carlsbad's Recirculated Draft/Final EIR Table 3.2-10 Comparing Urbemis 2035 and "baseline" existing conditions D Carlsbad's Consultant's July 2015 CalEEMod Summary of Operational Emissions E Carlsbad's Consultant's July 2015 CalEEMod Analysis: Not physically attached but incorporated by reference since it is already in Carlsbad's possession and would needlessly lengthen this letter. 2015 Carlsbad Bender Supp Final EIR Letter re Ca!EEMod Tiffi NEW ONE August 17 [ smart file Genera!Plan _] bee: 9 1 A-14 Cont. Attachment A To Bender August 18, 2015 Supplemental Comments on General Plan and General Plan EIR Resulting from New EIR Information Presented by Carlsbad at the July 24, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Considering Adoption of the Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan and General Plan EIR [Shows Carlsbad Misapplied its Final EIR Urbemis Air Quality Data to its July 2015 CalEEMod Air Quality Data [See 2n' to last page of CaiEEMod Carlsbad Data] The Carlsbad July 2015 CalEEMod Construction Emissions Table that Carlsbad relied on at the July 25,2015 Plarming Commission meeting compares the old Urbemis and new CalEEMod results as follows: carlsbad General Plan Update Construction Emissions ca!EEMod URBEMIS ROG NOx CO SOZ PMlO PM2.5 247 38 83.82 66.31 0.12 16.68 4.85 2Z2.76 92.89 73.4 0.14 18438 39.64 Yet the Carlsbad Final EIR-on which the above table relies-reports the Urbemis results as follows: !CONSTRUCTION EMISSION ESTJMATIES I ROG NOx .QQ 502 PM10DustPM10 Exhaust PM10 PM2.50ust PM2.5 l -2015 TOTALS (lbsfday unmitigated) 8.87 92.89 44.15 0.14 323.21 3.69 324.81 67.50 3.40 ! 2015TOTALS (lbsfdaymHigalad) 8.87 92.89 44.15 0.14 182.78 3.69 184.38 38.17 3.40 I f016TOTALS(Ibsfdayunmitigaled) 246.94 30.44 73.40 0.12 ~16TOTALS(Ibsldaymiligatad) 222.76 30.44 73.40 0.12 0.53 1.59 2.12 0.19 1.44 0.53 1.59 2.12 0.19 1.44 I . PM2.5 68.97 39.64 1.62 1.62 N~ticerl:fu:C:rBEMod. table incorrectly reports ilieFTn7EiRurbe~s ~e~'cw;;mEMod table intermingles the 2015 and 2016 Urbemis results rather than consistently reporting the 2015 results. Accordingly, the July 2015 Table results mistakenly reported 222.76 rather than 8. 87 pounds per day ofROG and 73.4 rather than 44.15 pounds per day of CO. 2015 Carlsbad General Plan Ca1EEMod EIR Comments Attachment A [smart file GeneralPlan_] 2015 Carlsbad General Plan CalEEMod ElR Comments Attachment C [smart file GeneralPlan_] Attachment C To Bender August 18, 2015 Supplemental Comments on General Plan and General Plan EIR Resulting from N<ew EIR Information Presented by Carlsbad at the July 24, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Considering Adoption of tllte Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan and General Plan EIR [Shows Carlsbad Mis:applied its Final EIR Urbemis Air Quality Data to its July 2015 CalEEMod Air Quality Data [See last page of CalEEMod Carlsbad Data] Reproduces Carlsbad Tabh~ 3.2-10 from Recirculated General Plan Draft EIR Below are the tables noted above. These tables are reproduced to contrast with Table 3.2-7 reproduced in Attachment B and with the Carlsbad July 2015 CalEEMod-Urbemis comparison. RecimJlatsd l'Dr!i"alu !?[.the PmJi: J'rogmm -Emoli"omnemnllmpact Repmt for 1the Carlsbod Genera# #'fan Upd<ne C11qpter 3.2: Air Qualily Table!3.2-6!10: General Pian BuUdout (2035} Estimated D·aily M..xilrn~m Operationallemissions (poundS/day) Emiss1pn Soum! voc; @. co so = PM,. 1'Md Estimated Emissions1trit:hmot Prooosed General Plan GOlD MotOr-Vebldes 2219;9!! ~ 23.268.-10 ~ J.!!.l!!H2& 1.1117.60 Area Sources 1.!.478.33 1.52153 ~ 143.53 7.-4011.75 7.l23.59 ~ Sources' llO.I~l ~ 1.190.68 30.68 213.70 NfA Total 13.BOB..4.!i 4,579.86 70.154:.45 23'7.34 18.499.17 9.201.19 Estimated EmissiDDs •l!i!;!il!n:mosed General Plan (21135) Motor Vehicles ,?.84L9~1 3.410:65 29.763.92 8(J:J7 13'.935.46 ~ ~ 11~' .LZlY1 ~ ~. ~·. ~· Sat'ionary Sorirces1 110.14_ 395.12 1,190.68 30.68 213.70 NIA Total 16.2J3.9,l! 5,542.118, 84,261.12 276.71 22,671.48. IQ,862.BIJ Net New Emissions .d: Genoor..l Plan Buildout {2035) :. Motor Vehicles 621.9!> 747.~ 6,495.52 ~ 30.50.74, 582.~ ~· 6;.49&&7 lZM ~- Area Sources j,783.Sl~ 214.78 7.013:15 ~~ ~ 7;Dl+.+O 21.73 l.I21.5Z6 1,079.5I4 Station~ Soun:e5-1 0(){[ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 NIA Total Net New l,.405.4i' ~9M). 13.508.67-1-n.u 4.172.314, 1.661.61& Emissions 2,41)7.-UI PJ II.SQ-9.7'1-39.3'7 ln.fi 7- Emissit:m Threshold 7!> 2.50 5.50 2.50 100 55 Threshold y,.,, Yes Yes No Yes Yes Exceeded? Em~ons ,~resent maximu~ of surnmer .and winter. ""Swnmer" emissions~ .represema:tfve aft:he .conditions t:J:1a.t may occur during rh~ ozone: season (May 1 m October 31). and --~ emissions are rapresentative of 'the 'COnditions tha:f may occ:ur during 1:he balance <?f the year (November J to April 30). S~>UJ'C!!:Appendbr:ll /_ Stationar:,y souro5 include the !.d!rrd'e of the Carlsbad .Enerq Center. Source: Carrtbmia Enerv-Commission (CEQ 2012.CarlsbadEne~J'.,!!Ij'gg;;~~ 111 2015 Carlsbad General Plan CalEEMod EIR Comments Attachment D [smart file Genera!Plan_] Attachment D To Bender August 18, 2015 Supplemental Comments on General Plan and General Plan EIR Resulting from New EIR Information Presented by Carlsbad at the July 24, 2015 Planning Commission Meeting Considering Adoption of the Carlsbad 2015-2035 General Plan and General Plan EIR [Shows Carlsbad Misapplied its Final EIR Urbemis Air Quality Data to its July 2015 CaiEEMod Air Quality Data [See last page of CalEEMod Carlsbad Data] Com pares Carls bad Tables 3.2-7 and 3.2-10 from Recirculated General Plan Draft EIR with Consultant July 2015 CalEEMod v. Urbemis Operational Emissions Comparison CarJshad General Plan Update Operafional Emissions Oo1Run Single fam~iy Multifami~y Mobile Home Regional Sho~ping Center GeneraJ Office B!d Oo2Run Supermarket Mixed Use {Genetal Office Building) Strip Mall Government OffE'Ce Bid Pharrnacy}Drug Store Oo3 Run Industrial Park Are/Po-lice Station {Government Office Bid) Speciality Commercial (Resear.c:h and Development) Other Pubfic Service {General Office Bid} Other Commercial {Office Park} CaiEEModTotol · · URBEMISTotal Area Energy Mobile Total Area Energy Mobile Total Area Energy Mobile Total lV ROG 1,751.84 4.48S4 124.241 l,880.S7 ROG 133.252 2.7244 171A065 307.3829 ROG 540.8711 15.8&81 165.3409 722.1001 2.910.0S ~ NOx co 22.9454 2.163.79 39.2057 22.7368 213.4426 1.217.28 275.59 3,403.81 NDx co 0 0.013 24.7675 20.8047 245.6959 1,485.87 270.4634 1506.6914 NDx co 0.0527 144.4m 121.3272 277.1672 1.592.66 421.6044 1714.0389 967.55 6.624-54 962.22. 13,_508£7 soz PMUI PM2.S !to2S7 2263273 225.3147 0.2447 3.099 3.093 4.713 3311.1153 93.6&92 4.99 56754 323.10 soz PMl-D PMZ.S 0 0 II 0.1486 1.8823 1.8823 5.0089 354.5127 98.4748 ·s.1575 356.495 100.3571 502 PM1D PM2.S 0 0 !I !1.8655 10.9772 10.9772 6.0613 434.1791 120.338 6.9279 445.1563 131.3152 17.07 1,369.19 5511.78 39.37 ~1.72-31 _3.;~ Scott Donnell Senior Planner City of Carlsbad LAW OFFICES HALL & BAILEY 25014 Las Brisas Road South, Suite B Murrieta, California 92562 Telephone: (951) 304-7566 Facsimile: (951) 304-7571 September 15, 2015 Community and Economic Development 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 Dear Mr. Donnell: ALL RECEIVED I have received your letter dated September 10, 2015, in response to my August 10, 2015 letter to the Carlsbad City Council. Unfortunately, your general responses appear dismissive of the issues that were raised in my correspondence. I am also somewhat concerned that City staff summarily determined it was not appropriate to amend zoning ordinance section 21.45.060 to prohibit on-street visitor parking in high density areas, indicating that you and staff " think any problems associated with this provision are probably location-specific and therefore the merits of its application should be considered on a project-by-project basis." First of all, in high density residential areas where 30 units per acre are permitted, it is more likely you are going to have street parking problems where on-street "visitor parking" is allowed to be calculated into the project's development plans. The only feasible way to truly alleviate the street parking problems in these high density areas is to require the developer to design and construct sufficient on-site resident and visitor parking that can realistically meet the needs of the proposed development. Furthermore, and more importantly, any future projects that have these issues (without a change in the current zoning ordinance) will, as a matter of course, be approved as being "Code compliant" as has happened with the Magnolia Townhomes project in our neighborhood. Page Two September 15, 2015 At your suggestion, I did sign up for the "email subscriptions" for the Village and Barrio Updates as referenced in your letter. However, a review of that site was not very helpful in terms of addressing the specific zoning issues raised in my letter, but I did notice on clicking the link to the "zoning map" that the Harding Street Neighbors LLP "26-parcel Assemblage" in the immediate area, referenced in my August lOth correspondence, apparently had a recent zoning change to RO-M (i.e., 30 units per acre). While investigating the issues concerning the Magnolia Townhomes project, and prior to sending my August 10, 2015 letter to the City Council, I pulled up the City's zoning map from the City's website for this area which included the Harding Street Assemblage. At that time (July-August 2015), the Assemblage was zoned "R-2." This R-2 zoning is also reflected on the current tax assessor roll for these properties. I find it interesting and disconcerting that nowhere in your September 10, 2015 letter did you make a reference to or comment upon the Harding Street Assemblage and/or the recent change on the zoning map for this Assemblage. Rather than giving me general comments regarding an on-going master plan, I would have preferred you addressed the specific concerns set forth in my August 10, 2015 letter to the City Council. It would be greatly appreciated if you would provide me responses to the following inquiries: (1) Enclosed is an Assessor's Parcel Map roughly depicting the properties which make up the "Harding Street Assemblage." Please tell me the specific date the zoning for the Harding Street Assemblage changed from R-2 to RO- M on the City's zoning map. (2) Has the City received from Harding Street LLP or anyone a proposed plan for the remapping and/or development of the Harding Street Assemblage properties? If the City has received some proposal from the Harding Street Neighbors LLP or any of its agents or representatives for the remapping and/or proposed development of the Harding Street Assemblage, please provide me with sufficient September 10, 2015 John L. Bailey Hall & Bailey 25014 Las Brisas Road South, Suite B Murrieta, CA 92562 Dear Mr. Bailey: Ccityof Carlsbad Thank you for your August 10, 2015 letter to Carlsbad City Council members on the Zoning Ordinance provision that permits on-street guest parking. On behalf of the city, I am responding as your letter regards a land use standard and a matter specific to the Barrio. As project manager for the Village and Barrio Master Plan, a proposed master plan for these two neighborhoods, it is very helpful to know resident and business owner concerns. The on-street guest or visitor parking standard you have referenced from Zoning Ordinance Section 21.45.060, Table C, Reference C.7, applies to planned developments in residential zones throughout Carlsbad. Staff does not believe it is appropriate to amend city standards and prohibit on-street visitor parking. Instead, we think any problems associated with this provision are probably location-specific and therefore the merits of its application should be considered on a project-by-project basis. With regards to your neighborhood in particular, the proposed master plan would replace Zoning Ordinance standards with Barrio and Village-specific requirements. The city has worked with a planning consultant for the past year in the development of the plan. As part of our work, a parking strategy and standards are being drafted that attempt to recognize the attributes of both the Village and the Barrio. That is why your letter is helpful, and I will share it with our consultant. More information on the master plan is available at www.carlsbadca.gov/villagebarrio. Once the master plan has been drafted, the public will have opportunities to review the document and provide comments. To this end, please sign up for project email updates by selecting "email subscriptions" after clicking the link above and then selecting "Village and Barrio Updates." This will enable you to be apprised of its progress and public input opportunities. Please contact me if you have any questions at {760) 602-4618 or scott.donnell@carlsbadca.gov. Sincerely, SCOTI DONNELL Senior Planner c: Kathy Dodson, City Manager Glen Van Peski, Community and Economic Development Director Don Neu, City Planner Community & Economic Development Planning Division /1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314/760-602-4600 /760-602-8560 f I www.carlsbadca.gov All Receive • Agenda Item # Jr' /-For the Information of the: CITY COUNCIL CHATTEN-BROWN & CARSTENS LLP AC~.,.lL_,_ CA_LCC V 2200 PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY Date ~ity ManagerL_ TELEPHONE:(310) 798-2400 FACSIMILE: (31 0) 798-2402 SUITE 318 HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 90254 www.cbcearthlaw.com September 16, 2015 Via email jennifer.jesser@carlsbadca.gov david.decm·dova@carlsbadca.gov planning@car ls badca. gov clerk@carlsbadca.gov City Council City of Carlsbad c/o Planning Division 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 E-MAIL: MNB@CBCEARTHLA W.COM Re: Final Environmental Impact Report Prepared for City of Carlsbad General Plan & Climate Action Plan, SCH #20 11011004 Honorable Councilmembers: We submit these comments on the City of Carlsbad's Draft General Plan, Draft Climate Action Plan (together "Project"), and the final environmental impact report prepared for these documents on behalf of the San Diego Chapter of the Sierra Club (Sierra Club). In an attempt to ensure its concerns were addressed, the Sierra Club and its members submitted comments on the draft EIR (DEIR) and participated in meetings with the City of Carlsbad in order to strengthen the Climate Action Plan (CAP) and its enforceability. The Sierra Club most recently submitted comments addressing the final EIR (FEIR) on July 17, 2015. While the Sierra Club is heartened that the Planning Commission and the City's planning staff have revised the FEIR and CAP to improve its utility, the Sierra Club remains concerned that the CAP is not sufficiently enforceable as required mitigation for the General Plan. As explained further in the Sierra Club's July 17, 2015 comments, this unenforceability results from the City's failure to consider the General Plan's greenhouse gas emission impacts to be significant. I. The Climate Action Plan Remains Insufficiently Enforceable. In response to the Sierra Club's concerns about the enforceability of the CAP, the City has proposed to modify Policy 9-P.l to state, "Enforce the Climate Action Plan as the city's strategy to mitigate the significant effects of greenhouse gas emissions on climate change." Despite the seeming strength of this language, the proposed revision to Policy 9-P.l would only require enforcement of the CAP to mitigate the significant City Council City of Carlsbad September 16, 2015 Page2 effects of greenhouse gas emissions. The EIR prepared for the General Plan concludes that greenhouse gas impacts will not be significant. As a result, the Sierra Club remains concerned that the CAP remains unenforceable as mitigation required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As discussed in the Sierra Club's previous comments, Sierra Club v. County of San Diego (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 1152, the Court found that the County of San Diego's Climate Action Plan failed to contain concrete and enforceable greenhouse reductions strategies and specific greenhouse gas emission reductions targets. These specific strategies and reductions targets were required mitigation for the County's 2011 General Plan update, which properly admitted that the growth anticipated pursuant to the policies of the General Plan update would result in significant greenhouse gas emissions. Here, despite the City of Carlsbad's best attempts to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions with General Plan policies and compliance with state law, it is certain that the General Plan will lead to significant greenhouse gas emissions. Other cities with progressive climate policies -San Diego and Chula Vista, for example -have admitted as such and adopted climate action plans as mitigation for those impacts. This has resulted both in compliamce with CEQA as well as compliance with state policies designed to fight climate change. The Sierra Club urges the City of Carlsbad to do the same. Only with a truly binding and enforceable CAP can the City meet its climate change goals and provide substantial evidence for the EIR's conclusions about greenhouse gas impacts. From a drafting standpoint, the solution to the CAP enforceability issue is simple. The City need only to modify the Section 3.4 of the EIR regarding "Energy, GHG, and Climate Change" to admit that the cumulative nature of greenhouse emissions and climate change means that the City's anticipated growth under the new General Plan will have significant impacts on climate change, despite the City's inclusion of General Plan policies and a CAP. Once this has occurred, the City's proposed change to Policy 9-P.1 will achieve the desired effect. IT. Additional Strengthening of the Climate Action Plan is Necessary. The Sierra Club is pleased by the City's efforts to strengthen the Climate Action Plan, but the Plan still lacks many of the feasible goals and strategies suggested by commenters. For example, the Sierra Club strongly supports a goal achieving 100 percent renewable energy on the City's electrical grid by 2035, a goal the City of San Diego included in its draft CAP. City Council City of Carlsbad September 16, 2015 Page 3 Conclusion Thank you for your consideration of these comments. The San Diego Chapter of the Sierra Club respectfully requests that the City Council revise the EIR prepared for the General Plan to admit the significance of the General Plan's future greenhouse gas emissions in order to ensure the enforceability of the Carlsbad Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Michelle N. Black Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: Andrea Dykes Monday, September 21, 2015 5:04 PM City Clerk FW: Maintain R15 designation-medium density for Sunny Creek off of El Camino Real in Carlsbad's General Plan From: JoAnn Sweeney [mailto:j.ocean92008@yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 4:52 PM To: Matthew Hall <Matt.Hall@carlsbadca.gov>; Keith Blackburn <Keith.Biackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; Mark Packard <Mark.Packard@carlsbadca.gov>; Lorraine Wood <Lorraine.Wood@carlsbadca.gov>; Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov>; Michael Schumacher <michael.schumacher@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Maintain R15 designation-medium density for Sunny Creek off of El Camino Real in Carlsbad's General Plan Dear Mayor Hall and Carlsbad City Council Members: Please support and approve only medium density for the Sunny Creek area off of El Camino Real in the General Plan. Approve R15-medium density, not R23- high density. Once residents move into the Robertson Ranch master planned community,less than one mile away from the Sunny Creek area, there will be additional increased traffic, noise, and water usage in an already impacted residential area. We have been residents of Carlsbad for eighteen years and appreciate the quality of life Carlsbad has to offer its residents. Please continue to maintain a fair and balanced approach for implementation of the General Plan. Sincerely, William K. Sweeney JoAnn V. Sweeney 5342 Forecastle Court Carlsbad, Ca. 92008 1 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Andrea Dykes Monday/ September 21 1 2015 1:23 PM City Clerk Subject: FW: Ponto Village Development requests to current zoning From: FARHAD SHARIFI [mailto:fhsharifi@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, September 21, 2015 1:18 PM To: Matthew Hall <Matt.Hall@carlsbadca.gov>; Keith Blackburn <Keith.Biackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; Mark Packard <Mark.Packard@carlsbadca.gov>; Lorraine Wood <Lorraine.Wood@carlsbadca.gov>; Michael Schumacher <michael.schumacher@carlsbadca.gov>; Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Sherri Azimi <SHEROPT@aol.com> Subject: Ponto Village Development requests to current zoning September 21, 2015 To: The Honorable Matt Hall, Mayor, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Keith Blackbum, Mayor Pro Tern, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Mark Packard, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Lorraine Wood, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Michael Schumacher, Council Member, City of Carlsbad FROM: Farhad Sharifi, Member of San Pacifico's Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee Re: City of Carlsbad General Phm Update Ponto Beachfront Development zoning density and commercial use (Project for Southern entrance of our beautiful city) 1 The San Pacifico Homeowners Association represents a community of approximately 1,000 Carlsbad citizens living in 500 homes in southwest Carlsbad adjacent to the future development property kllown as the Ponto Beachfront Village. The ultimate development of this southern coastal gateway into Carlsbad will not only have direct and substantial impacts on the San Pacifico neighborhood, but will have a lasting impact on a unique local coastal resource that is such an important part of the Carlsbad lifestyle and the tourism industry. Toward that end, we appreciate all the hard work and support from city staff and the Planning Commission to ensure the land use goals and design standards promulgated by the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan are incorporated into the General Plan Update. More specifically, I would request to reduce the Zoning designation to R-15 on what is commonly known as the Ponto East property as recommended by the Ponto Beach Front Vision Plan. Also zoning designation of GC for the property commonly known as the Ponto West property, should stay with General Commercial in order to promote commerce and tourism at the Southern gate to the City of Carlsbad. It should also be noted that as a result of our interaction with the current developer-applicant for the Ponto East and West properties, we understand they are endeavoring to substantially increase the number of residential units while reducing the commercial area to be developed. the San Pacifico residents remain committed to the more limited residential development and mixed use commercial development prescribed by the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan. As part of the General Plan Update, we ask that the City Council, not allow any amendments to increases to density zoning laws & guidelines, Building height, Common area & public space, and distance from sidewalks & easements. · Respectfully Submitted, Farhad Sharifi 2 Faviola Medina ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: Everett Delano <everett@delanoanddelano.com> Monday, September 21, 2015 11:22 AM City Clerk david.clecordova@carlsbad.ca.gov 9-22-15 City Council meeting, agenda item #15: General Plan, CAP and EIR CCF09212015_0000.pdf Please provide the attached to the IVIayor and City Council. Please confirm receipt. Thank you, Everett Delano Delano & Delano 220 W. Grand Avenue Escondido, CA 92025 (760} 510-1562 (760} 510-1565 (fax) www.delanoanddelano.com 1 ., The C'ry shall not approve any residential development eta density that exceeds the gro'Nth management c:on!rol point lor the. applicable density. range without making the lotlowlog find!ngs: 1. That the project wilt provide sufficient additional public faollftie9 for UJe density ln excess of the control point to en..~re that !he adequacy of the aty's public f~Utles plans Wl1! not be ~ii!ly _lrr~~ed. . ··:. : . 2. That there t1ava boon suffiCient developments approved in the quadrant at d~)'ISilies below the control point to cover the units ln the project above too control pom.t so tl'le approval will nol. result ln exceeding the quadrant lirOO. The City Mamager shall ITX)OllOf all ~rova!$ and report to the Planning Conm'ssion and City Council on an annual basis to ensure that the oonstructlori of residential unils within each quadrant, on a CUI"Tl.llatlve basis, will be e1 or below too growth managE!11'"1Em1 control points and tha!l the overall quadrant llmits are being maintai:ted. · If tha annual reportindlcates in any way that it is likely that the lirm may be exceeded, the Council shaM take appropria!e ac1ion by revising the growth management plan and the City's zoning code to ensure thJ!lt the caillngs wm be maintained. J:ba,City~unc:il or the Planning.Gomrnission shall not find that all necessary public 1ag1i!iSs will 1:!1\1 av.allabl<e concurr.entv.ith need .as required by the Public F.acililles Element arid the Clt;y's 1986 growth management plan unless the pro:vlsion of such laciUties Is QUS£8,nt~,nln· guaran11eelng that n;e· fadlities will be provided errphasis st''JSll. be given to ensuring good traffic ·c~lalion, schools,. parKs. Jibrruies; .open spaca and reaeational amenitles._.Pubf'IO fdiiies may be added. Tile. Cit)' Council shall not materially reduce publiC facilitles-wlfhout1makfng com!Sp(lndlog reduCtions In rBS1d&ntial de~: NOlhing In ·this t!Eietion sball be conSlrued as changing the requifei'I'IOOt that any specme resldentiall density above the rrinlrnlm allowed by the Land Use Element density ranges llnd the a,ppllellbla zoning shall be justified Ell;OOrding to the requil'emants of the appropriate General Pl~m and :.l!Onlng proVisions. (Conllnuad on next page} EIBIB!'!' ttA• RESOLUTION NO. 8796 PUBLIC FACILITY AND SERVICE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Facility/Service City Administrative Facilit.i.es Library Wastewater Treatment Capacit:y Parks · Drainag-e CirculatiOn Fire open spac.e Schools sewer Collection System Water Distribution Svstea -~. J. Standard 1500 square feet per 1 ,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. 800 square feet per 1 ,000 population must be scheduled for construction within a five year period. Sewer plant capacity is adequate for at least a five year period. Three acres of community park or special use park per 1 ,000 population within the Park District, :!!lUst be schedu1ed for construction 'W-ithin a five year period. Drainage facilities must be provided as requ~ed by the City concurrent with develo,t:ment. No road segment o-r intersection in tbe zone nor any road segment Qr intersection out of the zone which is impacted by development in the zone shall be projected to exceed a se.rvice level. C durinq off- peak hours, nor service level Q during peak hours~ Impacted means where 20i or n:ore of the traffic generated by the local facility management zone will use the road segment or intersection. No more than 1 ,SOO dwelling unita outside of a· five minute resp!')nse time. 'Fifteen percent ot the total land area in the zon:e exclusive.of environmentally constrained non- developable land must be set aside for per-manent open space and must be available concurrent with deve.lopnent4 School capacity to meet projected enxollmant within the zone as determined by the appropriate school district must be provided prior to projected occupancy. Trunk line capacity to meet demand as determined by the appropri.ate sewer district must be providetll concurrent with deve1o~t. Line capacity to meet demand as determined by the appropriate water district must be provided con- current with development. A minimum 1 0 average day stora9'e-eapaei ty tn1.1st be provided concurrent with development. . ........._, l 2 3 4 5 REEOI..UTION NO,. 8797 ----~--. A"RBSOLU~IOI OF THE CITY COUNCrL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBA~, CALIFORNiA, ADOPTING THE CITYWIDE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS PI..AN TO BE USED WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AS REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE NO. 9808 {GROWTH MANAGEMENT ORDINANCE). WBBREAS, on July 1, 1986, the City Council adopted 6 Ordinance No. 9808 which established a Growth Management Program 7 for the City of carlsbad; and 8 WHEREAS, one of the primary purposes of Ordinance No. 9 9808 was to prevent growth unless adequate public facilities and 10 services to serve the growth is provided when they are .needed in a 11 phased and logical way; and -. . 12 WHEREAS, the Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan is 13 the first phase in the implementation 'of the Growth Management l.4 r_rogram and .. is n.eed.ed to set the f:ra:me"lltOrk to allow Local Facili+ 15 ianagement Plans to be submitted, and .1 1 \ 8 6 ~hnde adopt::R::• :i ::c::::c::. ::~:: :t ::n °::i: •:::y:::e 9: 0:c i: ::::: es r Improvements Plan; 19 I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the 20 ity of Carlsbad, California, that the City~ide Facilities and 21 mprovements Plan as contained on attached Exhibit •A• is hereby 22 dopted and shall be used in the implementation of Ordinance No. 23 808 -The Carlsbad Growth Management Ordinance. 24 Ill 25 Ill 26 Ill 27 Ill 28 Ill -l , IJ r-C:\ c. ClTYWIOE FACILITIES AND IMPROVEMENTS PLAN Adopted by City council Resolutio~ No. S797 . " Septemhter 23, 1986 MARY B. CASLER, MAYOR Claude A. tewis, Vice Mayor Bichard Chick, Coun~ilmember Ann J. Kulchin, Councilmember Mark v. Pettine, Councilmember Prank D. Aleshire, City Manager V·incent F. Biondo, City Attorney Marty Orenyak, Community Development Director Michael J. Bolzmiller, Planning Director PLA~ PREPARA~ION Michael J. Rol~ailler, Planninq Dire~tor James C. Bagaman$ Research/Analysis Manager Gordon Peterson, Systems Atl<llyst Bobbie loder, Administrative Assistant II v ioJd. Bowen, Graphics Consultantst Fay Round, Automated Systems Philip 0. Carter, ~dministrative Assiat~nt I! Gra.ce Manues, Administrative Assistant I Anita Ramoa-Bonas Secretary II Barbara Nedros,. Word Processing Operator Paul Zucker, Pl&nninq SANOAG • Automated Systems and Gr&phics Special AsaistanE..!,_ From: costa Real Mu~icipal Water District Leucadia County Water District san Marcos county Water District Olivenhaia Municipal Water District Carlsbad Unified School District Encinita, Onion Elementary School District san Oieguito Onion High School District san Marcos Unified School District Lee Rautenkran~, Information Systems Director Charlie Grimm, Assistant Planning Director Jim Elliott, Finance Director cliff Lange, Library Director oave Bradatreet, Parks & Recreation Director Jim Thoapson, Pire Chief Roger Greer, Ut.ilitfes i Maintenance Dirf!Ctot' ... :. ~--.:..< SECTION I S!fC'!'!ON II SECT!O!i III SECTION IV SECTION v SECTION VI SECTION VII. SECTION VIII SECTION IX APPENDIX I APPENDIX II APPENDIX III APPENDIX IV APPENDIX V APPENDIX VI TABLE OF CONTENTS overview Page 1 Content~ of Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Page Requirement for Local Facility Management Plan and Relationship to Citywide Plah Page 3 Buildout Projeetions and Assumptions PagEt 5 Citywide Requirements for Public Facilitiea and Services ... Existing to Buildout Page 12 Guidelines for Preparation of Local Facility Management Plans Financing Options and Policies Growth Management Information System Applicability· to Gtovth Management Ordinance (Section 2190 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code) Ordinance No. 9808 ·Growth Management Progr•m Paqe 56 Page 7 o Page 78 Paqe 9 0 Resolution No. 8796, Establishing the Clarified Performance Standards Resolution No. 8797, Approving the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Resolution No. 8798, Establishing. the Guidelines for the Preparation of the Local Facility Management Plans R~solution No. 9799, Establishing a Local Facility Management Plan Processing Fee Resolution No. 8800, Directing Staff. to Prepare the Local Facility Management Plans !or Zones 1 through 6 FiGURES 1 • ~1 Pacili ty· Ma.nagsent zones 2. ccaparieon. o,t Cit:rwide and r..ocal Phns 3. ~ity Caa.trol M;s.p 4.. Citywide Acreaqe Xn:fonnation S., Projected t>wel:t.i~ Units and Population at Build<lut 7. Oeteratin&tion ~:r.f Ccapliance with Performance Standards 8 U.l Publie Suildir19s -City Administrative Pacilities B(S) Public Buildings -Libraries 8 (C) Public BuildiE\9:1 -Pire Statio:u 9 • Sewer Service 10. Sever District Uour.1daries 11. Parka 12. Drai.naqe 13. Circulation 14. Fire 15.. Open s pa.oe 16. Schools 17. School District l!owLdari.u 1 9. Water Dbtrict Bom:iclaries 2t. Entity Levels 22. Data Availability 23,. Data Availability (M~ltri.x: Forntat) 24. Relationship to P;ueel-Level Geobase 25. Informational Relatic)J1ship overview lO 15 22 27, 50 28, 51 :u 37 43 45 41 48 53 54 82 83 85-81 sa 89 PARKS PER~ORMAHCE S~ANDARD Three acrea o:f coa•unit.y Park ol:' Special Cse Area per 1 ,ooo population within the Park District, aust be scheduled for conatruetion within a five year period. ADDITIONAL FACILITY PLANNING INFORMATION A. 1 • The Growth Management Park standard has been developed to address Community Park and Special Use Areas toqether. Combining the two will provide greater flexibility for the Parks and Recreation Department to address the future needs ot each qua~rant as development occurs. The Parks and Recreation Department recently prepared an analysis of existing park acreage in the city which produced the following information: .INVENTORY Buildout Assumptions~ ~rthwest guadrant Current At Buildout · Northeut guadrant Current At Buildout southwest guadrant Current At Buildout Southeast ~uadrant Current At Buildout Po~lation 25,039 39,479 5,607 20,843 5,416 31,775 16,128 -42,817 '.fetal Required Acres 75.12 118 •• u 16.10 62.53 Hi.23 95.33 48.38 128.45 2. kiating CCIIIlun.ity Parks and Special Use Areas: 'lorthveat Qudrant C~ity Parks (Developed) Holiday Hosp Grove Laquna Riviera M4qee Total Dev-eloped Community Parks (Undeveloped) Macario Canyon -credit Cannon Lake Total Undeveloped Acres 5.4 27 .o 5.8 3.0 Acres 25.0 6.7 31.7 PAR~S (Continued) southe&at Quadrant CO•llunity Parks (Developed) La Costa Canyon Stagecoach Total Developed Coaaunity Paries (Undeveloped) Hacario canyon -credit Alqa Norte Carrillo Ranch Total Undeveloped Special Use Areas Cadeneia Fuerta Puerte Elementary Levante St. Elizabeth Total C., ADEQUACY EVALUATION Acres 9.0 28.0 Acr~s 25.0 2l.O 10.3 Acres 4. t 3.6 2 .. 0 s.o t • 0 Existing Acreage Acres Required -CCIII!tuni ty Special Use Per Standard Park (Oev) Area. Northwest Quadrant "75. 12 42.20 39.10 Northeast Quadrant 16.10 26 .. 30 4.00 southwest Quadrant 16.23 12 .. 00 0 Southeast Quadrant 48.38 37.00 18 .. 70 Citywide Totals 155.83 117 .so 61 .. 80 37.0 S8.30 18.7 Total Acreaqe 81.30 30.30 12.00 55.70 179.30 On a Citywide basis 1 the overall parks acreaqe is adequate. a:ovever, the Growth Management Program requires each quadrant to provide the appropr.iate acreage in relation to its residential populationo Por tbat reason, the southwest quadrant does not meet the p•rforaance standard and is deficient. The three .other quadrants ••et the performance standard. It should be noted as shown in the existing acreage figures that in certain quadrants-there exists a greater proportion of Special Use Area acreage as compared to community Park acreage. The performance standard allows the Parks and Recreation Department the ability to more properly address the individual quadrant needs for either Community Park or Special Use Area acreage as local plans are submitted. -35- ~. \ AlternatiV•!. There are several alternative• which could be considered to rectify this deficiency, however, after discussing these options staff believes one of tha follovinq should be considered: 1. Amend the current FiVG Year C.I.P. to include fuAding for Atnt parJc facility in the Southwest Quadrant ~nich would require deleting other projects. 2. Direct staff to attempt to resolve this deficiency based on the I.cu:al Facility Management Plans which will be receiv~d after tb~ approval of ibe Cityvida Facilities and Improvements Plan • . · -36- ··~. JOOIN&I.TTI." LN B) AREAS WHERe t a•• AJ:)Ot1'10HAL PERMANENT OPEN S'ACE 1'0 IE PROVIDED EXa.USIV! OP ENVIACIHMEHT AU. Y COolS TRAINED l.N() -45- FIGURE 15 OPEN SP.AC S!!PTet.fiER 11, till City ot Cart~ .~ OPBlf SPACB PERFORKA5C& S~ABDARDz rifteen percent of the total land area in the zone exclusive ot. environmentally constrained non:. developable land must be set aside for permanent open space and must be available concurrent with development. ADDITIONAL PACILITY PLANNING INPORMATON: The precedinq cap hiqhlights those araas <)f thll! eity which will be required to comply with the open space performance standard. The other· areas of thi city are already developed or meet or exceed the require•ent. Local Facility Manaqement Zones 1, 2, 3, 4; 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 16 already meet the standard while Zon•a 11, 1 2 , t 3 , 1 4 , l 5 , 17 , 1 8 , 1 9 , 2 0 , 2 1 , 2 2 , 2 3., 2 4 ~ and 2 5 must detail in their local plan how they will Beet thi• standard. -46- Faviola Medina ________________________ , ___ , __________________________________________________ __ From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Jennifer Jesser Monday, September 21, 2015 9:34AM Shelley Collins; Faviola Medina FW: City of Carlsbad City Council Proposed Amendments to General Plan Concerned Citizen's Petition 2 9.18.15.pdf; SP GPU City Council Letter FINAL.docx Hi ladies. This letter was emailed to us yesterday. it pertains to the General Plan update agenda bill. Let me know if I need to do anything more with this letter. Thanks Jennifer From: john Iundy [mailto:jklundyl@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 8:13 PM To: David de Cordova; Lance Schulte Cc: gbuhr@coastal.ca.gov; jtnardil@msn.com; 'Sebahar Family Email'; Jason Goff; Jennifer Jesser; Don Neu; 'Jean Camp' Subject: Re: City of Carlsbad City Council Proposed Amendments to General Plan Dave, With Lance out of the country, I am sending you a letter for the City Council for Tuesday's hearing regarding the General Plan update on behalf of the San Pacifico community. I'd Iike to thank you and your staff for working with us throughout this process. As you are aware, we are supportive of the recommendation of staff and the Planning .Commission to the General Plan update as it relates to the Ponto Beachfront area. Please let me know if there are any questions regarding the attached letter and petition. We are very appreciative of the hard work of you and your staff and look forward to working with you to ensure that Ponto is developed right. Thank you, Kelsey Lundy On Thursday, September 10, 2015 9:10AM, David de Cordova <David.deCordova@carlsbadca.gov> wrote: Hi Lance, The City Council agenda materials will be posted on the city's website by the Friday (9/18) before the meeting. Dave From: Lance Schulte [mailto:meyers-schulte@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 11:42 PM To: David de Cordova Cc: gbuhr@coastal.ca.gov; jtnardi1 @msn.com; 'Sebahar Family Email'; Jason Goff; Jennifer Jesser; Don Neu; 'Kelsey Lundy'; 'Jean Camp' Subject: RE: City of Carlsbad City Council Proposed Amendments to General Plan Dave: 1 Thanks! Your email and attachment are very much appreciated. Thank you for keeping us informed. We are in the process of communicating back to our 400+ San Pacifico households and this information is helpful. It is a lot of work to craft a General Plan. Our thanks to the Carlsbad Planning Staff! When and how will the Staff report be available? Thank you again and to the entire planning staff, Lance From: David de Cordova [mailto:David.deCordova@carlsbadca.gov] Sent: Friday, September 4, 2015 7:57PM To: Lance Schulte Cc: gbuhr@coastal.ca.gov; jtnardi1 @msn.com; Sebahar Family Email; Jason Goff; Jennifer Jesser; Don Neu; Kelsey Lundy; Jean Camp Subject: RE: City of Carlsbad City Council Proposed Amendments to General Plan Hi Lance, We are aiming for a September 22 City Council hearing date, and will be confirmed when public notices go out. There are no other public hearing dates scheduled for the General Plan update (GPU); however, the City Council could continue the meeting to another date if they need more time to complete their deliberations in deciding whether to certify the Final EIR and approve the GPU project. The item will be a public hearing and public comment is welcome; but keep in mind that the primary focus of the hearing wiH be to consider the Planning Commission's recommendations on the GPU. Therefore, oral testimony by the public should be limited to the Planning Commission recommendations or any changes to the project or Final EIR, and that repeating the testimony given to the Council at the joint meeting on July 18 should be avoided. I can confirm that we have received the correspondence you attached and we will ensure that it is included in the City Council agenda packet. Attached is the written correspondence we've received since the July 18 meeting. Dave tl:~~- {_ City of rlsbad David de Cordova Principal Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4604 office (760) 602-8559 fax 2 David.deCordova@carlsbadca.gov From: Lance Schulte [mailto:rneyers-schulte@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 2015 3:33 PM · To: Don Neu; David de Cordova; ,Jennifer Jesser; Jason Goff Cc: gbuhr@coastal.ca.gov; jtnardi1 @msn.com; Sebahar Family Email; Kelsey Lundy; Jean Camp Subject: City of Carlsbad City Council Proposed Amendments to General Plan Hi Don, Dave and Jennifer: I have heard, and wanted to confirm for our San Pacifico Community, that the City Council Public Hearing on the General Plan Update will be on Sept 22nd. Is the that the first PH date and are other scheduled? I also heard that the upcoming City Council Public Hearing will allow public testimony. Can you confirm? ! was told last month that the public hearing was closed in July and the hearing is only for City Council deliberation, although the City Council could receive written testimony. That is why we provided you the flowing/attached emailed testimony on August to be given to thEt City Council and Planning Commission. Also, is the written public testimony available for review prior to the public hearing? If so, who should we contact to review that? Thanks, Lance From: Lance Schulte [mailto:meyers··Schulte@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, August 17, 2015 10:57 AM To: Don.Neu@carlsbadca.gov; david.decordova@carlsbadca.gov; jennifer.jesser@carlsbadca.gov; jason. goff@carlsbadca. gov Cc: gbuhr@coastal.ca.gov; jtnardi1 @)msn.com; Sebahar Family Email (sebbiesixpack@att.net); Kelsey Lundy (jklundy1@sbcglobal.net); Jean Camp (l§anscamp@yahoo.com) Subject: City of Carlsbad City Council Proposed Amendments to General Plan Dear Don, David, Jenifer and Jason: Attached is a communication the San Pacifico Community would like to provide to the Carlsbad City Council and Planning Commission regarding the proposed General Plan regarding Ponto. Don, I understand communications to the City Council and Planning Commission should be submitted to you? If there is a more appropriate protocol please let us know and we will use it. We understand this communication as past communications will be in the public record and be forwarded to the California Coastal Commission with the Local Coastal Program for the City and Ponto area. If that is not correct, please let us know and protocol for providing that formal communication. Thank you and your staff again for considering our prior communications and concerns and your General Plan recommendations to preserve the commercial Village Heart of Ponto, and deemphasize housing which is a low Coastal priority land use. Planning and developing Ponto Right is critical as Ponto is a precious resource -one of the last remaining open areas along Coastal San Diego County. Ponto is the last remaining area in South Coastal Carlsbad that can provide a needed public 3 park, a community gathering place and a Coastal commercial Village in an area (South Coastal Carlsbad) that is lacking these land uses for Citizens and visitors. Thank you again for considering our concerns as Carlsbad citizens and for helping achieve a vision for Ponto that will be a lasting legacy for Carlsbad and our Coast. The San Pacifico Community and HOA Ponto Development Committee is meeting with Shopoff, the proposed Ponto developer, to hopefully work towards common ground during their redesign of their development proposal for Ponto. If you like, we can keep you informed as progress with our meetings with Shopoff. If so, please let us know the protocol for communications. For the San Pacifico Community and HOA Sincerely, Lance Schulte 4 CONCERNED CITIZEWS PETmON PONITO BEACHFRONT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, 2015 We are residents and citizens of the south Carlsbad area who have concerns over some critical elements of the current Developers proposal for developm•~nt of the south Ponto Beach area and the Ponto Beachrront Villages East and W~ proje.cts. We oppose any changes to the current General Plan that would result in a reduction of development quality standards, such as inappropriate land use, incr·eased unit density and residential use on the western portion of the site.; increased hetghts of structures; redoced easements and/or setbacks; and kiss of community and open space. The current Develope(s proposal prqvides for inappropriate dens}ty and inappropriate use of. this precious coastallapd that is contrary to current legislation. We o.ppose any amendments to the current Genera.! Plan that would allow this inappropriate density. We oppose the planned height of the structures in the Devefopef's proposaf.The proposed ,~:::;;structures would Be, inconsistent with other homes/structures in the area, would lfkely cause excessive noise fronr·ttf~-railroad to be bounc~d back on existing homes/communities, is inconsistent with a more balanced land use, and would provide an unsightly southern entrance to our otherwise beautiful City of Carlsbad. CONCERNED CITIZEN'S PETITION PONTO BEACHFRONT DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, 2015 We are residents and citizens of the south Carlsbad area who have concerns over some critical elements of the current Developer's proposal for development ofthe south Ponto Beach area and the Ponto Beachfront Villages East and West projects. We oppose any changes to the current General Plan that would result in a reduction of development quality standards, such as inappropriate la"nd use, increased unit density and residential use on the western portion of the site, increased heights of structures, reduced easements and/or setbacks, and loss of community and open space. The current Developer's proposal provides for inappropriate density and inappropriate use of this precious coastal land that is contrary to current legislation. We oppose any amendments to the current General Plan that would allow this inappropriate density. We oppose the planned height of the structures in the Developer's proposaL The proposed 3-story structures would be inconsistent with other _homes/structures in the area, would likely cause excessive noise from the railroad to be bounced back on existing homes/communities, is inconsistent with a more balanced land use, and would provide an unsightly southern entrance to our otherwise beautiful City of Carlsbad. PRINTED NAME N?tfl':1~~t ADDRESS <986{ P~r Tr~Dr ctZOit SIGNATURE \~-• -....._L ~~~&r~-- September 21, 2015 To: The Honorable Matt Hall, Mayor, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Keith Blackburn, Mayor Pro Tern, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Mark Packard, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Lorraine Wood, Council Member, City of Carlsbad The Honorable Michael Schumacher, Council Member, City of Carlsbad FROM: Jim Nardi, San Pacifico HOA President, on behalf of the Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee Re: City of Carlsbad General Plan Update The San Pacifico Homeo·wners Association represents a community of approximately 1,000 Carlsbad citizens living in 500 homes in southwest Carlsbad adjacent to the future development property known as the Ponto Beachfront Village. The ultimate development of this southern coastal gateway into Carlsbad will not only have direct and substantial impacts on the San Pacifico neighborhood, but will have a lasting impact on a unique local coastal resource that is such an important part of the Carlsbad lifestyle and the tourism industry. Within the last 10 years, the San Pacifico residents participated in a multi-year analysis and planning process with other Carlsbad residents, city staff and elected officials to ensure the Ponto Beachfront Village area would be developed responsibly in accordance with the City of Carlsbad's high quality stc:mdards. The result was the December 2007 City Council approval of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan and certification ofEIR 05-05. Since then, through our Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee, the San Pacifico residents have carefully monitored any development applications and participated in the General Plan update process to ensure the principals, standards and guidelines contained in the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan are adhered to. Toward that end, we appreciate all the hard work and support from city staff and the Planning Commission to ensure the land use goals and design standards promulgated by the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan are incorporated into the General Plan Update. More specifically, we support the city staff and Planning Commission recommendation for the R-23 zoning designation on what is commonly known as the Ponto East property, with a maximum of 124 residential units allowed, and a zoning designation of GC for the property corilmonly known as the Ponto West property, with a maximum of 12 residential units allowed for this commercial mixed-use area. Our concurrence with these General Plan designations for the Ponto East and West properties is not to be construed as support for any specific development plan or application. More particularly, we consider these indicated land use and residential densities to be maximum limits, which upon review and analysis of any specific development application many not be achievable or supported by the San Pacifico residents. ·· It should also be noted that as a result of our interaction with the current developer-applicant for the Ponto East and West properties, we understand they are endeavoring to substantially increase the number of residential units while reducing the commercial area to be developed. Notwithstanding any developer-sponsored market studies or other arguments being offered to support alternative land uses, the San Pacifico residents remain committed to the more limited residential development and mixed use commercial development prescribed by the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan. Prior to the July 17th joint public hearing of the Carlsbad City Council and Planning Commission, we submitted a petition with over 400 signatures, both printed and online, showing the overwhelming support from Carlsbad citizens for the General Plan update to continue the vision of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan and concerns we've expressed in previous correspondence with the city and since that time we have collected over an additional350, for a total of over 750. We have attached the additional printed petitions. As part of the General Plan Update, we ask that the City Council reaffirm its commitment to the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan and concur with the recommendations of city staff and Planning Commission. Respectfully Submitted, Jim Nardi, San Pacifico HOA President on behalf of the Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee Cc: David de Cordova, Principle Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development, Planning Division Kathy Dodson, Interim city Manager, City of Carlsbad Jason Goff, Associate Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Jennifer Jesser, Senior Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Don Neu, City Planner, City of Carlsbad, Community and Economic Development Department, Planning Division Gabriel Buhr, California Coastal Commission ,Kira Linberg From: Sent: To: Subject: Tim Thompson <timgthompson@att.net> Monday, September 21, 2015 9:31 AM Help vote on Climate Action Plan To all city council members, when you vote tomorrow on the Climate Action Plan, that you add to the plan a goal of 100%!! This issue (clean energy/environmental protection) is too important to ignore. Will you also set up a Community Choice Energy plan which other cities have done. Do the right thing. Stand out and show leadership. Thank you. Tim Thompson, Carlsbad, Calif. 1 City Council City of Carlsbad supposed salt marsh is a low spot where the old offramp/ onramp from Highway 101 went under the bridge. The existing stormdrain sy.stem which drained that area is still in the ground but the inlets were capped when the ramps were shut down. I protest the misrepresentation and reserve the right to address it further in the future, if this is in any way being relied upnn in making findings or determinations for the GPU project. Should you have any questions regarding this correspondence please contact me directly.' Respectfully Submitted;· p~£7)(~ Dalel.X~?- 09-17-15;08:24AM;From:Gresham!Savage To: 17607209461 ;9098900687 # 21 3 \ GRESHAM ! SAVAGE Br'l~r1t.Mcl\1;>r\it;~ltii•Cr~~~h.,mSnva~;l'.com · Snn [krnMdino Offici.! (909) 890-4499 · {i1X (909) 890-9877 I 'I ':I ·,: :,, ...... Septer.nber16,201~ i ' ' \ \ i VIA E-MAIL: (Clerk@lcarlsbadca.gov) and FACSIMILE (7~0) 720·9461 . i I Honorable Mayor Jnd City Council City of Carlsbad i I 1635 Faraday Ave \ Carlsbad, California 92008 I . . Re: Sunny Creek Commercial Opportunity Site: General Plan Land Use Designation Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: Our firm. represents Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Walmart"), the property owner of the property referred to in the General Plan Land Use element as "Sunny Creek Commercial". Walmart requests the Cily Council to change the land·use design.ation on the Sunny Creek Commercial property to R23, as recor.nmended by Staff and analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the General Plan. The Planning Commission recommended the designation be R15, not the R23, but the R15 designation significantly impairs the ability of this property to be developed in an economical and reasonable mann~r. As you are aware, the Sunny Creek Commercial property is located within the City's Growth Management "Zone 15". Development within Zone 15 requires construction of substantial infrastructure prior to construction of new development. Due to the high cost of the Zone 15 lnfrastructure, coupled with the City's requirement that twenty percent (20%) of the residential units built on the Sunny Creek Commercial property be set aslde as affordable housing, the ability to develop this property is very limited. The R23 designation is necessary to enable development to occur that is not only financially feasible, but also able to participate in the Zone 15 infrastructure financing, as well as comply with the development goals and standards set by the City. Staff's recommendation for the R23 designation on this property was based on not only input from the community, but also a thorough analysis of the infrastructure .. · .. \ I< I 1: · .. \ r: I )I'·' I ;;sn l:!n~l ("'(ls[li(:tlity L:tllC. Sui•·~ 300 • S~lll lknwnlin(l, Ctllii'Nnia 1)240X ,. :· I i' ·dill J75rl Univcr~ity Av~:nut•, Suilc 250 • Riv.:n;ide. C''Hiifumia <12501 ·, · ·. 1111 • .1' 5!'0 W~:c;l (" S~r·~:cl. Suire fRIO • ~an Diqto. C;llifnr·nia 9~1()( I' l' .. '. ·.,, .J ; i ·· 333 Snulh Hnpc Sfn:cr, JS'h J'Jn(ll' • Lnl' 1\ngcll~S. Calil~ll'fliil Wl(}71 G n:sh;lmSnv;ag~.CI\Ill W211 ~-RI!_MGMT·CA·CAIU..$0AD;_s'!'OR!iJ15724 --1776564,1 _______________________ .. ,, __ 09-17-15;08:24AM;From:Gresham1Savage Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Carlsbad September 16, 2015 Page2 To: 17607209461 ;9098900687 # 3/ 3 and environment by the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the General Plan. The EIR shows that the R23 density can be accommodated on the property and also requires any development proposal to be further analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. In addition, development plans for the site will still require review and approval by the City. The subsequent environmental review and approvals by the City of development plans for the Sunny Creek Commercial site "'lllill ensure that development meets the City's expectations and does not impact adjacer1t properties. The R23 designation is consistent with staff recommendation, consistent with the analysis in the ElR and assists the City in meeting its low and moderate housing requil"ernent established by the State. Accordingly, Walmart requests that the R23 land use designation be reinstated on the Sunny Creek Commercial property. Very truly yours, ______. ~ Brent R. McManigal, for GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN, A Professional Corporation BRM:djb WZIIS-Ril.MOMT·CA-CII.IlLSDAD:_STORE_//5724 ··1776564.1 --" .... ·--···----·--,-----~-- Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 11:52 AM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Alixe Fesler Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:15 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Alixe Fesler 1 1825 Butters Rd Carlsbad, CA 92008-1004 alixefesler@yahoo.com 2 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:51 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Scott Mcgee Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:15 AM To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Scott Mcgee 3 PO Box 131495 Carlsbad, CA 92013-1495 {760) 473-9436 sfmphotog@gmail.com 4 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday; September 18, 2015 11:51 AM To: City Clerk; David de Cordova; Jennifer Jesser Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Carol Gajewski Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:15 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Carol Gajewski 5 7034 Rockrose Ter Carlsbad, CA 92011-3955 sbsbycl@aol.com 6 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:09 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Gabriella Ladi Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:16 AM To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. ' Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Gabriella Ladi 7 3431 Calle Del Sur Carlsbad, CA 92009-8618 gabriella.ladi@gmail.com 8 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:08 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Vonnie Varner Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:16 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwid~. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go upS?-million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. We are installing solar at our house this month. Yes, there are hurdles but every journey starts with one step .... But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, 9 Vonnie Varner 6933 Sitio Cordero Carlsbad, CA 92009-6092 vonnievm @gma il.com Hi Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 11:08 AM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Christine Lewis Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:16 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Christine Lewis 11 6691 Halite PI Carlsbad, CA 92009-1738 (760) 683-5290 christn.lewis@me.com 12 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 11:08 AM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Van Dien Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:16 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of ow energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obsta~les put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council cari provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Stephen Van Dien 13 2628 La Costa Ave Carlsbad, CA 92009-7324 .svandienl@yahoo.com 14 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 11:07 AM Jennifer Jesser; City Clerk; David de Cordova FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of John Garcia Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:45 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, John Garcia 15 6771 Follette St Carlsbad, CA 92011-5052 {619) 884-3701 garciajohng44@gmail.com 16 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 11:07 AM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Tim Thompson Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:45 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Tim Thompson 17 Carlsbad Carlsbad, CA 92009-6722 timgthompson@att.net 18 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 11:07 AM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Lois Boncer Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:45 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Lois Boncer 19 5219 El Arbol Dr Carlsbad, CA 92008-4317 (760) 438-3431 lois@aardvarktozebra.com 20 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday/ September 18/ 2015 11:07 AM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Laura Shames Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:45 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Laura Shames 21 7522 Gibraltar St Apt B Carlsbad, CA 92009-7408 (310) 486-7647 llsha mes@cs.com 22 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:07 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of lan Burgess Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:45 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 181 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members} I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan} which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit} in economic and general quality of life terms1 from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses} allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years} the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes} and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy} everyone should have it1 and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely} ian Burgess 23 3444 Clear Cliff Ct Apt 202 Carlsbad, CA 92010-4683 (760} 729-2315 zero_gravity_flow@yahoo.com 24 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:06 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Debra Cunningham Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:16 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Debra Cunningham 25 30811/2 Highland Dr Carlsbad, CA 92008-1914 (760) 646-6826 littledebscakes@hotmail.com 26 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:06 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Vonnie Varner Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:16 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. We are installing solar at our house this month. Yes, there are hurdles but every journey starts with one step .... But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, 27 Vonnie Varner 6933 Sitio Cordero Carlsbad, CA 92009-6092 vonnievm@gmail.com 28 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:06 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Gabriella Ladi Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:16 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $.1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Gabriella Ladi 29 3431 Calle Del Sur Carlsbad, CA 92009-8618 gabriella.ladi@gmail.com 30 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:03 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Constance Snow Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:15 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Constance Snow 31 1785 Blackbird Cir Carlsbad, CA 92011-5010 phizzy54@sbcglobal.net 32 faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 11:03 AM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy GP email -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Dan Mccoy Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 10:15 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Dan Mccoy 33 .5817 Dryden PI Carlsbad, CA 92008-.5576 da n.mccoy@westonsolutions.com 34 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: FYI-General Plan update email -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 11:01 AM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Nathan Riding Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 8:15AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trenq and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Nathan Riding 35 1814 0 St Apt 4 Sacramento, CA 95811-6177 nathan.riding@sierraclub.org 36 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: Andrea Dykes Thursday, September 17, 2015 4:24PM City Clerk FW: Excessive Development in NE quadrant of El Camino Real From: Patricia Parsons [mailto:pat@parsons.org] Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 4:19PM To: Matthew Hall <Matt.Hall@carlsbadca.gov>; Keith Blackburn <Keith.Biackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; markpackard@carlsbadca.gov; torraine.wood@carlsbadca.gov; Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Terry Parsons <terry@parsons.org> Subject: Excessive Development in NE quadrant of El Camino Real As concemed residents of Carlsbad, my husband and I are asking the City Council members, in their final vote on September 22nd, to approve the revised zoning of Sunny Creek prope1iy. On July 22, 2015, the Planning Commission agreed with us (the residents) that increased housing density and the resultant traffic, water usage, and congestion was not desired in this section of El Camino Real. We appreciate your listening to us and giving us your support. Thank you. Pat & Terry Parsons 1 Faviola Medina -----------------------~----------------------------------------------------- From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Council Internet Email Thursday, September 17, 2015 1:25 PM City Clerk FW: CAP: Sierra Club Comments Potential for Renewable Energy in San Diego Region.pdf; 08-19-15 Resolution No. 5-1.516 Support of School Energy Cost Reform.pdf From: Stephen Gold [mailto:stephen--golcl@att.net] Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 12:47 PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Pete Hasapopoulos <phasapopoulos@hotmail.com>; John Garcia <garciajohng44@gmail.com> Subject: Fw: CAP: Sierra Club Comments Dear Mayor Hall and Council Members, In anticipation of your vote on the Climate Action Plan next week, I am writing on behalf of the Sierra Club to request that you add a !goal to achieve 100% renewable energy on the city-wide electrical grid by 2035 or sooner. Before I continue, I'd like to encourage you to watch the video our Carlsbad High School students made regarding the goal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFeYt3C-5dc. As we have noted in meetings with you and during public comments, the City of San Diego has a 100% clean energy goal in their draft CAP. Mayor Faulconer supports this goal. Rather than shooting for twenty years out like San Diego, some American cities have already hit 1 00%, with Aspen, Colorado the latest to do it: https://cleantechnica.com/2015/09/15/aspen-stands-tall-third-us- city-achieves-100-renewable-energ_y( Lancaster, California (pop. 160,000) is pursuing this goal and doing some amazing things: http://www.cityoflancasterca.org/index.aspx?page=1499 in terms of partnerships with their schools, residential developers, and the solar industry. They also have Community Choice Energy. There are numerous technologies and program tools like Community Choice Energy to rapidly move toward 100%. To give you an E3Xample of what is within your grasp consider local solar. In 2005 the San Diego Regional RenewabiH Energy Group--which included SDG&E staff--issued a report saying that Carlsbad's residential rooftop solar potential for 2020 is 131 megawatts (see Table 2.6 in the attached report). That estimate was made ten years ago. Rooftop solar cost has gone down over 50% since then. Carlsbad's commercial rooftop and parking lot potential would add another 200 or more megawatts for a total potential of well over 300 megawatts by 2020. To put that in perspective, the peak demand on the electricity grid in Carlsbad is approximately 200 megawatts. Also, you might not be aware that the Carlsbad Unified School District board recently passed a resolution (see attachment #2) speaking to the great difficulty they are having with electricity rates and adoption of clean energy due to SDG&E. This is detrimental to maintaining a first rate educational system in Carlsbad. But our school district shouldn't have to tackle all this 1 alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that schools, businesses, and residents reap economic and environmental benefits from clean energy and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only you can provide the type of leadership that we need to briri'g all of us together, and the only way you can do that is by making this our own little mission to the moon-which, by the way, was accomplished 46 years ago and made use of solar panels. Sincerely, Stephen Gold Volunteer Leader, Sierra Club Carlsbad 2 Carlsbad Utitled Scf"O·:JI [!;S:rict RESOLUTION NO. 05-1516 6225 El Camino Real • Carlsbad, CA 92009 760-331-5000 p • 760-431-6707 f RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF SCHOOL ENERGY COST REFORM WHEREAS, skyrocketing energy prices in. San Diego County are having a negative impact on our school districts' budgets and our ability to offer programs that will foster a quality learning environment for our students; and WHEREAS, San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) is continuing to advance its long- standing position that blocks school districts from investing in solar and other forms of clean energy, most recently through its proposed change in Time Of Use (TOU) periods (R.14-0 1- 027); and WHEREAS, the change in TOU increases rates for those San Diego County school districts that have already invested in solar energy and takes away incentives for other school districts exploring clean energy options for the future; and WHEREAS, these changes are compounded by potential changes to net energy metering currently being considered by the California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) for new renewable projects installed after July 1, 2017 or when SDG&E reaches its net energy metering statutory cap (R.14-07-002); and WHEREAS, school districts are limited in their ability to alter hours of operation and by finite funding sources; and WHEREAS, many school districts have or want to invest in clean energy without having to dedicate resources to defend current and future rate structure changes; and WHEREAS, the CPUC has limited and narrow authority to assist local school districts as districts are considered commercial customers subject to commercial rate structures; and WHEREAS, future legislative amendments may be appropriate to direct and authorize the CPUC to place school districts statewide in separate customer classes th~t recognize districts' limited ability to fund energy cost increases; and WHEREAS, previous attempts at school energy cost reform have only resulted in delays to energy increases without any viable· long term solution. For example, recently approved SDG&E rate proposals have resulted in rate increases of approximately 43% of which only 10% is attributable to increased energy usage. This rate shock hurts students; and WHEREAS, 39 of 42 school districts and the San Diego Office of Education have joined a school energy coalition to file as formal interveners in SDG&E's current Phase II General Rate Case pending before the CPUC. As fonnal interveners, school districts will demonstrate the current rate shock affecting schools and attempt to minimize proposed rate increases. To file as formal interveners requires substantive economic resources from school districts' general funds, diverting resources away from districts' core educational missions; and WHEREAS, even successful participation in the Phase II General Rate Case requires school districts to divert resources away from core educational programs and does not prevent SDG&E from proposing new rate increases and structures that would harm school districts in future CPUC proceedings. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Carlsbad Unified School District Board of Trustees affirms its support to pursue efforts that will lower energy costs· for the future and support investment in clean sustainable energy, including but not limited to a permanent change in CPUC rate structures affecting schools and renewable energy investments, maintaining the current TOU periods school districts in San Diego County or developing other programs to reduce school district energy costs. It is imperative that any change include a long-term legislative solution that ensures that school districts are not required to participate in triennial rate cases to defend their rate structure and energy investments. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of Trustees ofthe Carlsbad Unified School District on August 19, 2015 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BY: ________________________ ___ Veronica Williams President of the Board of Trustees Carlsbad Unified School District Faviola Medina --------------------------~---------------------------------------------------------- From: Sent: To: Subject: Council Internet Email Thursday, September 17, 2015 8:51AM City Clerk FW: My husband and I support the Carlsbad Raceway Project. We are Carlsbad home owners From: Lorri Aiello ~==~===-'~==.:..:.J Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2015 10:39 PM To: Help <Help@CarlsbadCA.gov> Subject: My husband and I support the Carlsbad Raceway Project. We are Carlsbad home owners Dear Carlsbad City Council: My husband Norman and I support the Carlsbad Raceway Project. We are Carlsbad home owners. The raceway will provide good, wholesome entertainment for families and will also be another attraction and reason for tourists to visit, Please make this raceway a reality! Sincerely, Norman & Lorri Aiello 569 Anchorage Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92011 1 Faviola Medina From: Andrea Dykes Sent: To: Thursday, September 17, 2015 8:10AM City Clerk Subject: FW: Ponto Beach Proposed Development Importance: High From: Sibyl Melin [mailto:sibyl.melin@znet.com] Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 5:10 PM To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto Beach Proposed Development Importance: High Andrea, I am an original owner in the San Sebastian portion of San Pacifico. As a resident of south Carlsbad, I have long hoped to see some development on the property I'm referring to. That said, I am concerned at the proposal for the very high density development on the Ponto property. As a concerned resident of the area, I will attend the City Council Meeting on September 22nd. One only needs to visit this area on a beautiful days to understand that we already lack adequate parking for our beach area and that there are "impromptu parking lots" during most weekends. It is unconscionable to me that this development as currently proposed would be accepted. Whether considering the additional demand for our very scarce resource (water) or the large increase in traffic along Avenida Encinas, it just doesn't make sense. I have literally watched hundreds of cars disregard the stop sign on the corner of Avenida Encinas and Portage Way -near our development's recreational area. I think it's been a miracle that someone has not been seriously injured to date. More traffic could worsen that possibility. I support the UN-ANENDED RECOMMENDATIONS FOR PONTO. Regards, Sibyl Melin 7446 Sundial PI Carlsbad, CA 92011 760-505-5003 1 Faviola Medina ------------------------------------------------------------- From: Andrea Dykes Sent: To: Thursday, September 17, 2015 8:02AM City Clerk Subject: FW: Ponto beach development Regarding General Plan update. From: DAVE TORRES [mailto:dave.torres@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 8:47PM To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: Ponto beach development Andrea, please pass on to the city council that I'm asking that they adopt the Planning c:ornmission Un-amended recommendations for Ponto. I say no to increased housing density I say no to 40+foot tall buildings I say yes to a village environment, shops and restauraQts and a development that benefits the citizens. I have lived in the vista mar development since year 2000 Thank you, Dave Torres 1 Sara Vakulskas HECHT SOLBERG ROBINSON GOLDBERG & BAGLEY LLP 600 WEST BROADWAY, SUITE 800 SAN DIEGO, CA 92101 P: 619.239.3444 F: 619.232.6828 SVakulskas@hechtsolberg.com llii!HechtSolb(;rg www. hechtsolberg .com This e-mail transmission (and/or documents attached) may contain confidential information belonging to the sender which is protected by the attorney/client or work product privileges. The information is intended only for the use of the individu<al or entity to whom this e- mail is directed. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please delete it immediately. This e-mail may not be forwarded without the sender's express permission. 2 Carlsbad City Council September 15, 2015 Page2 • Local land use authorities need to address and plan for the viable reuse and redevelopment of golf courses as a component of the jurisdiction's General Plan update process in light of the changing nature ofthe golf industry. The combination of this golf course's particular problems sourcing water, recent water restrictions, and the dim future of golf courses in general results in the need to plan for future redevelopment of the Property. The area surrounding the Property is primarily residential and the Property itself is well suited for residential development. As of June 30, 2015, the Citywide Excess Dwelling Unit Bank Balance was 2,085. We ask that the City Council apply a portion of these available units to the Property so that it may be redeveloped for residential use. Given the City's view that Excess Dwelling Units can no longer be transferred to the Northeast Quadrant, in which the Property lies, the Growth Management dwelling unit limit for the Northeast Quadrant should be increased to allow residential development of the Property. Currently, the City proposes designating this Property as Open Space, category 3 -i.e., outdoor recreation, which allows golf course use and little else. The designation virtually forces CCL to use costly and scarce water to operate its golf course. The designation would, thus result in a regulatory taking because it would not allow the "pursuit of useful activities." Skalko v, City of Sunnyvale (1939) 14 Cal.2d 213, 215-216. An action is a regulatory taking when it allows the physical invasion of property, ~' Cwynar v. City and County of San Francisco (200 1) 90 Cal.App.4th 637, 653-659; completely deprives the property owner of the value of the property; or results from an adverse balance of the economic impact and character of the action with the owner's "'investment-backed expectations."' Lingle v. Chevron USA. Inc. (2005) 544 U.S. 528, 538-540. The proposed plan is and does all these things: It will foreseeably bar useful activities; it calls for the physical invasion of property; and it will soon deprive the property owners of th,e value of their property. Even if its treatment of this property is not immediately a "taking," it is, at a minimum, poor planning. Planning requires anticipating future needs, but the combination of the plan and the City's growth management system would lock in a designation that will become unworkable long before the horizon year of the plan. As indicated above,, this problem also implicates the adequacy of the analysis of the EIR in two ways. First, Impact 3.9-3 addresses whether the plan would affect population growth. The EIR concludes that it will not because "the city's public hearing process" on the plan amendment will reduce allowable development so as not to exceed growth management limits. This is not exactly true, however, because the: City will either have to pay to acquire the Property, which it will not want to do, or allow development of the Property. This is an inevitable consequence of the growth management system and Proposition E, so the EIR needs to recognize these eventualities. Second, if the City is going to require that this Property remain in use as a golf course, the EIR must -but did not-evaluate the effect on groundwater that drilling necessary wells will have. CCL will litigate this i[f necessary, but we believe the best and simplest solution for our client, the City, and Carlsbad residents would be to revise the proposed General Plan; and then enact Carlsbad City Council September 15, 2015 Page 3 appropriate zoning, so as to allow development at some reasonable level. We respectfully request that the City make the proposed change and place the matter on the ballot for voter approval. The City can do so easily and cheaply, which would not be true for CCL. The alternative would be an inverse condemnation lawsuit that would cost the City millions of dollars. I am available to discuss how to best accomplish redevelopment of the Property. Sincerely, Paul E. Robinson HECHT SOLBERG ROBINSON GOLDBERG & BAGLEY LLP SGV cc: Ms. Kathy Dodson, City Manager (via e-mail) Ms. Celia Brewer, City Attorney (via e-mail) Ms. Jennifer Jesser, Planning Division (via e-mail) Mr. Brett Feuerstein (via e-mail) Mr. Elliot Feuerstein (via e-mail) 4847-2818-6152 v.1 Date: To: From: Subject: All Receive -Agenda Item # l5 F E H R h p E E R S For the Information of the: /. J _ CITY COUNCIL -,m-p-ro-v-in_g_C_o-mmunities Since 1985 ~~~ gi~ :an~;r __ 7 MEMORANDUM September 18, 2015 David de Cordova-City of Carlsbad Doug Bilse, P.E.-City of Carlsbad Jason D. Pack, P.E. Oceanside Comments on the Carlsbad General Plan FEIR 5010-0020 The following summarizes the comments received from the City of Oceanside and Fehr & Peers response to those comments. 0-1 Looking at the model runs included in the City of Carlsbad General Plan update analysis, College Blvd between Vista Drive and the City limits (south of Lake Blvd) is expected to carry more traffic than what was estimated in the traffic analyses conducted for: a) Oceanside General Plan Circulation Element; b) Quarry Creek Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA). This appears to be the result of eliminating Cannon Reach 4 from the analysis of the General Plan update. As a result of the elimination of the Cannon Reach 4 connection, the intersections and road segments in Oceanside may be more congested than was reported in the Oceanside General Plan Circulation Element and may become "unmanageable." The daily traffic reported for College Boulevard between Cannon Road and the north city limit appears to be understated in comparison to forecasts included in the Oceanside General Plan Circulation Element and Quarry Creek TIA. 0-2 Robertson's Ranch and Quarry Creek projects included the Cannon Reach 4 connection in their traffic analysis. The Oceanside letter states: "The Quarry Creek Master Plan had prior knowledge of the City of Carlsbad's intent to remove Cannon Road Reach IV but failed to study it." Mitigation measures for both projects could have been different if the Cannon Reach 4 connection were not included in these traffic analyses. 0-3 Oceanside staff recommends that the EIR for the Carlsbad General Plan update include a roadway and intersection LOS baseline condition and conduct a thorough "with" and "without" analysis of the Cannon Reach 4 connection including: 8141 East Kaiser Boulevard I Suite 110 I Anaheim, CA 92808 I (714) 941-8800 I Fax (949) 859-3209 www.fehrandpeers.com Tecla Levy © Urban Systems Associates, Inc. City of Carlsbad August 6, 2015 scenario. As discussed in Section 2.0 of the TIA, an increase in volume to capacity ratio based on ADT volumes of no more than 0.02 is acceptable. With a calculated increase in v/c of 0.007 with Cannon Road and an increase in vIc of 0. 01 without the Cannon Road connection, the amount of project traffic on this segment of Lake Boulevard is within accepted thresholds. A similar analysis can be conducted for Lake Boulevard between Thunder Drive and Sundown Lane. This segment of Lake Boulevard is currently constructed as a two-lane Collector roadway with a capacity of 15,000. This segment is planned to be widened to four lanes according to Table 3-6 of the City of Oceanside Circulation Element. Assuming the roadway remains at its current classification, the existing deficient level of service may continue into the future. Utilizing the existing capacity of 15,000 ADT and calculating the change in v/c caused by the Quarry Creek project yields a change in v/c ratio of 0.013 with the Cannon Road connection and 0.018 without the Cannon Road connection. Both of these changes in v/c ratio are within acceptable limits. Additionally, when the road is widened per the City of Oceanside Circulation Element, the change in v/c will be significantly reduced and an acceptable level of service will be achieved. Potential impacts to any other freeway or roadway segment are anticipated to be extremely minor as a result of the Quarry Creek project. No changes to the Quarry Creek Master Plan project TIA are recommended as a result of the removal of Cannon Road due to the minor redistribution of project traffic. 2 001307-080615-ememo-jps 8451 Miralani Drive, Suite A • San Diego, CA 92126 • (858) 560-4911 From: Glenna Citron •.:..:..:..:====.::.;_~-===-=...=.:o• Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2015 9:46AM To: Council Internet Email -~.z..==.==~===­ Subject: 100% Dear City Council Members, Please vote to include a 100% clean energy goal in the Climate Action Plan. The 100% goal will direct decisions that will benefit the city, businesses, and the environment for years to come. Seize this opportunity to lead Carlsbad toward a future we want. Thank you, Glenna Citron 4915 Refugio Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 All Receive -Agenda Item # 15 - Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 2:56 PM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Barbara Cohn Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:46 PM To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Cleari Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, For the Information of the: CITY COUNCJL AC~CA v CC~ I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Let's see if you really represent the citizens or you are completely owned by the corporate sector. Sincerely, 1 Barbara Cohn 3521'Cay Dr Carlsbad, CA 92010-7072 (760} 637-5122 barbc624@gmail.com 2 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 2:54 PM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Patricia Bleha Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 12:16 PM To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. ' Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Patricia Bleha 1 3209 Fosca St Carlsbad, CA 92009-7830 {760} 436-5920 pcb@sbcglobal.net 2 SAVAGE Brent..McManigal@GreshamSavage.com · San Bernardino Office (909) 890-4499 · fax (909) 890-9877 September 16, 2015 VIA E-MAIL: (Clerk@carlsbadca.gov) and FACSIMILE (760) 720-9461 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Sunny Creek Commercial Opportunity Site: General Plan Land Use Designation Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council: Our firm represents Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Walmart"), the property owner of the property referred to in the General Plan Land Use element as "Sunny Creek Commercial". Walmart requests the City Council to change the land-use designation on the Sunny Creek Commercial property to R23, as recommended by Staff and analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report prepared for the General Plan. The Planning Commission recommended the designation be R15, not the R23, but the R15 designation significantly impairs the ability of this property to be deyeloped in an economical and reasonable manner. As you are aware, the Sunny Creek Commercial property is located within the City's Growth Management "Zone 15". Development within Zone 15 requires construction of substantial infrastructure prior to construction of new development. Due to the high cost of the Zone 15 infrastructure, coupled with the City's requirement that twenty percent (20%) of the residential units built on the Sunny Creek Commercial property be set aside as affordable housing, the ability to develop this property is very limited. The R23 designation is necessary to enable development to occur that is not only financially feasible, but also able to participate in the Zone 15 infrastructure financing, as well as comply with the development goals and standards set by the City. Staff's recommendation for the R23 designation on this property was based on not only input from the community, but also a thorough analysis of the infrastructure · ' 550 East Hospitality Lane, Suite 300 • San Bernardino, Californicl 9:2408 3750 University Avenue, Suite 250 ~ Riverside, California 92501 · \ 550 West C Suee1, Suite 1810 s San Diego, California 92101 ' ,. 333 South Hope Stred, 35'' Floor • Los Angeles. California 90071 GresharnSavage. com W2ll8-RE_MGMT-CA-CARLSBAD;_STORE_#5724--l776564.l Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Carlsbad September 16, 2015 Page 2 and environment by the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the General Plan. The EIR shows that the R23 density can be accommodated on the property and also requires any development proposal to be further analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. In addition, development plans for the site will still require review and approval by the City. The subsequent environmental review and approvals by the City of development plans for the Sunny Creek Commercial site will ensure that development meets the City's expectations and does not impact adjacent properties. The R23 designation is consistent with staff recommendation, consistent with the analysis in the EIR and assists the City in meeting its low and moderate housing requireme~t established by the State. Accordingly, Walmart requests that the R23 land use designation be reinstated on the Sunny Creek Commercial property. Very truly yours, Brent R. McManigaL for GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN, A Professional Corporation BRM: djb W2118·RE_MGMT-CA-CARLSBAD;_STORE_#5724 --1776564.1 Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Carlsbad September 16, 2015 Page2 and environment by the Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") prepared for the General Plan. The EIR shows that the R23 density can be accommodated on the property and also requires any development proposal to be further analyzed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. In addition, development plans for the site will still require review and approval by the City. The subsequent environmental review and approvals by the City of development plans for the Sunny Creek Commercial site will ensure that development meets the City's expectations and does not impact adjacent properties. The R23 designation is consistent with staff recommendation, consistent with the analysis in the EIR and assists the City in meeting its low and moderate housing requirement established by the State. Accordingly, Walmart requests that the R23 land use designation be reinstated on the Sunny Creek Commercial property. Very truly yours, ---------- ~ Brent R. McManigal, for GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN, A Professional Corporation BRM: djb W2118-RE_MGMT-CA-CARLSBAD:_STORE_#5724 •• 1776564.1 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 3:00 PM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of James Mccord Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:16 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, James Mccord 1 628 Sandside Ct Carlsbad, CA 92011-3255 (760) 683-5665 mccord50@gmail.com 2 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----0 rig ina I Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 2:59 PM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of M May Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:16PM To: Councir Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieveJts mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, M May 3 1250 Carlsbad Village Dr Carlsbad, CA 92008-1949 {619} 634~2929 mmp2u@cox.net 4 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:02 PM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Origin a I Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Karen McKinzie Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 2:16PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Karen McKinzie 1 1660 Corte Orchidia Carlsbad, CA 92011-4065 karen@mckinzieins.com 2 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:02 PM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Norman Ogilvie Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:46 PM To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas .reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad !O benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendlyto businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Norman Ogilvie 3 2885 Sanford Ln Carlsbad, CA 92010-6553 normanleeogilvie@aol.com 4 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:02 PM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Calion Morgan Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 1:46PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Calion Morgan 5 5245 Frost Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008-3840 callonj@roadrunner.com · 6 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:03 PM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Alicia Dalforno Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 2:48PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Alicia Dalforno 1 PO Box 2318 Carlsbad, CA 92018-2318 (760) 458-8066 shashaengstrom @ya hoo.com 2 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:02 PM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Karen McKinzie Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 2:16PM To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve)ts mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the dty. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore re:main friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. ,. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. · Sincerely, Karen McKinzie 3 1660 Corte Orchidia Carlsbad, CA 92011-4065 karen@mckinzieins.com 4 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:02 PM To: City Clerk; Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sammis Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 2:16 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Rob Sammis 5 3575 Roosevelt St Apt 102 Carlsbad, CA 92008-5045 robsammis@live.com 6 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 4:13 PM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Larry Lawrence Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:17 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Larry Lawrence 1 3481 Sitio Borde Carlsbad, CA 92009-8926 (760} 436-3671 lsquared21@roadrunner.com 2 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 4:12 PM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Candy LeBlanc Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:17 PM To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. ' · The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Candy LeBlanc 3 1525 Cold Springs Rd Spc 52 Placerville, CA 95667-9465 telvari13@yahoo.com 4 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Friday, September 18, 2015 4:12 PM Jennifer Jesser; David de Cordova; City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Mary Oren Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 3:17 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. ~ A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Mary Oren 5 7842 Sitio Coco Carlsbad, CA 92009-8714 (760) 943-1046 maryoren@aol.com 6 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:32 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Patty And Bruce Montgomery Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 4:46 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Patty And Bruce Montgomery 1 7029 Columbine Dr Carlsbad, CA 92011-5109 (760) 931-6678 mr.leakey@gmail.com 2 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:32 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Carl Pope Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 4:46PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Carl Pope 3 1977 E Pointe Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008-3777 (760) 828-8341 seatp3@gmail.com 4 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:32 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Sandra Blake Sent: Friday,September 18, 2015 5:46PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwid~. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Sandra Blake 5 4783 Flying Cloud Way Carlsbad, CA 92008-3785 {760) 434-2608 sandra.blake@gmail.com 6 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:31 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Trent Buckman Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 6:16PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great dty is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory ·greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Trent Buckman 7 3010 Cadencia St Carlsbad, CA 92009-8307 d rrhino@ea rth link. net 8 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:31 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Craig Turk Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 6:16 PM To: Council Internet Email. Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to SReak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Craig Turk 9 2340 Hosp Way Unit 217 Carlsbad, CA 92008-1225 (760) 729-4635 craigturk@sbcglobal.net 10 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:31 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of susan Locker Sent: Friday, September 18, 2015 7:46PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 18, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, susan Locker 11 7016 Wildrose Ter Carlsbad, CA 92011-4009 susan@ uesem ina rs.com 12 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:31 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of James O'Leonard Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 9:19AM To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 19, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, James O'Leonard 13 .2670 Cazadero Dr ~Carlsbad, CA 92009-5812 (760) 268-0155 joleonard@alumni.haas.org 14 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Origina I Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:30AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Liz Myers-Chamberlin Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 10:48 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100%_ Clean Energy Sep 19, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve· its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Liz Myers-Chamberlin 15 2941 Sombrosa St Carlsbad, CA 92009-9250 (760) 753-0603 lmyerschamberlin@gmail.com 16 Faviola Medina From: Council Internet Email Sent: To: Monday, September 21, 2015 8:30 AM City Clerk Subject: FW: 100% clean energy -----Original Message----- From: Paige DeCino [mailto:pdecino@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, September 19, 2015 11:25 AM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% clean energy Dear council members and mayor, I'm disappointed that including 100% renewable energy as a goal for the city's general plan has not been done. But it's not too late. On Tuesday I hope that you insert this important goal before voting on the GP and CAP. Our schools are reeling under the added expense from energy costs-money that could easily be used in the classroom. Respectfully, Paige DeCino 17 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----~ Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:29 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Kim Hurt Sent: Sunday, September 2d, 2015 6:51 J\M To: Council internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 20,2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall! greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trencl_ and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the City council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Kim Hurt 18 6660 Sweetclover Ln Carlsbad, CA 92011-4082 kimlhurt@yahoo.com 19 Faviola Medina -------------------------~---------------------------------------------------------- From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Origi na I Message----- Council Internet Email Mondc;1y, September 21, 2015 8:29 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Arin Zwonitzer Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 12:20 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 20, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, Hello, I'm Arin Zwonitzer, a sophomore at Carlsbad High school, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad my whole life. because it is a nice city. But we can only become a great city with 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would help Carlsbad to benefit both economically and improves our quality of life, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. That means less money for my education. Recently this year all my classes have about forty people in order to save money, makin~ learning and one-on-one time with the teachers significantly harder. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. Both my peers and I want change now for a better future tomorrow. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Thank you! Sincerely, 20 Arin Zwonitzer 6835 Alderwood Dr Carlsbad, CA 92011-3902 (619) 988-6294 arinzwonitzer@gmail.com 21 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:28 AM City Clerk Subject: · FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Susan Swan Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 2:19 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 20, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? · Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. I am counting on your leadership. Sincerely, Susan Swan 22 2907 Corte Celeste Carlsbad, CA 92009-9211 (760) 942-3465 sueswa n @yahoo .com 23 Faviola Medina ______________________________ , ________________________________________________________ _ From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:28 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@siierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Dee Pope Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 2:40PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 20,2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption ofthe best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passe_d a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. , Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Dee Pope 24 1977 E Pointe Ave Carlsbad, CA 92008-3777 oceanhorse760@gmail.com 25 Faviola Medina --------------------~----------------------------------------------From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monday, September 21, 2015 8:28 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Lynda Daniels Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 3:11 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 20,2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is a great city. What would make it a truly fantastic city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall! greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. ' Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, 26 Lynda Daniels 4547 Picadilly Ct Carlsbad, CA 92010-2895 (760} 542-6631 lynda1967@att.net 27 Faviola Medina --------------------~---------------------------------------------- From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Council Internet Email Monda1y, September 21, 2015 8:26 AM City Clerk FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Erin Lindquist Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2015 10:55 PM To: Council Internet Email Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 21, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future . . A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall gre,enhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Erin Lindquist 28 2588 El Camino Real Carlsbad, CA 92008-1211 (760} 687-3281 ealproductions@hotmail.com 29 Faviola Medina --------------------~----------------------------------------------From: Sent: To: Subject: -----Original Message----- Andrea Dykes Monday, September 21, 2015 8:18 AM City Clerk FW: September 22nd Revised Zoning (Sunny Creek) Final Vote From: Patricia Parsons [mailto:pat@parsons.org] Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2015 7:22PM To: Matthew Hall; Keith Blackburn; Mark Packard; Lorraine Wood; Andrea Dykes Subject: September 22nd Revised Zoning (Sunny Creek) Final Vote Appreciate all you've done to change the General Plan designated Medium Residential Density on Sunny Creek thus over-ruling the Council's 2013 directive to designate Sunny Creek as High Density. My husband, Terry, and I were at the meeting on July 22nd when the Planning Commission agreed with the residents that increased housing density and the resultant traffic, water usage and congestion is not desired in this section of El Camino Real. Now on Tuesday the final decision will be made by the Council. We appreciate your being there for us and preserving the beauty of our fare City. Regards, Pat Parsons 1 Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: David Bentley <benteq@roadrunner.com> Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:54 AM City Clerk Don Neu; David de Cordova; Jennifer Jesser General Plan Update Letter 15-0922 GPU Ltr to Council.pdf; ATTOOOOl.htm AH fl@(;~lve ·Agenda Item# \15 For the Information of theF CJJV COUNCIL ', ACM CA / CC /\ Qat§ Q City Manage;:--:7 ' Please distribute a copy of the attached letter to the Mayor and Council Members. Thank You, David M. Bentley 1 September 22. 20 l 5 i\1ayor & Council l\lembers of Carlsbad Carlsbad. CA 9:2008 via ernaiL Re: City of Carlsbad General Plan L1pdate Dear ::vlayor Hall and Council i\tembers: appreciate the thorough anal) sis. thoughtful planning. extraordinary community outreach. and fair consideration provided by City Staff: Planning Commission and City Council in crafting the General Plan t;pdatc. In particular. the updaLed land uses for Carlsbad's Zone 15 area will help achieve (i) the level of development needed to fund local infrastructure. (ii) the Yariety of housing needed to support a wide array of income kvds and i 1 ii) the commerciul I retail required to serve the local area: all ofwhkb will be achieved while protecting the extraordinary natural open space amenities and uniqLa: rural-estate character of the Sunny Creek area. We encourage the to adopt the recommendations of City StatT and Planning Commission connection with the General lJpdate. RespectfullY Submitted. Lr~ DaYid !'vl. Bentley. CCTM -President Bentley-Wing Propdties. lnc. ec: Faviola Medina From: Andrea Dykes Sent: To: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:41 AM City Clerk Subject: FW: Ponto East and West developments -----Original Message----- From: phil Iicata [mailto:plicata1@icloud.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 11:39 AM To: Andrea Dykes <Andrea.Dykes@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: plicata@hotmail.com Subject: Ponto East and West developments Andrea and Council members, I have lived in San Pacifico for over two years now, and prior camped at South Carlsbad since a small child and am 60 now. I believe I can speak to development in this community. It is extremely important that we maintain this area as open space as much as possible and preserve the small coastal town that attracts so many tourists here. So I urge you to NOT allow a change in zoning or modify the general plan so as to allow cheesy developments that go against what so many residents want here. If a development must happen let's make it a true gateway to Carlsbad one that we can be proud of. As I sit on Ponto beach today I worry greatly about increased noise, traffic, trash that these developments will bring and sincerely hope the City Council and Planning Commission considers their decision very carefully. Thank You, Phil Licata Sent from my iPhone 1 Faviola Medina ---------------------------------------------------------------From: Sent: Mike McSweeney <MMcSweeney@biasandiego.org> Tuesday, September 22, 2015 10:47 AM To: City Cil:!rk Subject: Attachments: Letter to Mayor & Council from the BIA SKM_C554e15092210050.pdf Please forward_to the Mayor and Councilmembers before tonight's meeting. Thank you. Michael McSweeney Sr. Public Policy Advisor Building Industry Association 9201 Spectrum Center Blvd. #110 San Diego, CA 92123 858-450-1221 X 104 858-514-7004 Direct 858-552-1445 Fax 619-884-5354 Cell mmcsweeney@biasandieqo.org www.biasandieqo.org Check out our new Website!!! 1 BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO COI!JHT'If CHAIRMAN David Poole Brookfield Residential VICE CHAIRMAN David Stearn Lennar Homes TREASURER I SECRETARY Mike Mahoney ConAm PAST CHAII!\1MAN james Schmid Chelsea Investment Corp. PRESIDENT & C.I:.O. Borre Winckel AFFIUATIES C<lllfurn!a Building Industry Association National Associatio~ of Home Builders September 21, 2015 Honorable Mayor Hall and Council Members City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Envision Carlsbad Affordable Housing Policy Revisions Dear Mayor Hall and Council Members: The Building Industry Association of San Diego {BIA} is providing you with this letter regarding policy changes to the City's Affordable Housing Program as part ofthe Envision Carlsbad General Plan Update. Specifically, the SDBIA opposes the recommendation by Staff to increase the affordable housing requirement from 15% to 20% for projects in the City that use units from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. This proposed policy is very punitive to market rate housing, and will only increase the cost of housing to Carlsbad residents. Under the proposed policy, 1 out of every 5 new homes will be required to meet the City's inclusionary housing policy. The City is encouraged to adopt policies that promote affordable housing in a manner that allows for market demand to create efficient affordable housing. The City is encouraged to consider policies such as the following to promote affordable housing in the City: 1. Eliminate the quadrant system requirement for affordable housing. The City currently requires developers to deliver affordable housing units either on-site or within the same quadrant as the market rate project. This creates significant hurdles to delivering affordable units in the City, particularly with the primary growth in the southwest quadrant and the lack of available sites for affordable housing in the southwest quadrants. The City should revise the ordinance to allow affordable housing requirements to be met in any quad~ant. 2. Provide developers transparency on their ability to utilize the State Density Bonus Law. Developers have the explicit right under State Density Bonus Law to a density bonus and other incentives if they Building lnchs$try .A$1iOCiliiltion of Sl'lln Diego County 9201 Spectrum Center Blvd., Suite 110, San Diego, CA 92123"1407 P 858-450-1221 F 858-552-1445 www.biasandiego.org Faviola Medina From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: See attached letter. Council Internet Email Tuesday, September 22, 2015 9:31 AM City Clerk FW: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) 20150922 City Council meeting letter-Linke.pdf From: Steve Linke [mailto:splinke@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:34AM To: Council internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Cc: Planning <Pianning@CarlsbadCA.gov> Subject: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) Please forward the attached letter to the City Council, City Attorney, and Planning Commission. I would like it to become part of the record for the referenced agenda item. Thank you. 1 September 22, 2015 To: Carlsbad City Council ancl City Attorney Cc: Carlsbad Planning Commission Re: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) City Councilors and Attorney: I am going to begin with my recommendations on the above-referenced agenda item and provide justification after. The Mobility Element, as well as the associated sections of the EIR, Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CFIF'), Fi1ndings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which you are being asked to adopt at your 9/22/2015 meeting, were only finished and became available on Friday afternoon. They have been hastily cobbled together over the last several weeks and are convoluted (and sometimes internally inconsistent) due to alleged issues that could require recirculation of the EIR. How~ver, these documents will serve as the equivalent of the "Constitution" for the city for the next 20+ years. Accordin~Jiy, I recommend that the City Council not rush the end of the process. P.lease do not adopt the above-reference documents, but rather direct Transportation Division staff to take a bit of additional time and: 1. Conduct a valid multi-modal LOS analysis (i.e., assess LOS for all travel modes) on all major streets usin~J methods that account for individual street conditions to allow meaningful review of the potential environmental impacts of Mobility Element policies. 2. Restore the vehicle priority to Connector and Employment streets with encouragement of bicycle/pedestrian enhancements to the extent that they do not degrade vehicle LOS and/or develop an intermediate typology for certain streets with shared priority (vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians). 3. Remove the "hard-·coded" vehicle LOS exemption list but include the necessary street segments in a "supplementary" exemption list that is adopted in the same vote that approves the Mobility Element and related documents (street segments can then be deleted or added by the City Council in the future as conditions, technology, or LOS metrics change). An argument may be macle that the above actions could require the recirculation of the EIR. However, that may not be necessary, as I detailed in a separate communication to the Transportation Division. But even if recirculation is necessary, it is the correct thing to do to make sure this is done correctly. If you feel it is critical to adopt the Mobility Element and associated documents immediately, though, I urge you to make the following policy tweaks. 1 3-P.4: Implement the city's MMLOS methodology consistent with the Growth Management Plan by evaluating level of service (LOS) for all travel modes on all major streets (those named in Figure 3-1). Maintain LOS D or better for all modes of travel, when possible, but further enhance LOS for modes of travel for which the MMLOS standard is applicable, as identified in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1, contingent upon the LOS for the other travel modes not being degraded below D or further degraded when the existing LOS is below D. Rationale: This proposed revision is in the true spirit of a multi-modal approach. The first sentence is consistent with the City Attorney's proposed language and retains the requirement that LOS is evaluated for all modes of travel on the major streets, so that the city can stay informed about potential existing and emerging problem areas for any mode. The second sentence ensures that the prioritized travel mode(s) meet the rpinimum LOS standard but encourages further enhancement of the LOS for the prioritized travel mode(s) while still maintaining a reasonable LOS for non-prioritized travel modes. 3-P.5: Require developers to evaluate LOS for all travel modes and to construct or pay their fair share toward improvements for all travel modes consistent with this Mobility Element, the Growth Management Plan, and specific impacts associated with their development. Rationale: This simply adds a reference to evaluating LOS for all travel modes (regardless of the street typology), reinforcing the multi-modal concept from Policy 3-P.4 to developers to help guide resources to the projects most appropriate for the individual streets. 3-P .9: ... For LOS exempt street facilities, implement improvements to the exempt mode of travel, as long as such improvements are within what is identified as appropriate at build out of the General Plan. In the case of street facilities where the vehicle mode of travel is exempt from the LOS standard, non-vehicle improvements should be implemented to improve mobility, to the extent that they do not conflict with viable vehicle improvements ... Rationale: The tone of the current language ("For LOS exempt street facilities, the city will not implement improvements to maintain the LOS standard ... ") is very negative. Basically, what the revision is intended to do is make it clear that vehicle improvements should still be done to the extent that they are consistent with build out, even if the street has been exempted from vehicle LOS. For example if a vehicle exempt arterial street is operating at LOS E, and a project would cause it to go to F, but there is some creative project that is consistent with build out that could keep it atE, it should still be done. " 3-P .11: Require new development that adds vehicle traffic to street facilities that are exempt from the vehicle LOS standard to implement the strategies described in Policy 3-P.9. Rationale: The current Policy 3-P.11 seems very redundant with Policy 3-P.9 (above). The proposed new policy simply applies the revised Policy 3-P.9 to developers without restating everything in it. 2 3-P.15: The City Council must approve any project that would reduce vehicle LOS to or below a LOS D on any street, including those for which vehicles are not subject to the MMLOS standard. Rationale: This is a simplified version of staff's proposal. Background/Justification As part of the General Plan Update process, the Transportation Division was supposed to draft a "Mobility Element" and related documents that support "multi-modal" transportation (i.e., balanced between vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, buses, etc.). However, they produced a document with an alarmingly unbalanced approach that shifted street priority from vehicles to bicycles/pedestrians and eliminated the requirement to monitor and maintain vehicle level of service (LOS) for the vast majority of Carlsbad's streets. The Transportation Division justified this alarming shift by stating that it represented the "community vision" expressed during the Envision Carlsbad process. However, it was likely more the personal vision of one Transportation Division employee (who left his job in 2014 just prior to the release of the General Plan) 'and the consultants paid to conduct the meetings. Carlsbad citizen Allen Sweet, who ~Jenerously volunteered his time to participate in Envision Carlsbad, has submitted multiple public comments criticizing there-prioritization, and here is an excerpt from his testimony at the General Plan public hearing in July: The documents which you have in front of you generally reflect the consensus of [the Envision Carlsbad] group ... but there was one part which I had trouble with, including the fact that we didn't actually talk about it in the group. Now, I will tell you what we did talk about. We talked about trails, and we talked about biking. And I support both of those activities. I try to walk every day. But we didn't talk about giving them priority over vehicles. And that bothers nne. ·The Transportation Division also took a fundamentally inadequate approach to reporting LOS impacts for the various travel modes on Carlsbad's major streets in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), preventing a meaningful public review. For example, despite the re-prioritization of many major streets to bicycle/pedestrian travel, virtually no bicycle/pedestrian LOS data were presented for those streets, let alone the potential collateral impact on vehicle LOS. There was also no transit LOS data for the vast majority of streets prioritized for transit. And despite the almost fanatical emphasis on "multi-modal" travel in the Mobility Element, and although state guidelines on the General Plan update process include assessing current and future performance for all travel modes on the same streets, a combination of vehicle and bicycle/pedestrian LOS's were never reported for any of Carlsbad's streets in the EIR. The Transportation Division was made aware of these problems by Mr. Sweet, me, and others starting way back in February 2014, within days of the initial public release of the Mobility Element. However, rather than fixing the problems, the Transportation Division chose to cling to their unbalanced policy proposals and, in response to public comments, they issued responses that were not supported by factual evidence. They also squandered an opportunity .. to fix things 3 earlier this year when the EIR was recirculated for other reasons. Only in the last several weeks (after a majority of the Planning Commission excoriated them during the July hearings for the poorly written Mobility Element) did the Transportation Division agree to make changes. Unfortunately, the City decided not to allow access to the hundreds of pages of documents and changes until they were finalized on Friday, which does not allow time for full review. - Setting aside the frustrations of the process and the apparent overstepping of certain staff and consultants, a limited review of the documents suggests that the Transportation Division's revisions partially address some of the Planning Commission and citizen criticisms. Some streets have been returned to vehicle priority, and others now require City Council approval of projects that would cause reductions in vehicle capacity. In addition, mandatory vehicle LOS monitoring has been restored for some streets. However, Transportation Division staff claim that the streets to which vehicle priority can be added back is limited without a recirculation of the EIR. Specifically, they claim that only streets for which they provided LOS analysis in the current EIR, and which achieved a minimum score of "D" are eligible. This creates an ironic situation in which several streets allegedly must be left with their new bicycle/pedestrian priority due to their much heavier vehicular traffic (e.g., Poinsettia Lane between 1-5 and Aviara Parkway and La Costa Avenue between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road), while streets with far lower vehicular traffic (e.g., Carlsbad Village Drive and Alga Road) can go back to vehicle priority. This alleged limitation seems inconsistent with the willingness to re-prioritize so many streets to bicycle/pedestrian (or transit) travel without providing accompanying LOS analyses in the EIR, further suggesting that the current EIR may be defective. In addition, the Transportation Division did nothing to address the concern about the extensive arterial street vehicle LOS exemptions being directly incorporated into the General Plan. A very simplistic "daily street segment capacity" table (3.13-1) was used to determine LO$, which is not necessarily adequate to assess individual street capacities. For example, La Costa Avenue (between 1-5 and El Camino Real) is a very special "arterial," in that it contains almost no intersections. A proper LOS analysis that accounts for intersection density would almost certainly show that La Costa Avenue would not fail the LOS standard and does not need to be put on the exemption list. In any event, the whole idea of putting a "hard-coded" exemption list directly into the General Plan, rather than maintaining a separate list that can be modified as conditions and technologies change seems short-sighted. Best regards, ~~ Steve Linke 7513 Quinta St Carlsbad, CA 92009 Phone: 760.944.7546; email: splinke@gmail.com 4 Faviola Medina -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------From: Robin Nuschy Sent: To: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:28 AM City Clerk Subject: Attachments: FW: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) 20150922 City Council meeting letter-Linke.pdf From: Michele Masterson On Behalf Of Planning Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:11AM To: Don Neu; David de Cordova; Jennifer Jesser; Robin Nuschy; Andrea Dykes Subject: FW: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) From: Steve Linke [mailto:splinke@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:34AM To: Council Internet Email Cc: Planning Subject: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) Please forward the attached letter to the City Council, City Attorney, and Planning Commission. rwould like it to become part of the record for the referenced agenda item. Thank you. 1 September 22, 2015 To: Carlsbad City Council and City Attorney Cc: Carlsbad Planning Commission Re: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) City Councilors and Attorney: I am going to begin with my recommendations on the above-referenced agenda item and provide justification after. The Mobility Element, as well as the associated sections of the EIR, Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CFIP), Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which you are being asked to adopt at your 9/22/2015 meeting, were only finished and became available on Friday afternoon. They have been hastily cobbled together over the last several weeks and are convoluted (and sometimes internally inconsistent) due to alleged issues that could require recirculation of the El R. However, these documents will serve as the equivalent of the "Constitution" for the city for the next 20+ years. Accordingly, I recommend that the City Council not rush the end of the process. Please do not adopt the above-reference documents, but rather direct Transportation Division staff to take a bit of additional time and: 1. Conduct a valid multi-modal LOS analysis (i.e., assess LOS for all travel" modes) on all major streets using methods that account for individual street conditions to allow meaningful review of the potential environmental impacts of Mobility Element policies. 2. Restore the vehicle priority to Connector and Employment streets with encouragement of bicycle/pedestrian enhancements to the extent that they do not degrade vehicle LOS and/or develop an intermediate typology for certain streets with shared priority (vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians). 3. Remove the "hard-coded" vehicle LOS exemption list but include the necessary street segments in a "supplementary" exemption list that is adopted in the same vote that approves the Mobility Element and related documents (street segments can then be deleted or added by the City Council in the future as conditions, technology, or LOS metrics change). An argument may be made that the above actions could require the recirculation of the EIR. However, that may not be necessary, as I detailed in a separate communication to the Transportation Division. But even if recirculation is necessary, it is the correct thing.to do to make sure this is done correctly. If you feel it is critical to adopt the Mobility Element and associated documents immediately, though, I urge you to make the following policy tweaks. 1 3-P.4: Implement the city's MIIIILOS methodology consistent with the Growth Management Plan by evaluating level of service (LOS) for all travel modes on all major streets (those named in Figure 3-1). Maintain LOS D or better for all modes of travel, when possible, but further enhance LOS for modes of travel for which the MMLOS standard is applicable, as identified in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1, contingent upon the LOS for the other travel modes not being degraded below D or further degraded when the existing LOS is below D. Rationale: This proposed revision is in the true spirit of a multi-modal approach. The first sentence is consistent with the City Attorney's proposed language and retains the requirement that LOS is evaluated for all modes of travel on the major streets, so that the city can stay informed about potential existing and emerging problem areas for any mode. The second sentence ensures that the prioritized travel mode(s) meet the minimum LOS standard but encoura~1es further enhancement of the LOS for the prioritized travel mode(s) while still maintaining a reasonable LOS for non-prioritized travel modes. 3-P.S: Require developers to evaluate LOS for all travel modes and to construct or pay their fair share toward improvements for all travel modes consistent with this Mobility Element, the Growth Management Plan, and speci1fic impacts associated with their development. Rationale: This simply adds a reference to evaluating LOS for all travel modes (regardless of the street typology), reinforcing the multi-modal concept from Policy 3-P.4 to developers to help guide resources to the projects most appropriate for the individual streets. 3-P.9: ... For LOS exempt street facilities, implement improvements to the exempt mode of travel, as long as such improvements are within what is identified as appropriate at build out of the General Plan. In the case of street facilities where the vehicle mode of travel is exempt from the LOS standard, non-vehicle improvements should be implemented to improve mobility, to the extent that they do not conflict with viable vehicle improvements ... Rationale: The tone of the current language ("For LOS exempt street facilities, the city will not implement improvements to maintain the LOS standard ... ") is very negative. Basically, what the revision is intended to do is make it clear that vehicle improvements should still be done to the extent that they are consistent with build out, even if the street has been exempted from vehicle~ LOS. For example if a vehicle exempt arterial street is operating at LOS E, and a project would cause it to go to F, but there is some creative project that is consistent with builld out that could keep it at E, it should still be done. 3-P.11: Require new development that adds vehicle traffic to street facilities that an~ exempt from the vehicle LOS standard to implement the strategies described in Policy 3-P.9. Rationale: The current Policy 3-P.11 seems very redundant with Policy 3-P.9 (above). The proposed new policy simply applies the revised Policy 3-P.9 to developers without restating everything in it. 2 3-P.15: The City Council must approve any project that would reduce vehicle LOS to or below a LOS D on any street, including those for which vehicles are not subject to the MMLOS standard. Rationale: This is a simplified version of staffs proposal. Background/Justification > As part of the General Plan Update process, the Transportation Division was supposed to draft a "Mobility Element" and related documents that support "multi-modal" transportation (i.e., balanced between vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, buses, etc.). However, they produced a document with an alarmingly unbalanced approach that shifted street priority from vehicles to bicycles/pedestrians and eliminated the requirement to monitor and maintain vehicle level of service (LOS) for the vast majority of Carlsbad's streets. The Transportation Division justified this alarming shift by stating that it represente~ the "community vision" expressed during the Envision Carlsbad process. However, it was likely more the personal vision of one Transportation Division employee (who left his job in 2014 just prior to the release of the General Plan) and the consultants paid to conduct the meetings. Carlsbad citizen Allen Sweet, who generously volunteered his time to participate in Envision Carlsbad, has submitted multiple public comments criticizing there-prioritization, and here is an excerpt from his testimony at the General Plan public hearing in July: The documents which you have in front of you generally reflect the consensus of [the Envision Carlsbad] group ... but there was one part which I had trouble with,.,including the fact that we didn't actually talk about it in the group. Now, I will tell you what we did talk about. We talked about trails, and we talked about biking. And I support both of those activities. I try to walk every day. But we didn't talk about giving them priority over vehicles. And that bothers me. The Transportation Division also took a fundamentally inadequate approach to reporting LOS impacts for the various travel modes on Carlsbad's major streets in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), preventing a meaningful public review. For example, despite the re-p'rioritization of many major streets to bicycle/pedestrian travel, virtually no bicycle/pedestrian LOS data were presented for those streets, let alone the potential collateral impact on vehicle LOS. There was also no transit LOS data for the vast majority of streets prioritized for transit. And despite the almost fanatical emphasis on "multi-modal" travel in the Mobility Element, and although state guidelines on the General Plan update process include assessing current and future performance for all travel modes on the same streets, a combination of vehicle and bicycle/pedestrian LOS's were never reported for any of Carlsbad's streets in the EIR. The Transportation Division was made aware of these problems by Mr. Sweet, me, and others starting way baGk in February 2014, within days of the initial public release of the Mobility Element. However, rather than fixing the problems, the Transportation Division chose to cling to their unbalanced policy proposals and, in response to public comments, they issued responses that were not supported by factual evidence. They also squandered an opportunity to fix things 3 earlier this year when the EIH was recirculated for other reasons. Only in the last several weeks (after a majority of the Planning Commission excoriated them during the July hearings for the poorly written Mobility Element) did the Transportation Division agree to make changes. Unfortunately, the City decided not to allow access to the hundreds of pages of documents and changes until they were finalized on Friday, which does not allow time for full review. Setting aside the frustrations of the process and the apparent overstepping of certain staff and consultants, a limited review of the documents suggests that the Transportation Division's revisions partially addres8 some of the Planning Commission and citizen criticisms. Some streets have been returned to vehicle priority, and others now require City Council approval of projects that would cause reductions in vehicle capacity. In addition, mandatory vehicle LOS monitoring has been restored for some streets. However, Transportation Division staff claim that the streets to which vehicle priority can be added back is limited without a recirculation of the EIR. Specifically, they claim that only streets for which they provided LOS analysis in the current EIR, and which achieved a minimum score of "D" are eligible. This creates an ironic situation in which several streets allegedly must be left with their new bicycle/pedestrian priority due to their much heavier vehicular traffic (e.g., Poinsettia Lane between 1-5 and Aviara Parkway and La Costa Avenue between EI Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road), while streets with far lower vehicular traffic (e.g., Carlsbad Village Drive and Alga Road) can go back to vehicle priority. This alleged limitation seems inconsistent with the willingness to re-prioritize so many streets to bicycle/pedestrian (or transit) travel without providing accompanying LOS analyses in the EIR, further suggesting that the current EIR may be defective. In addition, the Transportation Division did nothing to address the concern about the extensive arterial street vehicle LOS exemptions being directly incorporated into the General Plan. A very simplistic "daily street seg1ment capacity" table (3.13-1) was used to determine LOS, which is not necessarily adequate to assess individual street capacities. For example, La Costa Avenue (between 1-5 and El Camino Real) is a very special "arterial," in that it contains alm"ost no intersections. A proper LOS analysis that accounts for intersection density would almost certainly show that La Costa Avenue would not fail the LOS standard and does not need to be put on the exemption list. In any event, the whole idea of putting a "hard-coded" exemption list directly into the General Plan, rather than maintaining a separate list that can be modified as conditions and technologies change seems short-sighted. Best regards, ~~~ Steve Linke 7513 Quinta St Carlsbad, CA 92009 Phone: 760.944.7546; email: splinke@gmail.com 4 Faviola Medina From: Andrea Dykes Sent: To: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:24AM City Clerk Subject: Attachments: FW: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) 20150922 City Council meeting letter-Linke.pdf From: Michele Masterson On Behalf Of Planning Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 8:11AM To: Don Neu <Don.Neu@carlsbadca.gov>; David de Cordova <David.deCordova@carlsbadca.gov>; Jennifer Jesser <Jennifer.Jesser@carlsbadca.gov>; Robin Nuschy <Robin.Nuschy@CarlsbadCA.gov>; Andrea Dykes <And rea. Dykes@ca rlsba dca .gov> Subject: FW: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) From: Steve Linke [mailto:splinke@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 2:34AM To: Council Internet Email Cc: Planning Subject: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) Please forward the attached letter to the City Council, City Attorney, and Planning Commission. I would like it to become part of the record for the referenced agenda item. Thank you. 1 September 22, 2015 To: Carlsbad City Council and City Attorney Cc: Carlsbad Planning Commission Re: AB# 22,094 of 9/22/2015 City Council Meeting (General Plan Update) City Councilors and Attorney: I am going to begin with my recommendations on the above-referenced agenda item and provide justification after. The Mobility Element, as well as the associated sections of the EIR, Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan (CFIP), Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations, and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which you are being asked to adopt at your 9/22/2015 meeting, were only finished and became available on Friday afternoon. They have been hastily cobbled together over the last several weeks and are convoluted (and sometimes internally inconsistent) due to alleged issues that could require recirculation of the El R. However, these documents will serve as the equivalent of the "Constitution" for the' city for the next 20+ years. Accordin~Jiy, I recommend that the City Council not rush the end of the process. Please do not adopt the above-reference documents, but rather direct Transportation Division staff to take a bit of additional time and: 1. Conduct a valid multi-modal LOS analysis (i.e., assess LOS for all travel modes) on all major streets usin9 methods that account for individual street conditions to allow meaningful review of the potential environmental impacts of Mobility Element policies. 2. Restore the vehicle priority to Connector and Employment streets with encouragement of bicycle/pedestrian enhancements to the extent that they do not degrade vehicle LOS and/or develop an intermediate typology for certain streets with shared priority (vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians). 3. Remove the "hard-coded" vehicle LOS exemption list but include the necessary street segments in a "supplementary" exemption list that is adopted in the same vote that approves the Mobility Element and related documents (street segments can then be deleted or added by the City Council in the future as conditions, technolpgy, or LOS metrics change). An argument may be made that the above actions could require the recirculation of the EIR. However, that may not be necessary, as I detailed in a separate communication to the Transportation Division. But even if recirculation is necessary, it is the correct thing to do to make sure this is done correctly .. If you feel it is critical to adopt the Mobility Element and associated documents imrl)ediately, though, I urge you to make the following policy tweaks. 1 3-P.4: Implement the city's MMLOS methodology consistent with the Growth Management Plan by evaluating level of service (LOS) for all travel modes on all major streets (those named in Figure 3-1 ). Maintain LOS D or better for all modes of travel, when possible, but further enhance LOS for modes of travel for which the MMLOS standard is applicable, as identified in Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1, contingent upon the LOS for the other travel modes not being degraded below D or further degraded when the existing LOS is below D. Rationale: This proposed revision is in the true spirit of a multi-modal approach. The first sentence is consistent with the City Attorney's proposed language and retains the requirement that LOS is evaluated for all modes of travel on the major streets, so that the city can stay informed about potential existing and emerging problem areas "tor any mode. The second sentence ensures that the prioritized travel mode(s) meet the minimum LOS standard but encourages further enhancement of the LOS for the prioritized travel mode(s) while still maintaining a reasonable LOS for non-prioritized travel modes. 3-P.5: Require developers to evaluate LOS for all travel modes and to construct or pay their fair share toward improvements for all travel modes consistent with this Mobility Element, the Growth Management Plan, and specific impacts associated with their development. Rationale: This simply adds a reference to evaluating LOS for all travel modes (regardless ofthe street typology), reinforcing the multi-modal concept from Policy 3-P.4 to developers to help guide resources to the projects most appropriate for the individual streets. 3-P.9: ... For LOS exempt street facilities, implement improvements to the exempt mode of travel, as long as such improvements are within what is identified as appropriate at build out of the General Plan. In the case of street facilities where the vehicle mode of travel is exempt from the LOS standard, non-vehicle improvements should be implemented to improve mobility, to the extent that they do not conflict with viable vehicle improvements ... Rationale: The tone of the current language ("For LOS exempt street facilities, the city will not implement improvements to maintain the LOS standard ... ") is very negative. Basically, what the revision is intended to do is make it clear that vehicle improvements should still be done to the extent that they are consistent with build out, even if the street has been exempted from vehicle LOS. For example if a vehicle exempt arterial street is operating at LOSE, and a project would cause it to go to F, but there is some creative project that is consistent with build out that could keep it at E, it should still be done. 3-P .11: Require new development that adds vehicle traffic to street facilities that are exempt from the vehicle LOS standard to implement the strategies described in Policy 3-P.9. Rationale: The current Policy 3-P.11 seems very redundant with Policy 3-P.9 (above). The proposed new policy simply applies the revised Policy 3-P.9 to developers without restating everything in it. 2 3-P .15: The City Council must approve any project that would reduce vehicle LOS to or below a LOS D on any street, inclluding those for which vehicles are not subject to the MMLOS standard. Rationale: This is a simplified version of staff's proposal. Background/Justification As part of the General Plan Update process, the Transportation Division was supposed to draft a "Mobility Element" and rellated documents that support "multi-modal" transportation (i.e., balanced between vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, buses, etc.). However, they produced a document with an alarmingly unbalanced approach that shifted street priority from vehicles to bicycles/pedestrians and eliminated the requirement to monitor and maintain vehicle level of service (LOS) for the vast majority of Carlsbad's streets. The Transportation Division jiUstified this alarming shift by stating that it represented the "community vision" expressed during the Envision Carlsbad process. However, it was likely more the personal vision of one Transportation Division employee (who left his job in 2014 just prior to the release of the General Plan) and the consultants paid to conduct the meetings. Carlsbad citizen Allen Sweet, who ~~enerously volunteered his time to participate in Envision Carlsbad, has submitted multiple public comments criticizing there-prioritization, and here is an excerpt from his testimony at the General Plan public hearing in July: The documents which you have in front of you generally reflect the consensus of [the Envision Carlsbad] group ... but there was one part which I had trouble with, including the fact that we didn't actually talk about it in the group. Now, I will tell you what we did talk about. We talked about trails, and we talked about biking. And I support both of those activities. I try to walk every day. But we didn't talk about giving them priority .over vehicles. And that bothers rne. The Transportation Division also took a fundamentally inadequate approach to reporting LOS impacts for the various travel modes on Carlsbad's major streets in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), preventing a meaningful public review. For example, despite there-prioritization of many major streets to bicycle/pedestrian travel, virtually no bicycle/pedestrian LOS data were presented for those streets, let alone the potential collateral impact on vehicle LOS. There was also no transit LOS data for the vast majority of streets prioritized for transit. And d~spite the almost fanatical emphasis on "multi-modal" travel in the Mobility Element, and although state guidelines on the General Plan update process include assessing current and future performance for all travel modes on the same streets, a combination of vehicle and bicycle/pedestrian LOS's were never reported for any of Carlsbad's streets in the EIR. The Transportation Division was made aware of these problems by Mr. Sweet, me, and others starting way back in February 2014, within days of the initial public release of the Mobility Element. However, rather than fixing the problems, the Transportation Division chqse to cling to their unbalanced policy proposals and, in response to public comments, they issued responses that were not supported by factual evidence. They also squandered an opportunity to fix things 3 earlier this year when the EIR was recirculated for other reasons. Only in the last several weeks (after a majority of the Planning Commission excoriated them during the July hearings for the poorly written Mobility Element) did the Transportation Division agree to make changes. Unfortunately, the City decided not to allow access to the hundreds of pages of documents and changes until they were finalized on Friday, which does not allow time for full review. Setting aside the frustrations of the process and the apparent overstepping of certain staff and consultants, a limited review of the documents suggests that the Transportation Division's revisions partially address some of the Planning Commission and citizen criticisms. Some streets have been returned to vehicle priority, and others now require City Council approval of projects that would cause reductions in vehicle capacity. In addition, mandatory vehicle LOS monitoring has been restored for some streets. However, Transportation Division staff claim that the streets to which vehicle priority can be added back is limited without a recirculation of the EIR. Specifically, they claim that only streets for which they provided LOS analysis in the current EIR, and which achieved a minimum score of "D" are eligible. This creates an ironic situation in which several streets allegedly must be left with their new bicycle/pedestrian priority due to their much heavier vehicular traffic (e.g., Poinsettia Lane between 1-5 and Aviara Parkway and La Costa Avenue between El Camino Real and Rancho Santa Fe Road), while streets with far lower vehicular traffic (e.g., Carlsbad Village Drive and Alga Road) can go back to vehicle priority. This alleged limitation seems inconsistent with the willingness tore-prioritize so many streets to bicycle/pedestrian (or transit) travel without providing accompanying LOS analyses in the EIR, further suggesting that the current EIR may be defective. In addition, the Transportation Division did nothing to address the concern about the extensive arterial street vehicle LOS exemptions being directly incorporated into the General Plan. A very simplistic "daily street segment capacity" table (3.13-1) was used to determine LOS, which is not necessarily adequate to assess individual street capacities. For example, La Costa Avenue (between 1-5 and El Camino Real) is a very special "arterial," in that it contains almost no intersections. A proper LOS analysis that accounts for intersection density would almost certainly show that La Costa Avenue would not fail the LOS standard and does not need to be put on the exemption list. In any event, the whole idea of putting a "hard-coded" exemption list directly into the General Plan, rather than maintaining a separate list that can be modified as conditions and technologies change seems short-sighted. Best regards, ~;Z.~ Steve Linke 7513 Quinta St Carlsbad, CA 92009 Phone: 760.944.7546; email: splinke@gmail.com 4 Faviola Medina From: Kathy Hamilton Sent: To: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 9:37 AM City Clerk Dept Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Council Internet Email Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2015 9:35AM To: Kathy Hamilton <Kathy.Hamilton@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: FW: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy -----Original Message----- From: Sierra Club [mailto:information@sierraclub.org] On Behalf Of Donna Carr, M.D. Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2015 9:09 PM To: Council Internet Email <CityCouncil@carlsbadca.gov> Subject: 100% for Carlsbad Means 100% Clean Energy Sep 22, 2015 Mayor Hall and Council Members Dear and Council Members, I am happy to say that I live in Carlsbad because it is fine city. What would make it a truly great city is a 100% clean energy goal. I urge you to add this goal to the Climate Action Plan, which you will soon adopt. A 100% goal would do much more than greatly increase the likelihood that Carlsbad will achieve its mandatory greenhouse gas reduction targets. It's about seizing opportunity. A 100% goal would drive adoption of the best available and emerging technologies and the right policies to support them. This would position Carlsbad to benefit, in economic and general quality of life terms, from the rapid shift to clean energy that is underway worldwide. Anything less and Carlsbad will have to play catch up later as other cities capitalize on the inevitable direction of our energy future. A 100% goal would also stimulate partnerships with local businesses, allowing them to benefit economically as well as increase their contribution to overall greenhouse gas reductions for the city. There is a growing number of corporations pursuing 100% clean energy. What is Carlsbad going to do to support that trend and therefore remain friendly to businesses--both large and small? Over the last three years, the Carlsbad Unified School District has seen its electricity bills go up $1 million. It's mostly due to electricity rate hikes, and our district has not invested in money-saving solar because of obstacles put in place by the utility. The school board even passed a resolution to speak up about this. 1 But our schools can't do this alone. We need a citywide effort that is driven by the idea that everyone benefits from clean energy, everyone should have it, and it will take all hands on deck to make it happen. Only the city council can provide the type of leadership that we need to bring all of us together. Please add a 100% clean energy goal to the Climate Action Plan. Sincerely, Donna Carr, M.D. 1201 Sidonia St Encinitas, CA 92024-2240 (760) 436-7836 donnacarrmd@aol.com 2 General Plan Update September 22, 2015 Project Description •Final Environmental Impact Report •General Plan Update, with Housing Element •Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment •Local Coastal Program Amendment •Zoning Ordinance Amendment •New Climate Action Plan Public Hearing Background •July 18, 2015 –Joint City Council and Planning Commission Public Hearing –Detailed staff presentation on project proposal Public Hearing Background •July 18, 2015 –Public comments received by council and commission (public comment closed) –Written comments received on and after July 18 •See Exhibit 13 Public Hearing Background •July 18, 2015 –City Council adjourned its meeting –Planning Commission continued its meeting to: •July 22, 23 and 24 Purpose of This Meeting •City Council consideration of Planning Commission and staff recommendations –City Council errata exhibits A & B •City Council action on the project Planning Commission •Recommendation –Approve project per staff’s July 18th recommendation with revisions –AB Exhibit 9 identifies commission’s revisions –AB Exhibit 10 summarizes commission’s vote on each part of the project Planning Commission •Recommended revisions focus primarily on: –Residential land use designations –Mobility Element Residential Land Use Changes Residential Land Use Changes •Growth Management Quadrant GM Dwelling Unit Limit Total Future Dwellings # Dwellings below GM limit Northwest 15,370 15,113 257 Northeast 9,042 8,939 103 Southwest 12,859 11,109 1,750 Southeast 17,328 16,667 661 CITYWIDE 54,599 51,828 2,771 Residential Land Use Changes •Excess Dwelling Unit Bank CURRENT EDUB BALANCE (outside Village)891 EDUB WITHDRAWAL 873 EDUB DEPOSIT (after approval of category 2 land use changes) 312 (from changes outside coastal zone) 191 (from changes inside coastal zone) REMAINING EDUB BALANCE (after approval of category 2 land use changes) 330 (+191 after Coastal Commission approval) Residential Land Use Changes •Housing Element -RHNA Number of units that can be accommodated by income group Very Low Low Moderate Above Moderate All Income Groups TOTAL 1,262 1,052 1,268 2,932 6,491 RHNA 912 693 1,062 2,332 4,999 SURPLUS 350 359 206 600 1,515 Mobility Element Background •Reasons for Mobility Element update –Achieve balanced, livable streets –Community Vision –Responds to changes in state law –Link to reducing GHG (Climate Action Plan) Mobility Element Background •Relevant state laws & policies –Executive Order S-3-05 (2005) –AB32 (2006) –SB97 (2007) –Complete streets act (2008) Mobility Element Background •Relevant state laws & policies (cont.) –SB 375 (2008) –SB 743 (2013) –Executive Order B-30-15 (2015) Mobility Element Background •Key features –Improve safety/comfort for all users –Emphasize methods to maximize efficiency of road system –Expands circulation performance standard to establish a standard for all travel modes (MMLOS) Mobility Element Background •Key features –Complete the street system •Poinsettia Lane •College Blvd –Cannon Road not to be extended eastward –Complete the bike, pedestrian & trail system Mobility Element •Planning Commission recommends approval with policy revisions –Recommended revisions (AB Exhibit 9) –Expressed concerns (AB Exhibit 12) –Staff recommends additional revisions •Address commission concerns (AB Exhibit 12A/12B) •City Council errata (Exhibit A) Mobility Element •Planning Commission concerns regarding: –Vehicle levels of service on “connector streets” –Road diets –Terms “prioritized” and “non-prioritized” –LOS exemption –Title of “employment street” typology Vehicle LOS on Connector Streets •Planning Commission concern –Vehicle LOS could be reduced to an unacceptable level if the vehicle mode of travel is not required to meet a minimum LOS Vehicle LOS on Connector Streets •Require a minimum LOS D for the vehicle mode of travel on the primary east-west connector streets •Divide “connector streets” into two typologies –Arterial connector streets –Neighborhood connector streets Vehicle LOS on Connector Streets Arterial Connector Streets Neighborhood Connector Streets •All travel modes accommodated •Minimum LOS D for vehicle, pedestrian and bicycle •All travel modes accommodated •Minimum LOS D for pedestrian and bicycle •With City Council approval, vehicle mode may be allowed below LOS D “Road Diets” •Planning Commission concern –Staff would implement road diets and traffic calming measures that would significantly impact vehicle LOS “Road Diets” •Draft policy 3-P.11 (3-P.15, as revised) directs the city to evaluate implementing road diets and traffic calming measures –Intent is to promote safer streets, biking, walking, and attractive streetscapes –Does not require implementation of road diets or traffic calming “Road Diets” •To address the commission’s concern regarding vehicle LOS, staff recommends: –Revise draft policy 3-P.11 to provide the City Council with the sole discretion to approve road diets or traffic calming measures that would reduce vehicle capacity to or below LOS D “Prioritized” & “Non-Prioritized” •Planning Commission concern –The terms “prioritized” and “non-prioritized” modes of travel implies greater importance of one mode of travel over another “Prioritized” & “Non-Prioritized” •To clarify the intent of the Mobility Element, staff recommends: –Delete the terms throughout the element –Reformat Table 3-1 to clearly state which modes of travel are subject to a min. LOS standard “LOS Exempt” •Planning Commission concern –Exempting street segments from the vehicle LOS standard seems like giving up and the city would not do anything else to improve vehicle service “LOS Exempt” •Draft Mobility Element Policy 3-P.7 (3-P.9, as revised) –Allows the city to exempt street segments from vehicle LOS standard, if: •Not feasible to acquire right-of-way •Improvements would cause unacceptable impacts to environment •Improvements would cause unacceptable impacts to other community values •Would require more that 3 travel lanes in each direction “LOS Exempt” •Due primarily to regional growth, at buildout some street segments will operate below LOS D for vehicles •Policy 3-P.8 (3-P.10, as revised) identifies these street segments –Exempts them from the vehicle LOS standard –Only way to maintain LOS D is to widen the streets beyond six lanes “LOS Exempt” •Revised policy 3-P.9 (3-P.11, as revised) requires implementation of TDM and TSM strategies to manage the amount of vehicle traffic on the street •Revised policy 3-P.7 (3-P.9, as revised) to require evaluation of LOS exempt streets to determine if the exempt status is still warranted “Employment Streets” •Planning Commission concern –The title “employment street” does not make sense when the street does not provide access to employment “Employment Streets” •To clarify the purpose of the street typology, staff recommends: –Change the typology to “employment/transit connector street” Mobility Element •With recommended revisions, the Mobility Element remains consistent with: –Changes in state law (e.g. Complete Streets Act) –Carlsbad Community Vision –City Council livable streets priorities –EIR Summary •Planning Commission recommends approval of the project as recommended by staff on July 18 –With revisions identified in AB Exhibit 9 •Staff recommends additional revisions –Mobility Element revisions to address commission concerns (AB Exhibits 12A & 12B) –City Council errata (Exhibit A) Recommendation •Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2015-242 –Certifying the project FEIR (EIR 13-02) –Adopting Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Recommendation •Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2015-243, with City Council errata exhibit A, approving: –General Plan Amendment (GPA 07-02) –Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 07-02) –Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan Amendment (SS 15-06) –Allocation from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank Recommendation •Introduce City Council Ordinance No. CS-287, approving: –Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZCA 07-01) –Zone Change (ZC 15-02) –Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 07-02) Recommendation •Adopt City Council Resolution No. 2015-244, with City Council errata exhibit B, approving: –A Climate Action Plan (SS 15-05) General Plan Update September 22, 2015 Mr. Jason Forgo October 15, 2013 Page 5 "" and 2 of the airport serve as aircraft parking areas, house fuel farms and other structures, which store various chemicals required for routine aircraft maintenance activities. There is an additional fuel island north of Area 3. A crash in this area could result in extensive damage to structures and other parked aircraft A detailed review of the different types of chemicals, their .:::locations and proximity to the runway and/or to the three landfill areas is beyond the scope of this preliminary evaluation. The site also contains a below-grade, high-pressure, gas transmission main, owned by San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E), running east-west, along the north fence of the property. Damage to gas mains can vary from a gas leak resulting in the evacuation of surrounding areas, to otentially significant explosions. Please note SDG&E transmission main is more than 450 feet orth of the existing runway centerline. :Additionally, there are several below-grade LFG extraction and pipelines, as described in ~Table 1, which are assumed to be damaged/ ruptured by an aircraft crash causing free-venting of tethane into the atmosphere. Furthermore, a post-crash fire can pose as an ignition source, . hich can lead to explosions, depending on the concentrations of methane and oxygen in the ffected LFG pipelines, affected by the crash, No explosion related energy release calculations or emissions calculations were conducted as part of this evaluation. A post-crash fire and/or explosion will also severely compromise the air quality at the site and, possibly, at downwind locations. The San Diego air basin is currently in non-attainment of the 8-hour ozone standard set by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) as well as non-attainment for state particulate matter standards. Regulatory consequences of emissions release from a gas leak, fire or explosion were not assessed under this preliminary evaluation. ( Finally, the site also maintains an extensive storm water drainage system with a treatment vortex. It is our understanding that the treatment vortex is inspected once a year and cleaned out, if necessary. Storm water runoff from the airport property travels through the drainage system and the treatment vortex, to a structure under an existing business park area, located immediately north of the airport. This runoff eventually discharges into Agua Hedionda Lagoon, located north-west of the airport. Under a 'vvorst case scenario, it is assumed contaminated liquids from fire-fighting efforts or chemicals released from a crash can enter the storm water management system and potentially impair downstream tributaries and water bodies such as the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. However, this would require a substantial quantity of fuel and/or fire-fighting chemicals for this scenario to even be possible. No calculations were performed under this preliminary evaluation. 4 DISCUSSION In accordance with the scope of services identified in the proposal, SCS evaluated a vertical impact scenario into the landfill cover, focusing on the east end of the runway. During the past ten (I 0) years, there have been twelve ( 12) separate incidences of aircraft accidents, both fatal and non-fatal, in nature, a!! of which occurred during take-off and landing related operations. Since the lengthening of the runway can potentially alter the glide path ofthe aircraft, SCS has Mr. Jason Forgo October 15, 2013 Page 6 included brief discussions on two additional aircraft crash scenarios. The following sections present a summary ofthe effects of runway extension on the existing landfill and GCCS, and also discuss possible environmental impacts from aircraft accidents during take-off and landing, as well as the vertical impact scenario, requested by the County. EFFECT OF RUNWAY EXTENSION ON THE EXiSTING LANDFILL ,AND GCCS In a feasibility study for potential improvements at Palomar Airport, prepared by Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. (Kimley-Hom), dated August 2013, three different runway extension alternatives were identified. These include a 200-foot extension, a 900-foot extension, and a 1 ,200-foot extension to the east of the existing nmway, over areas containing the existing landfill and GCCS (See Figure 5H: Runway Extension Alternative and Approximate Location of Landfill, Kimley-Horn). The feasibility study also states that under the 200-foot extension ~ltemative, there would be minimal impact to the existing landfill and GCCS, while the other two alternatives (900 feet and 1,200 feet) would require extensive ground stabilization efforts and reconstruction of the GCCS. Furthermore, the feasibility study recommends 'Drilled Displacement Columns' as the most suitable method for improving the bearing capacity , and stability of soils, and reducing settlement in compressible materials i.e., sol.id waste, in this case. Under this method, columns would be constructed by advancing a drilling tool through the existing landfill, to the native formations below. The drill would then be slowly retracted, while filling the borehole with concrete or grout. Finally, an asphalt concrete runway pavement would be constructed, with geogrid-reinforced fill soils placed directly over the DDC. Depending on ~ the extension alternative selected, additional portions of Area 3 may be covered by runway ,.,pavement, potentially minimizing Jandfilled areas where cover soils and solid waste could be stripped in the event of an aircraft crash. Consequently, a portion of the Area 3 GCCS extraction we!! and HOPE piping system will likely need to be re-designed and re-constructed. tCENARIO 1 -TAKE-OFF Aircraft at Palomar Airport are permitted to take-off and land from the east end as well as the Eest end ofthe existing runway, depending on wind direction. During take-offs, aircraft are at heir highest weight due to the aviation fuel they carry for the length of the flight. A heavier rcraft requires higher take-off speeds. It is our understanding that some of the larger aircraft at Palomar Airport do not take-off on a full tank of fueL This is because a full tank of fuel increases ~the weight of the aircraft, thus necessitating higher take-off speeds, which in tum require greater runway lengths. The length of the existing runway is insufficient for certain aircraft operating at Palomar Airport to achieve the higher speeds needed. By extending the runway to the east, it is the intent of the County to facilitate these aircraft to achieve higher speeds, needed with higher on-board fuel quantities. With the current runway configuration, when an aircraft takes-off from the east end (as is typical, based on the prevailing wind direction in San Diego County, which is generally from the west), aircraft would not fly directly over the landfill units once becoming airborne, reducing the Mr. Jason Forgo October 15, 2013 Page 7 possibility that an aircraft crash could impact the landfiHed areas. If aircraft are taking-off · toward the east (for example during "Santa Ana" winds from the east to northeast), then it is likely that aircraft would fly over landfill units leading to a possibility of the environmental impact scenarios discussed above. In case of mechanical failures or other events that could contribute to aborting a take-off, the probability that an aircraft now carrying a larger quantity of fuei impacting the landfill, could increase. Please SCS did not review and/or analyze glide paths during take-off or landing for aircraft operating at Palomar Airport. Also, per Airport records, take-offtoward the east is infrequent (approximately 5% of all take-offs), thereby reducing the possibility of such an event. As stated in the earlier sections, aviation fuel is highly flammable and spillage of the same has the potential to cause the various impacts detailed above, if not contained during firefighting efforts. SCENARIO 2 -LANDING ( Currently, when an aircraft lands from the east, it would touchdown in the vicinity of Area 3 landfill. Discussions with the airport authorities indicate that under any of the runway extension alternatives, the landing threshold will be moved back further to the east, an estimated distance of approximately 200 feet. Please note that the landing threshold and end ofthe runway are not necessarily the same. If an east side "displaced threshold" is implemented at Palomar Airport, then the landing threshold would be displaced some distance from the end of the runway. During take-off, aircraft would utilize the entire while during landing, aircraft would be required to extend their approach to touch down at or beyond the displaced threshold. This would mean that aircraft landing on the new runway may touchdown at a location approximately 1200 feet further east of the current touchdown location. In the event of failure to touchdown at the predetermined threshold and/or other mechanical issues that prevent a typical touchdown, there could be aircraft accidents with potential environmental impacts. ·· However, as previously discussed under the different runway extension scenarios, additional portions of Area 3 may be covered by pavement, potentially minimizing landfilled areas where . cover soils and solid waste could be stripped in the event of an aircraft crash. Theoretically, a runway with a typical section consisting of sub grade cover, geogrid, lightweight cement and ~ asphalt concrete, would decrease the possibility of an aircraft penetrating the landfill by creating a substantial barrier that would have to be breached before impacting the landfill. Is c E N A R 1 o 3 -v E R r 1 c A L 1 M P A c r r v P E c R s H As discussed previously, this report assumes that an impact from an aircraft crash into the landfill could breach cover soils and expose solid waste. This scenario could result in the free- venting ofLFG to the atmosphere. Alternatively, the impact from the crash could rupture below- grade HOPE pipes and damage LFG extraction wells, also leading to the free-venting of LFG to the atmosphere. J;nder this worst case scenario a post-crash fire could theoretically aggravate this situation by ~serving as an ignition source to the potentially explosive LFG vapors. There could also be a Mr. Jason Forgo October 15,2013 Page 8 subsurface fire, which could continue for an unspecified duration of time. The site has also 'reported instances of subsurface oxidation events in the past, not related to the airport or any aircraft accidents. -~ As stated earlier, SCS did not perform any energy or emissions calculations or assess the regulatory implications under this preliminary evaluation. Post-crash firefighting methods for crash related fires, landfill surface and subsurface fires would include one or a combination of methods such as water, smothering with soil, using heavy equipment and foam type suppression agents, which could cause some of the impact described above. Based on the current location ofthe blower/flare facility (on the south side of Area 2), it is unlikely that it would be directly impacted or damaged as a result of an aircraft crash event. However, in the event that landfill cover soils are breached at the crash site and there is damage to the HDPE pipe network, air would be introduced into the collection system. With the GCCS still being under vacuum, air drawn into the ruptured end of the piping would slowly move towards the blowers and, possibly, into the flare. Under this scenario, it is possible for the flame within the flare, to propagate back into the collection piping, depending on the composition of the residual gas mixture in the collection piping. It is difficult to predict the magnitude or duration of this scenario, however, there could be extensive damage to the flame arrestor at the flare, blowers, knockout pot and piping, unless the system shuts itself down due to a no-flame or low temperature alarm. 5 CO ClUS!ONS & LiMITATIO S This report attempts to evaluate the worst case 'what-if scenario, and assumes that the impact from an aircraft crash into the landfill cover would result in uncovering buried solid waste materials and damage to the GCCS. The above described events are noted as a 'worst case' scenario and only postulated upon the request from the County. Whether or not this scenario is possible, is beyond the scope of this report. For this preliminary evaluation, it is assumed that any or all of these events are theoretically possible during an aircraft crash event. However, SCS did not conduct any statistical analysis to assess the probability of any of these events or the vertical impact type aircraft crash event. SCS did not assess or evaluate the energy released from any aircraft crash or pipe explosions. Analysis on whether or not the landfill cover itself could be penetrated by an aircraft impact and to what degree may be the subject of a future study. Lastly, SCS did not review and/or analyze typical glide paths for aircraft operating at Palomar 1irport, or glide slope for the airport itself. If, after further planning and study, a suitable runway extension alternative is selected, the limits of proposed ground stabilization efforts, and associated construction activities, will be established. Associated re-design/re-construction ofthe GCCS will depend on the runway option selected and the extent to which the proposed runway will impact refuse disposal areas. Mr. Jason Forgo October 15, 201 3 Page 10 RESOURCES & REFERENCES 1. Accident Analysis for Aircraft Crash into Hazardous F aGilities, Department of Energy, May 2006. 2. Civil and Military Aircraft Accident Procedures for Police Officers and Emergency Services Personnel, June 2010. 3. Contingency Analysis 1Vfodelingjor Superfund Sites and Other Sources, EPA, January 1993. 4. Emergency Response Guide, .Military Aircraft Incidents, July 2007. 5. Resource Guide to Aircraft Fire Fighting & Rescue, Aviation Safety Advisory Group of Arizona, 6. Post-crash Health Hazards from Burning Aircraft Composites. Galaxy Scientific Corporation. 7. http://www.faa.gov/regulations policies/policy guidance/envir policy/airguality handbook/ media!App C.PDF 8. http://www.calrecycle.ca.gov/SWFacilities/Fires/lffiresguide/default.htm 9. http:/ /www.faa.gov/regulations policies/handbooks manuals/aircraft/amt handbook/media!F AA-8083-30 Ch04.pdf 10. http://\\ww .ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief2.aspx?ev id=20060202X00149&ntsbno=SEA06M A047&akey=l To the members of the: CITY COUNCIL AC~.£ CA v CC v Date~ City Manager V Signatures obtained by Bill Bishop 760-500-1764 3139 Del Rey Ave., Carlsbad I strongly recommend that stop signs are placed going South on Cadencia St. at the Del Rey Ave. intersection and going North on Cadencia St. at the Del Rey Ave. intersection. This is an extremely dangerous corner and it is inevitable that a serious auto accident will occur if these stop signs are not installed. Please expedite this and cut through the red tape. k~ 1~1 t>e\ ~ k ~s~aJ '72oO'i ~~~~~ F)~~~ _ __,_ ~11--lk ~lJB ~ ~ ~ CoAst-~ ~ ~(3r/~o(\ Ut-4~ ? I~ J /-z ol'? "3ll'( t>f'L t.rY A.v~ p clfaLl'?i?;AJ} <t .. ~ 0-:tv I) s 11 :z v{J 1 72.-e. t{-~v-'J-1::> Is- 3-30-2o1s y12-7 Der ~Aw o/of?/ ts 1/z)rr 1/~(; r- ~1'1/f( q)Y.)IS ~ -. Ci(Sjts:- ---~-~ -~q-s-~--- 3);3_3 ~ ~ ();v -;S? r-Ca_d__()_j1 C(CL jfxJJ-. 7s:l f 6JILu GLQ ~~~ 3 1 31 o~l ~ kvt 3 < 31-lJu ~ ~k......J 75 03 13 Q/\{1\ ~,.­ -r::D~ ~VA ~1' I strongly recommend that stop signs are placed going South on Cadencia St. at the Del Rey Ave. intersection and going North on Cadencia St. at the Del Rey Ave. intersection. This is an extremely dangerous corner and it is inevitable that a serious auto accident will occur if these stop signs are not installed. Please expedite this and cut through the red tape. ~ac.ab ~\\iv4-, 3\1& Ho.-h<ca. ij. ~C/1~ ~).J-~kl \)rU..JflJ." TO) Ot L 1 '1 o 8 BrA v "--81-. J1J ~ )((tJ I tl=)I<!Un P. £&d 7'ttJ7 Cu0'rt-o f ~ t q11 w~" br ~ qj(~ :VH0 9 v ~-/6" 1-,&-l) q .(o ./5 q~(J-ts- 1-./6--6 f-& -;.5 j-~--I J NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chamber, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 4:00p.m. on Tuesday, September 22, 2015, to consider certification of a Program Environmental impact Report (including Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) for the Draft General Plan and Climate Action Plan; and approval of a comprehensive update to the General Plan, including the Housing Element, and a new Climate Action Plan; and approval of associated amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Local Coastal Program, Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, and an allocation from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. Whereas, on July 18, 22, 23 and 24, 2015 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend to the City Council certification of a Program Environmental Impact Report (including Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) for the proposed draft General Plan, Climate Action Plan and associated amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Local Coastal Program land use and zoning maps, and Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan; approval of a General Plan Amendment to comprehensively update the General Plan, including the Housing Element, approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to amend the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance for consistency with the draft General Plan, approval of a Zoning Map amendment for consistency with the draft General Plan, approval of a Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendment to amend the LCP Land Use and Zoning maps and LCP implementation plan consistent with the draft General Plan Land Use Map and Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance, approval of an amendment to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to amend the Growth Management circulation performance standard, approval of a Climate Action Plan, and approval of an allocation from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after September 18, 2015. If you have any questions, please contact Dave de Cordova in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4604 or david. decordova@carlsbadca. gov. If you challenge the Environmental Impact Report, General Plan Update, Zone Code Amendment, Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Climate Action Plan and/or an amendment to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, 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 wr~tten correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad ViUage Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: EIR 13-02/GPA 07-02/ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02/SS 15-05/SS 15-06 CASE NAME: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE PUBLISH: September 11, 2015 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL Al-131\ Va09·00S·I. wo:ntli3JAie"MMM CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92011 SAN DIEGUITO SCHOOL DISTRICT 710 ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS CA 92024 CITY OF ENCINITAS 505 S VULCAN AV ENCINITAS CA 92024 -----~------ CITY OF VISTA 200 CIVIC CENTER DR VISTA CA 92084 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE 3883 RUFFIN RD SAN DIEGO CA 92123 SAN DIEGO LAFCO STE 200 9335 HAZARD WAY SAN DIEGO CA 92123 ----~----------- U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE STE 250 2177 SALK AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 5934 PRIESTLEY DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 I T ®091.§ ®AH:IAY ~ r ,wdn-dod pAoq;u <II .lliaij~J\.~J I ap uy.e <a.il'lllpf!!ll.l lei f@ zaulill<~H ~ll!lawa6Ael.p ep:;;uas SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DISTRICT STE 250 255 PICO AV SAN MARCOS CA 92069 LEUCADIA WASTE WATER DISTRICT TIM JOCHEN 1960 LA COST A AV CARLSBAD CA 92009 CITY OF SAN MARCOS 1 CIVIC CENTER DR SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949 VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT 201 VALLECITOS DE ORO SAN MARCOS CA 92069 • ---~------··-------------~---- REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD STE 100 2375 NORTHSIDE DR SAN DIEGO CA 92108-2700 AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT 10124 OLD GROVE RD SAN DIEGO CA 92131 CA COASTAL COMMISSION ATTN KANAN! BROWN STE 103 7575 METROPOLITAN DR SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402 MICHAEL MCSWEENEY~ BIA SD STE 110 9201 SPECTRUM CENTER BLVD SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1407 f II\IJ.a5p3J dn-dOd asodxa l Ol aUII 61.1@11! Dl.!iilfl:l -Jaded lfle~:l~' -· r I I I ®09~S ®AU3AV ~1.1eqe6 a1 zasm:J.n .l<llliid I@ S~lt)e:J. sii:R,enb!:m.;t ENCINITAS SCHOOL DISTRICT 101 RANCHO SANTA FE RD ENCINITAS CA 92024 OLIVENHAIN WATER DISTRICT 1966 OLIVENHAIN RD ENCINITAS CA 92024 CITY OF OCEANSIDE 300 NORTH COAST HWY OCEANSIDE CA 92054 I.P.U.A. SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND URBAN STUDIES SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505 SD COUNTY PLANNING STE 110 5510 OVERLAND AV SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1239 SANDAG STE 800 401 B ST SAN DIEGO CA 92101 --------------------~ AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION SAN DIEGO CO. AIRPORT AUTHORITY PO BOX 82776 SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776 r I I ®09 ~§ a:j.ejdw•u qJUaAv asn <J:m~--m:::~:ll.ll ;(~:;:. BRICKELL ENTERPRISES INC 10 SHERBURNE HILLS RD DANVILLE CA 94526 CARLSBAD PALOMAR OAKS L P 1000 PIONEER WAY EL CAJON CA 92020 MARX DOROTHY C/0 CARNOVALE-KELLEY DRYER WARREN 101 PARKAVE NEW YORK NY 10178 LOUGH MICHAEL J 1010 HOME AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CALABRESE DALE C 1012 HOME AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MACGURN RICHARD B TR&MACGURN ELIZABETH M TR 1015 CHESTNUT AVE #E3 CARLSBAD CA 92008 MERCER MICHAEL J 1016 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 SYL VER MARSHALL 1027 S RAINBOW BLVD #281 LAS VEGAS NV 89145 CHRISTMAN ADRIENNE M 1 040 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CALAVERA HILLS II HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 CURTIS MANAGEMENT COMPANY 10455 SORRENTO VALLEY RD #1 02 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 REGENCY BRESS! L L C C/0 CORNERSTONE REAL ESTATE ADVIS 100 WILSHIRE BLVD #700 SANTA MONICA CA 90401 T M G PROPERTY 1000 PIONEER WAY EL CAJON CA 92020 ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS SERVICES DEPT 101 S RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD ENCINITAS CA 92024 MACQUARIE POINSETTIA INC C/0 MACQUARIE BANK LTD 10100 SANTA MONICA BLVD #250 LOS ANGELES CA 90067 ARO PARTNERS 1015 CHESTNUT AVE #A3 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SONN DONALD&CARDIN JULIE 1015 CHESTNUT AVE #F2 CARLSBAD CA 92008 EAGLE CANYON AT EVANS POINT ASSN 10179 HUENNEKENS ST SAN DIEGO CA 92121 MCINNIS SAMUEL&SHEILA 1 030 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 BRUNON FAMILY TRUST 01-13-00 1041 YALE ST SANTA MONICA CA 90403 CALAVERA HILLS MASTER ASSN C/0 CURTIS MGMT 1 0455 SORRENTO VALLEY RD #1 02 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 STATER BROS MARKETS <LF> REGENCY BRESS! L L C C/0 CORNERSTONE REAL ESTATE ADVIS 100 WILSHIRE BLVD #700 SANTA MONICA CA 90401 MATSUI RICHARD K&VERA B TRUST 06-10- 04 1005 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 RODRIQUEZ FAMILY TRUST 1010 GRAND AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 DAILEY PATRICK 1011 HOMEAVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARRANZA FAMILY TRUST 1015 CHESTNUT AVE #B3 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SONN DONALD A&CARDIN JULIE A 1015 CHESTNUT AVE #G2 CARLSBAD CA 92008 LONDON MANAGEMENT COM LLC 1022 GRAND AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 STANLEY FAMILY JOINT REVOCABLE 2009 TRUST C/0 W ROBERT STAN LEY 10343 S FAIRFIELD AVE CHICAGO IL 60655 CARLSBAD BEACH HOTEL PROPERTIES L L c C/0 PETER DAVIS 10455 PACIFIC CENTER CT SAN DIEGO CA 92121 RANCHO PONDEROSA HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 CURTIS MGMT CO 1 0455 SORRENTO VALLEY RD #1 02 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 CALAVERA HILLS II HOMEOWNERS ASSN AMUNDSON JASON DAWSON NICHOLAS B C/0 CURTIS MANAGEMENT COMPANY 1055 LAGUNA DR 1058 CALIFORNIA ST 1 0455 SORRENTO VALLEY RD #1 03 CARLSBAD CA 92008 ENCINITAS CA 92024 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 SURYA L P TRADITIONS AT LA COSTA HOMEOWNERS FELDMAN FAMILY TRUST 07-22-10 10660 SCRIPPS RANCH BLVD #100 ASSN 107 BRIAN CT SAN DIEGO CA 92131 1 0675 SORRENTO VALLEY RD #200B PALM DESERT CA 92260 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 CRIDDLE PERCY N&MARGARET J CARLSBAD CANTERBURY ASSN CARLSBAD PARKSIDE HOMEOWNERS 1070 MCTAVISH RD C/0 MARCIA GOODMAN ASSOCIATION NORTH SAANICH BC CANADA V8L5T4 1 0721 TREENA ST #200 C/0 SHEA HOMES SAN DIEGO CA 92131 10721 TREENA ST #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 EVANS POINT HOMEOWNERS ASSN HERON BAY/SPYGLASS HILLS HERON BAY/SPYGLASS HILLS C/0 MARCIA GOODMAN HOMEOWNERS ASSN HOMEOWNERS ASSN 10721 TREENA ST #200 C/0 MARCIA GOODMAN 10721 TREENA ST #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 10721 TREENA ST #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN SHEA HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP STACEY NEIL H C/0 SHEA HOMES 10721 TREENA ST #200 10772 E YEARLING DR 10721 TREENA ST #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 FITZPATRICK REVOCABLE INTERVIVOS AGORIO YVONNE SAKAMOTO BONNIE K TRUST 03-12-96 1106 2ND ST #215 11101 SUNSET BLVD C/0 ALBERT W FITZPATRICK ENCINITAS CA 92024 LOS ANGELES CA 90049 1080 NE 7TH DR NEWPORT OR 97365 FEARN BOYS-150 TAMARACK AVENUE L L C SOUTHEASTERN CALIF CONFERENCE OF SCHNEEKLUTH CURK&KAREN C/0 CERTIFIED FOLDER DISPLAY SEVENTH-DAY AD* 1162 MARIPOSA RD 1120 JOSHUA WAY 11330 PIERCE ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 VISTA CA 92081 RIVERSIDE CA 92505 J T TRUST 03-13-05 GEORGE FAMILY SURVIVORS TRUST 08-16-LEAVY SEVDA TRUST 07-08-10 1166 MARIPOSA RD 90 117 ROSEBAY DR #23 CARLSBAD CA 92011 11684 KILLIAN ST ENCINITAS CA 92024 EL MONTE CA 91732 LAS SUVERA HOMEOWNERS ASSN LACHASSE DANIEL J VERONA POINTE OWNERS ASSN 11717 BERNARDO PLAZA CT #220 1174 MARIPOSA RD C/0 PROPERTY MGNT CONSULT SAN DIEGO CA 92128 CARLSBAD CA 92011 11770 BERNARDO PLAZA CT #463 SAN DIEGO CA 92128 LINDSAY PHILLIP J&LAURA F LARUCCI FRANCES 2011 TRUST FRIEDER THOMAS G&SANDY 1178 MARIPOSA RD 1179 MARIPOSA RD 1183 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 ANEWALT ANTHONY TRUST 08-18-97 C/0 JOHN A AN EWALT 11835 SPRINGSIDE RD SAN DIEGO CA 92128 GERAGHTY MICHAEL E&KIMBERL Y A 1191 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST 1198 VIA SANTA PAULO VISTA CA 92081 GLS LLC 11999 SAN VICENTE BLVD #335 LOS ANGELES CA 90049 LEGOLAND CALIFORNIA L L C <LF> PLAY U S ACQUIS* THE CORPORATION TRUST CO 1209 N ORANGE ST WILMINGTON DE 19801 GILLIS DARLENE M 1225 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 P P 0 CARLSBAD LLC 1234 E 17TH ST SANTA ANA CA 92701 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE INVESTORS L L c C/0 FRANK VIOLI 1241 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR #1 00 CARLSBAD CA 92008 BURRIS TRUST 08-27-97 1250 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 KROLL KEVIN M&DANIELLE M 1253 BELLEFLOWER RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 EBERT ROBERT R&DONNA C LIVING FAMILY TRUST 1187 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 SCIALDONE FRANK 11928 ORCHARD RD LAKESIDE CA 92040 BOWDEN LIVING TRUST 09-15-00 1199 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 BRKOVIC MILIVOJE S&NATASHA P 1202 PLUM TREE RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 COX CHAD B 1215 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CALAVERA HILLS II L L C 12265 EL CAMINO REAL #180 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 MIONE STEFANO&JOSEPHINE 12381 DARKWOOD RD SAN DIEGO CA 92129 MORGAN FAMILY TRUST 06-19-14 125 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MORGAN LIVING TRUST 10-27-06 12526 HIGH BLUFF DR#105 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 JONES JAMES P&NELSON LINDA M 1253 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 WAGGONER LISA K 119 43 TOWN I COUNTRY DR FREDERICKSBRG VA 22404 ALICANTE HILLS OWNERS ASSN THE C/0 LANDMARK ESCROW SERVICE INC 11975 EL CAMINO REAL #100 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 R 0 F II FAIRWAY LLC 11990 SAN VICENTE BLVD #200 LOS ANGELES CA 90049 WILLIAMS ALBERT JR&DEBORAH P 12087 W RED HAWK DR PEORIA Al85383 LA COSTA GREENS OWNERS ASSN C/0 BUCHANAN INGERSOLL 12230 EL CAMINO REAL SAN DIEGO CA 92130 SZABO ATTILA&KATHY H 1230 CALLE CHRISTOPHER ENCINITAS CA 92024 HUBBARD CONSTANCE R 124 MELROSE DR MISSION VIEJO CA 92692 ELEVEN SAC SELF-STORAGE CORP <LF> FOUR SAC SELF* 1250 E MISSOURI AVE PHOENIXAZ 85014 DUNGAN FAMILY TRUST 03-13-03 12528 SORA WAY SAN DIEGO CA 92129 BARTEL JIMMY A&DEBRA J 1254 PLUM TREE RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 MAVRITTE FAMILY TRUST 06-18-99 1254 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 ANDREWS TRENT J 1258 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 DANNA ARMANDO&DORA 2014 TRUST 11- 14-14 1260 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MOORE RANDAL J 1262 KETTNER BLVD #1703 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 VAYNSHTEYN L&A FAMILY TRUST 01-07-09 1263 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 MAREA AT AVIARA HOMEOWNERS ASSN 12636 HIGH BLUFF DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 KIEFFER RAYMOND J&KAREN 1265 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 CALLEN BACH TIMOTHY C&LISA K 1267 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 FOX ELISE R 1274 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 PURVES KEITH F TRUST 12-16-96 1278 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 NEELEMAN FAMILY TRUST 04-09-93 1255 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 KIRCHHOFF FAMILY TRUST 08-30-12 1258 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 MYERS BARBARA LIVING TRUST 07-31-92 1261 BELLEFLOWER RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 PROVO MARK L&KRISTA A 1262 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 AVIARA MASTER ASSN C/0 CONTINENTAL HOMES 12636 HIGH BLUFF DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 RANCHO CARRILLO MASTER ASSN C/0 CONTINENTAL RANCH INC 12636 HIGH BLUFF DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 MADRID JOHN C&DENISE 1266 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 SMITH DOUGLAS B&ALICE K 1270 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 SMITHERMAN KENTON 0 1274 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 HENDRIX ROBERT M&MARY E FAMILY TRUST 03-11-99 1280 HIDDEN SPRINGS AVE OAK PARK CA 91377 DYE FAMILY 2001 TRUST 1257 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 BISSI DANIEL C&MICHELLE L 1259 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 WRIGHT FAMILY TRUST 02-16-00 1261 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 FORMAN JEFF&ELAINE TRUST 08-22-05 1262 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 AVIARA RESORT ASSCOCIATES LTD PARTNERSHIP C/0 CONTINENTAL HOMES 12636 HIGH BLUFF DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 STERN STEVEN&KELL Y 1265 BELLEFLOWER RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 ROSS JODI D REVOCABLE TRUST 01-13-11 1266 VERONICA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 1273 LAS FLORES L L C 1273 LAS FLORES DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 DUAN FAMILY TRUST 1278 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 HAMMER LARRY D&EILEEN 1282 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 HOLLOWAY KENNETH&DONNA 1286 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 VALLAS THEODORE T TR 129 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MCKERNEY INTERVIVOS TRUST A 07-24-81 C/0 MICHAEL MCKERNEY 12914 WILDCAT CANYON RD LAKESIDE CA 92040 BEULIGMANN STEVEN A 1299 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 WAL-MART STORES INC C/0 PROPERTY TAX DEPT-8013 1301 SE 10TH ST BENTONVILLE AR 72712 LA COSTA GREENS COMMUNITY ASSN 1302 CAMINO DEL MAR DEL MAR CA 92014 LABOUNTY PAUL&JUDITH FAMILY TRUST 07-30-02 1314 GULL CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 BLANCO FAMILY 2004 TRUST 1341 CORVIDAE ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 KOH LYNNET FAMILY TRUST 06-26-13 135 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 DELUCA DAVID T LIVING TRUST 03-07-95 1375 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD CA 92008 LINDSTROM RABBE&ROCHELLE FAMILY TRUST 01-11-91 12880 WELCOME WAY RENO NV 89511 NGUYEN MICHAEL T&CHRISTINE T 1290 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 HOME OF EXCEPTIONAL DENTISTRY L L C 1293 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 SIENKOWSKI MICHAEL 1301 3RD AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92101 FURMAN PAUL A& WOLF-FURMAN SHARON R 13015 E SHANGRI LARD SCOTTSDALE AZ 85259 KRA TCOSKI JOSEPH P JR 1306 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 LLANO GERMAN&FERNANDEZ CLARA I TRUST 1330 KEYSTONE WAY #A VISTA CA 92081 LUND CARLTON D&SANDRA L FAMILY TRUST 02-27-91 1342 CASSINS ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 REUSS ELIZABETH TR 135 KEENE DR MEDFORD OR 97504 FERRER SERGIO 13775 DURANGO DR DEL MAR CA 92014 TRACY DAVID J 1289 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 GREEN COASTLINE L L C 1291 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 MURAl CRAIG T 1294 MARIPOSA RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 FLEET PACIFIC RIDGE L L C ATTN SERVICING DEPT 1301 5TH AVE #3100 SEATTLE WA 98101 DEVELOPMENT SOLUTIONS C 16 L L C C/0 DAVIDSON COMMUNITIES L L C 1302 CAMINO DEL MAR DEL MAR CA 92014 BLANCO FAMILY 2004 TRUST 03-11-04 1314 CORVIDAE ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 FISHER FOREST F R TR C/0 GM PROPERTIES INC 13305 PENN ST #200 WHITTIER CA 90602 YANTZ FAMILY TRUST 11-20-06 13457 LANDFAIR RD SAN DIEGO CA 92130 CARLSON JANAMARI REVOCABLE TRUST 05-28-14 ET AL 135 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 DEVITO-MOORE FAMILY 2012 TRUST 07-09- 12 1401 SUMMIT AVE CARDIFF CA 92007 KOOLHOF FREDERIC J W FAMILY TRUST 04- 23-05 14025 RIVEREDGE DR #280 TAMPA FL 33637 MACQUARIE POINSETTIA INC 1420 5TH AVE #2220 SEATTLE WA 98101 SHUSHAN FAMILY TRUST 06-02-98 144 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 BAILEY MELINDA M FAMILY TRUST 05-04-00 ET AL 14830 N 113TH PL SCOTTSDALE AZ 85255 ISAACS JOHN D&SHIRLEY A 15 RUE DU RIVOLI PL HENDERSON NV 89011 NORTH COUNTY HEALTH PROJECT INC 150 VALPREDA RD SAN MARCOS CA 92069 FERAYORNI FAMILY TRUST 09-16-05 151 SEQUOIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 RYAN DOREEN SURVIVORS TRUST 01-14-14 152 SEQUOIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 RODDENBERRY ROD TRUST 01-23-09 C/0 KESSLER, SCHNEIDER I CO 15260 VENTURA BLVD #1040 SHERMAN OAKS CA 91403 DINSMORE ROBERT W&DEBORAH M REVOCABLE 2003 TRUS* 1541 9TH ST SANTA MONICA CA 90401 BRUBAKER JAMES L&LESLIE A 1410 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD CA 92008 BAYS DENISE 1428 WILBUR AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92109 BEL VUE TERRACE PROPERTIES L L C 14754 VIA DEL CANON DEL MAR CA 92014 CHRISTIE KENNETH J 14836 WINDMILL TER SILVER SPRING MD 20905 PAUR CHARLOTTE M TRUST 12-29-86 150 GRAN VIA PALM DESERT CA 92260 PROMENADE AT LA COSTA ASSOCIATION C/0 ADELE DUFFY 15010 AVE OF SCIENCE #201 SAN DIEGO CA 92128 SOLIS TANIA 151 TAMARACKAVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 GEMINI TRUST 1520 KING ST SANTA CRUZ CA 95060 THDC LLC 1530 FARADAY AVE #100 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CANNON MARIA T 158 N MELROSE DR VISTA CA 92083 SEIDERMAN BRIAN&JOYCE TRUST 04-21-00 1415 FOREST AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 KLEIN MORTON 1435 BREAKWATER TER HOLLYWOOD FL 33019 B N S FAMILY TRUST 03-18-08 148 HILLCREST DR ENCINITAS CA 92024 MONAHAN KEVIN N&JUDY L 14870 AVENIDA ANITA CHINO HILLS CA 91709 GRIFFING FAMILY DECEDENTS TRUST 10- 02-91 150 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 ROSGEN MARY E TR 151 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 ALLEN JOHN W&EVONNE M 152 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 TSAI CHIN-ZONG&CHIN-CHIANG 1521 VIRGINIA RD SAN MARINO CA 91108 HIDDEN RIDGE AT CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 PINNACLE COMMUNITIES 15375 BARRANCA PKWY #B212 IRVINE CA 92618 POHLE CHESTER&JUDY FAMILY TRUST 01- 25-00 15820 ARABELLA AVE BAKERSFIELD CA 93314 LADD DONALD J&CYNTHIA 15885 FETLOCK LN CHINO HILLS CA 91709 GOLDSTEIN FAMILY TRUST 03-27-98 160 TAMARACK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 OPEKA RYAN&RONI 1604 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 WERNIG RAYMOND M JR&JENNIFER S 1606 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 LEVISON MICHAEL 1609 F AI RLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 WHIDDON FAMILY TRUST 03-29-11 1613 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 BOREYKO BENSON K 1621 W RIO SALADO PKY TEMPE AZ 85281 ROBBINS DANIEL&CELENE P 1626 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 STIRPE RONALD J&LUCINDA M 1634 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MOGY RICHARD J&CANDY 1636 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HIEDO SADIR 1590 S MELROSE DR VISTA CA 92081 JENKINS ROCHELLE 1602 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HAYEK BRIAN J&ASHLEY A 16041 NEWTON HILL SAN DIEGO CA 92127 WATT LAWRENCE A&SUZANNA M 1607 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 FRANCO JOANNE M 1610 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 LARSON GRACE J 1618 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MULLER JEAN M 1622 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 BARTNETT MICHAEL J&KATHERINE E 1630 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 CITY OF CARLSBAD PROPERTY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MNGT 1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 A G-C P LA COSTA OWNER LP C/0 SCOTT SCHONFELD 1640 5TH ST #1 01 SANTA MONICA CA 90401 ANDREWS FAMILY TRUST 02-02-04 16 LAUREL AVE BELVEDERE CA 94920 LEE MARK&JOYCE 1603 FAI RLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SILVA RICHARD A 1605 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 TIRTANADI LAURIE J 1608 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ZULAUF MARA 1611 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SUAREZ ARMANDO JR 1620 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 PADUGA REMIA S 1624 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 KLASSEN JERRY D&SUSAN J FAMILY TRUST 10-15-96 16301 HARVEST ST BAKERSFIELD CA 93314 GALLON FAMILY TRUST 07-15-05 16351 GENTRY LN HUNTINGTN BCH CA 92647 VONS <LF> A G-C P LA COSTA OWNER LP C/0 SCOTT SCHONFELD 1640 5TH ST #1 01 SANTA MONICA CA 90401 MOYLES THOMAS B&KENDALL A 1644 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 BOOS VANCE A&IRENE 1650 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HWANG JENNIFER LIN 1656 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 DIAO LIYONG&LIU QING 1666 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SCANLON MATTHEW R 1670 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HEPWORTH JACK A&MARJORIE R 1674 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 VASQUEZ EDGAR A 1678 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 CLOSSEY FAMILY TRUST 09-28-04 169 SEQUOIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 RICHARDSON PAUL A&KELLI A 1702 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 PRIEST-ZACHER TRUST 09-24-13 1708 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 AQUINO KEVIN R 1648 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 CONRAD PETER R&SESNOVICH SUSAN 1652 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SISCO STUART L&SUNDMACHER DEBORAH s 1658 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 EMERSON KATHLEEN S LIVING TRUST 09- 04-13 1668 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SCHENK JAMES M&EVANS JUDY A 1670 MAKALOA ST #204-444 HONOLULU Hl96814 WHITE TODD J&KYLEE A 1676 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SMITH KEVIN T&LINDA A 1680 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 REN JIANMING&DONG YU 1700 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SINGH REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 11-15-03 1704 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 OSTERBERG ERIC C&SANDRA L 1710 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SMITH KALIM 1648 S HANNALEI DR VISTA CA 92083 KESLER SEAN&LAURA L 1654 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 DESHMUKH VINEET A 1660 FAI RLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 CRUM FAMILY TRUST 10-24-03 167 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 PAYNE ALANE 1672 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 JONES GREGORY S&KATIE L 1678 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 A TASSI MIKE LIVING TRUST 04-29-05 1684 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 WOODWARD SHAUNA L A&RUNYAN DEBRA G 1700 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SUN FAMILY TRUST 05-22-13 1704 HANSCOM DR S PASADENA CA 91030 HILL DAVID R 1712 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 COLE RYAN&LEANE 1714 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MCBRIDE LONNIE A TRUST 07-28-11 1726 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 WOLF-RICHARDSON VIOLA 2003 TRUST 04- 11-03 1730 W MULBERRY DR PHOENIXAZ 85015 THOMAS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 11-08- 06 1736 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MATHENY ALLEN L TR&MATHENY ADELE L TR 1746 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 DAMIN VLADIMIR&DAMINA YELENA 1754 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 JOHNSTON MARK H 1758 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ANTLE SUSAN F&RICHARD J 1762 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 UKE MICHELE D 1997 TRUST 1778 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HADDAD KAMEL N&CHAMBERS BEREAN 1782 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 WINDRUM MARK E 1720 HILLSIDE DR FALLBROOK CA 92028 KYAW NAING&WIN SANDAR 1728 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MILLS MARENA L 1732 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HICKEY PATRICK 1740 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 LEE JOSEPH C&DERJU S 175 SEQUOIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 TINDER SHELLY 1756 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 DUFOUR PAUL&MARSHA 2005 TRUST 176 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MADISON MICHAEL E 1766 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SASKA ISABEL R TRUST 04-01-98 1781 SKIMMER CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 DEGNAN MARK E&CHERYL S REVOCABLE TRUST 07-14-06 1786 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SERGENT MICHAEL&JEANIE FAMILY TRUST 10-23-01 1720 KIRK PL CARLSBAD CA 92008 PEYTON JEREMY D&RACHEL H 1730 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 NATALIE MICHAELA&CYNTHIA L 1734 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HEILAND DAVID G 1742 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ROGERS GABRIELE 1750 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SCHEFTNER MICHAEL R&JANELLE 1758 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 DILLER KENNETH G 1760 FAIRLEAD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 COURTNEY CHRISTINA TRUST 04-07-05 177 4 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ZAFERAKIS ANDREW&ZEMINA LIVING TRUST 05-27-14 1782 BLACKBIRD CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 BRAKEBILL GRETCHEN L 2001 TRUST 06-07- 01 17870 BERNARDO TRAILS PL SAN DIEGO CA 92128 NORVELL KATHERINE 1790 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 CAIRE JUSTINIAN&ELIZABETH 1808 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 TENTLER FINANCIAL L L C 18184 CALLE ESTEPONA SAN DIEGO CA 92128 EVERGREEN HEBRON L P 1821 S COAST HWY OCEANSIDE CA 92054 SUGATHAN RUPESH 1832 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HOFFMAN IAN&LINDSAY 1844 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 BAKER WILLIAM&DONNA M DECEDENTS FAMILY TRUST 11* 18552 ERWIN ST TARZANA CA 91335 KINSEY-ROTHSCHILD LIVING TRUST 07-10- 13 18814 LOS ALIMOS ST NORTHRIDGE CA 91326 DEBOER REVOCABLE LIVING SURVIVORS TRUST 05-08-0* 1900 MORNING ROSE DR BAKERSFIELD CA 93312 VILLAGIO HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION C/0 CATHY AGUIRRE 1903 WRIGHT PL #120 CARLSBAD CA 92008 OWEN CULLEN M 1801 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HENDRICKS DENISE L 1813 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SPURLING FAMILY REVOCABLE LIVING 2004 TRUST 08-* 1820 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 WATERS EDGE PROPERTIES LLC 1825 ASTON AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 RHODES T L&EDITH M 1993 TRUST 05-27-93 1840 AVOCADO RD OCEANSIDE CA 92054 SPENCER DAVID L&LAURA M 1848 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ZAVALANIRUDY&CHERYL 1868 CREST DR ENCINITAS CA 92024 MILLER WILMA TR (DCSD) 18831 HIGHLAND VALLEY RD RAMONA CA 92065 KOH JULIETTE B 1903 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #B CARLSBAD CA 92009 LA COSTA GREENS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 MORROW DEVELOPMENT 1903 WRIGHT PL #180 CARLSBAD CA 92008 PAKULA FAMILY TRUST 06-19-90 1804 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 FERGUSON SCOTT T 1817 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 1284 PINE AVENUE PARTNERS 1821 S COAST HWY OCEANSIDE CA 92054 LAUBACH FAMILY TRUST 02-16-89 183 CALLE MAGDALENA #1 00 ENCINITAS CA 92024 LEFF JUDITH TRUST 12-11-01 1840 COTTONWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ABDI FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 06-02-81 18485 WITHEY RD MONTE SERENO CA 95030 PAULSON DENNIS J&LINDA K 1872 SHADETREE DR SAN MARCOS CA 92078 EMERALD POINTE ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 R MICHAEL JOYCE 1900 MAIN ST 5TH FL IRVINE CA 92614 PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES OF CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN 1903 WRIGHT PL #120 CARLSBAD CA 92008 REAL ESTATE COLLATERAL MANAGEMENT co C/0 LIZ LAYMAN/ MORROW DEV 1903 WRIGHT PL #180 CARLSBAD CA 92008 PACIFIC ESTATES OF CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN 1903 WRIGHT PL #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 THOMAS LAURA 1911 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 MURPHY PETER 1911 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #I CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARSOLAIS ROBERT L&JOANNE H FAMILY TRUST 10-01-* 1915 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #C CARLSBAD CA 92009 LA COSTA GREENS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 JOHN LAINS HOMES 1917 PALOMAR OAKS WAY #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 NICOLA VISA 1923 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #C CARLSBAD CA 92009 HEYWOOD KAREN D 1931 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #B CARLSBAD CA 92009 TAMAKI JANET REVOCABLE INTER VIVOS TRUST 08-13* 1935 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #C CARLSBAD CA 92009 CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES CHC L L C 1940 LEV ANTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009 BAY COLLECTION HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 WALTERS MGMT 1959 PALOMAR OAKS WAY #320 CARLSBAD CA 92011 IN GOD WE TRUST 03-03-14 1907 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 GAUNTT MARY B 1911 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #D CARLSBAD CA 92009 OLIVERA K 1911 SAXONY RD LEUCADIA CA 92024 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 COMMERCE TITLE CO 1917 PALOMAR OAKS WAY #160 CARLSBAD CA 92008 W L HOMES L L C 1917 PALOMAR OAKS WAY #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 WOLFE MICHAEL A 1927 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 HENSCH RYAN J 1931 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #D CARLSBAD CA 92009 KNOWLTON CHARLES D 1935 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #E CARLSBAD CA 92009 CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES LLC 1940 LEV ANTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009 BRESSI RANCH COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 WALTERS MGMT 1959 PALOMAR OAKS WAY #320 CARLSBAD CA 92011 HADLEY CLYDE A JR TR 1907 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #B CARLSBAD CA 92009 DURANT BARRY W&ABRAHAMSON DIANE I 1911 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #E CARLSBAD CA 92009 CASTANO MALENA 1915 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 TERI VAN SANN 1917 PALOMAR OAKS WAY #160 CARLSBAD CA 92008 JURKOWSKI BRADLEY 1919 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROBERTS MITCHELL D&PATRICIA 1927 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #B CARLSBAD CA 92009 IANNUZZI FRANK 1935 ESTRELLA DE MAR CT #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES C H C L L c C/0 VALERIE MCPHERSON 1940 LEV ANTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009 LAPLANTE ROBERT&STOUFFER-LAPLANTE LIBBY 1955 MARCASITE PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 WATERS END HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION C/0 WATERS MGMT 1959 PALOMAR OAKS WAY #320 CARLSBAD CA 92011 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AIRPORTS ADMINISTRATION 1960 JOE CROSSON DRIVE EL CAJON CA 92020 NELSON JAMIE&SARA OF AMERICA, INC 1970 BROADWAY #470 OAKLAND CA 94612 SUN FAMILY TRUST 04-30-93 19951 DURHAM CT SARATOGA CA 95070 LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA INC 200 S BISCAYNE BLVD #2500 MIAMI FL 33131 VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT 201 VALLECITOS DE ORO SAN MARCOS CA 92069 AVIARA MASTER ASSN C/0 HILLMAN PROPERTIES WEST INC 2011 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD #206 CARLSBAD CA 92011 AVIARA FSRC ASSCS L TO PTNSHP C/0 JON SPELKE 20200 MAIN ST #990 IRVINE CA 92614 FOOTHILLS AT CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 JACKSON DEMARCO TIDUSIPECKENP 2030 MAIN ST #1200 IRVINE CA 92614 HOWARD REVOCABLE TRUST 06-05-09 2042 BRUCEALA CT CARDIFF CA 92007 CLARK TRUDEL FAMILY TRUST 07-11-13 2051 ALGA RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 LEUCADIA WASTEWATER DISTRICT 1960 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92009 PAVOREAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION C/0 PAT THOMPSON 19700 FAIRCHILD RD #230 IRVINE CA 92612 GOLDEN RALPH&SANDRA LIVING TRUST 09- 22-97 1996 BELMORE CT EL CAJON CA 92020 DEJONG ARIE H FAMILY TRUST 06-25-87 20000 N RALSTON RD MARICOPA AZ 85139 GROSS VIRGINIA E 1990 TRUST 05-24-11 2010 VINTAGE PL ESCONDIDO CA 92027 AVIARA MASTER ASSOCIATION C/0 HILLMAN PROPERTIES 2011 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD #206 CARLSBAD CA 92011 LA COSTA VILLAGE INC 2030 E FLAMINGO RD #290 LAS VEGAS NV 89119 LARSON KAARE&ANNA K 2031 MAR AZUL WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 GRENGS GEORGE&KAREN FAMILY TRUST 12-02-02 20430 VIA CELLINI PORTER RANCH CA 91326 CRANDALL ANAMAE IRREVOCABLE TRUST 09-13-14 C/0 ROBIN D NELSON 20715 MEADOW DR SONOMA CA 95476 OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT 1966 OLIVENHAIN ROAD ENCINITAS CA 92024 BAGNALL MICHAEL L&EMILY T FAMILY SURVIVORS TRUS* 1990 DEERGRASS WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 LA COSTA RIDGE COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 PUL TE HOMES 2 TECHNOLOGY DR IRVINE CA 92618 TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK L L C 2006 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD #113 CARLSBAD CA 92011 AVIARA MASTER ASSOCIATION 2011 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 WATERS END HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 TRANSPACIFIC MGMT 2020 E 1 ST ST #500 SANTA ANA CA 92705 WALTERS WILLIAM T&SUSAN B 2030 E FLAMINGO RD #290 LAS VEGAS NV 89119 BARRATT AMERICAN INC 2035 CORTE DEL NOGAL #160 CARLSBAD CA 92011 TRITON STREET DEVELOPMENT L L C 205 W ALVARADO ST FALLBROOK CA 92028 WRISLEY 1990 FAMILY TRUST (1-31-90) 2080 BASSWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 SHUSTER FAMILY TRUST 03-03-99 2090 RIO VISTA DR FALLBROOK CA 92028 LAUGHLIN FAMILY LIVING 1993 TRUST B 04- 16-93 C/0 DONNA LAUGHLIN 2104 ELAMIGO RD DEL MAR CA 92014 GUEVARA RICHARD G&MARILYN S TRS 2124 SUN VALLEY RD SAN MARCOS CA 92078 SANTA FE TRAILS OWNERS ASSOCIATION C/0 ASSOCIATION MANAGEMENT GROUP 2131 LAS PALMAS DR#A CARLSBAD CA 92011 HOGAN 2013 FAMILY TRUST 02-14-13 2171 VIA TECA SAN CLEMENTE CA 92673 SIEGEL JOHN M&RENEE TRUST 08-12-76 21935 SW LEBEAU RD SHERWOOD OR 97140 DRAGLID INC 2226 N TOWNER ST SANTA ANA CA 92706 ANGAROLA JOSEPH&LIL Y IRREVOCABLE TRUST 07-17-14 2240 JEFFERSON ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 VEA GILBERT V&TRINIDAD T 2250 W HAMIL TON AVE EL CENTRO CA 92243 WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING INC 2280 WARDLOW CIR CORONA CA 92880 WANG LIVING TRUST 07-20-06 21 HAWKS NEST RD STONY BROOK NY 11790 LANZL JUSTIN 2114 PETALUMA AVE LONG BEACH CA 90815 HILLGATE ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION 2131 EL CAMINO REAL #101 OCEANSIDE CA 92054 WATERS END HOMEOWNERS ASSN 2131 LAS PALMAS DR#A CARLSBAD CA 92011 STAN HOPE KENNETH L&LAURA J 2172 E 26TH WAY YUMA AZ 85365 NELSON MARGERY A TRUST 220 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD ARROYO VISTA HOMEOWNERS ASSN 2237 FARADAY AVE#100 CARLSBAD CA 92008 MILLER KIRK A 2248 JEFFERSON ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 RANCHO PONDEROSA HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 AMERICAN REAL ESTATE ASSOC 227 N EL CAMINO REAL #205 ENCINITAS CA 92024 CHARTRAW KATHERINE L TRUST 02-27-06 23 MOUNTAIN CIR LAKE OSWEGO OR 97035 CLINE DAVID J&BARBARA E REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 21 02 E BALBOA BLVD NEWPORT BEACH CA 92661 CARLSBAD-WOODRIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT SERVICES 2124 EL CAMINO REAL #204 OCEANSIDE CA 92054 MORNING RIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 ASSOCIATION MGMT GRP 2131 LAS PALMAS DR#A CARLSBAD CA 92011 SALTAIRE AT CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION C/0 PILOT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT KRI 2146 ENCINITAS BLVD #102 ENCINITAS CA 92024 MARVIST A MAINTENANCE CORP C/0 CAL WEST MGNT 2185 FARADAY AVE #140 CARLSBAD CA 92008 PALOMAR B L C L L C C/0 BIXBY LAND CO 2211 MICHELSON DR #500 IRVINE CA 92612 RANCHO CARRILLO MASTER ASSN C/0 CONTINENTAL RESIDENTIAL INC 2237 FARADAY AVE #1 00 CARLSBAD CA 92008 MADDEN FAMILY TRUST 08-06-13 225 S 38TH ST BOULDER CO 80305 MSJJ L L C 22799 W RIVER RD GROSSE ILE Ml48138 WESTERN CONSUMER SERVICES INC C/0 LEGAUJVW 23 PASTEUR IRVINE CA 92618 SIEGEL ROBERT&DORIS TRUST 08-19-76 2300 PIO PICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 TOVAR FAMILY TRUST 08-26-99 2315 BIRDIE ST OCEANSIDE CA 92056 TONG CHRISTOPHER&DO MARY H 2339 PIO PICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 ROSSALL KERRY D 2361 BUENA VISTA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92008 DIELI SALVATORE&ALICE M 2375 RANGE AVE #88 SANTA ROSA CA 95403 PRADELS FREDERICK L&KARIS J 238 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 GHASSEMI PARVINDOKHT TRUST 2400 5TH AVE #1 06 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 BONAS BRYAN J&RITA B 241 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 GAGNON TERRY&MARIAN 24244 NOTTINGHAM CT VALENCIA CA 91355 HOHMAN FAMILY TRUST OF COSTA MESA 08-07-08 2450 ORANGE AVE COSTA MESA CA 92627 ROGERS CHARLES C TR&ROGERS DIY AN L TR 2305 PIO PI CO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 COLINAS DE ORO COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 HOMES BY POLYGON 23161 MILL CREEK #200 LAGUNA HILLS CA 92653 DAVIS MARY L 236 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 PARK KIM R TRUST 06-12-02 237 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CRISPEN FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 09-21- 01 2378 TERRAZA RIBERA CARLSBAD CA 92009 PALISADES VIEW C/0 TIEMPO ESCROW II 23807 ALISO CREEK RD #280 LAGUNA NIGUEL CA 92677 ERNST JOHN O&ALLEGRA 24081ST AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92101 WILCOX KEVIN F 2413 BRADLEY CREEK RD JOHNSON CITY NY 13790 MCCARTY MICHAEL F 245 HEMLOCK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MEMEL RONN&DIANNE L 2451 BUENA VISTA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92008 ROGERS CHARLES C&DIYAN L TRS 2305 PIO PICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 COLE 0 F C CARLSBAD CA L P C/0 COLE REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS 2325 E CAMELBACK RD #11 00 PHOENIXAZ 85016 SCHLEHUBER CONTINGENT TRUST 02-24-05 C/0 MICHAEL SCHLEHUBER 2360 AVENIDA HELECHO CARLSBAD CA 92009 VINE JAMES E&LII 237 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 ANDRUES TERRY A&MARY C 2379 HIGHLAND AVE ALTADENA CA 91001 POINSETTIA HEIGHTS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING 2385 CAMINO VIDA ROBLE #107 CARLSBAD CA 92011 PIT ALE ANTHONY J&SUSAN R 241 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 SARRO-PORRITT FAMILY TRUST 05-30-01 242 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MYRON LCO 2450 IMPALA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 C B CHINQUAPIN L L C 2454 ALTON PKWY IRVINE CA 92606 CAMPBELL DOROTHY B REVOCABLE 2001 TRUST 04-18-01 2454 ALTON PKWY IRVINE CA 92606 MISSETT FAMILY TRUST 07-06-90 2460 IMPALA DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 AVIARA RESORT ASSOCIATES SPELL C C/0 KEN REINKE 248 HOMER AVE PALO ALTO CA 94301 ZAGALA FAMILY TRUST 06-01-98 2484 W IVANHOE ST CHANDLER AZ 85224 PALOMAR FORUM OWNERS ASSN C/0 MAR WEST REAL ESTATE 250 EL CAMINO REAL #210 TUSTIN CA 92780 HOSPICE OF THE NO COAST 2525 PIO PI CO DR #31 0 CARLSBAD CA 92008 FESTIVE TENTS L P 254 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 365 HEMLOCK B TRUST 10-06-05 C/0 TAX SERVICE 25612 BARTON RD #348 LOMA LINDA CA 92354 COX DAVID C&JANET M 260 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 KORABECK GARY S 26183 ENGELMANN RD VALLEY CENTER CA 92082 FERGUSONJOHNJR 24582 VIA DEL RIO LAKE FOREST CA 92630 KURNER DAVID C&LAURA C 2461 BUENA VISTA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92008 EVANS RONALD E&ROSEMARIE E 2480 CYMBIDIUM CT HIGHLAND CA 92346 R REF II-GP CROSSINGS J V LLC C/0 RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS 25 ENTERPRISE #400 ALISO VIEJO CA 92656 COLONY AT CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN THE C/0 SEACOAST ESCROW 251 N EL CAMINO REAL ENCINITAS CA 92024 COODY REVOCABLE TRUST 09-23-05 253 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MOSS LIVING TRUST 08-28-90 25408 COLETTE WAY CALABASAS CA 91302 SCHILLER FAMILY TRUST 05-02-14 258 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 RAGLAND FAMILY 2002 TRUST 06-17-02 260 TAMARACK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MCCOY FAMILY 1994 TRUST 04-26-94 262 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MCNEVIN VALERIE C 246 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 J B B PROPERTIES L L C C/0 HIP MOBILE GEOCHEMISTRY INC 2470 IMPALA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MARINERS POINT COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 LENNAR HOMES OF CA 24800 CHRISANTA DR #200 MISSION VIEJO CA 92691 BOLTON TIMOTHY A 250 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 BUTLER CHRIS A REVOCABLE TRUST 03-20- 13 251 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 STITH FAMILY TRUST 01-07-09 2530 N SANTA LUCIA DR TUCSON AZ 85715 SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS SERVICES DEPT 255 PICO AVE, SUITE 250 SAN MARCOS CA 92069 CHURCHILL ROBERT T&KAREN J 26 WRIGHT PL WILBRAHAM MA 01095 SETTLEMYER KAREN M 2005 TRUST 06-24- 05 2604B EL CAMINO REAL #216 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SHEPHERD PAUL E&DONNA M 2631 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 ARAIN SOFIA 2632 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 GODINA PEDRO M 2635 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 ESPINOZA ROSA E 2638 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 URQUIJO MICHELLE T 2640 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 MEAD DONNA 2643 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 JONES KIMBERLY D 2646 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CHANDARLIS ROSALINDA 2649 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 ETIENNE-MERCADO BARBARA 2650 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CUELLAR SUSANA M 2669 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 TELLEZ MIRIAM 2671 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 WARREN NANCY J 2633 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 LEE DARNELL&JOYCE 2636 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 KIRILLOV ALEXEY&KIRILLOVA YULIYA 2639 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CLARK BRYAN P& TARA J 2641 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 KELTS AMY E 2644 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARONDA-DEPASCALE BLANCA 2647 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 GRUTMANINVESTMENTSINC 26496 SUMMER CREEK LAKE FOREST CA 92630 CINNAMON APARTMENT PARTNERSHIP C/0 CHAMBERLAIN PROPERTY MGMT CO 2653 ROOSEVELT ST #D CARLSBAD CA 92008 CALL JULIEANNE 2670 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 LIVINGSTON STEVEN J 2671 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 WAYNICK KELLEY 2634 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 THOMAS TYLER&HOLLY 2637 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SOUTH TRACY LAND PARTNERS LLC 264 PACIFIC AVE SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 CHIANG SHIRLEY H 2642 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 LE-NGUYEN TRUST 08-13-05 2645 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARTINEZ MARLENE V 2648 HANCOCK CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 VILLA DE LA PLAYA TRUST 11-20-03 265 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 NGUYEN NANCY MINH 2668 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SALMON JOY 2670 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 FERNANDEZ ARTHUR 2672 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 HSU ALICE W 2672 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 NEAL DARYL 2674 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 LARBI HANS 0 2675 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CAMPBELL BLAKE 2676 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 GONZALEZ RAMON 2678 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 WOODHOUSE REBECCA S 2679 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 MAYER DYLAN&KELLI 2681 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 BEHLER GWYNNE M 2682 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 EVERETT PAMELA K 2684 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 EPUNAJOHN C 2685 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 HUGHES JEREMY J 2673 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 GOLABATON L L C 2674 COSTEBELLE DR LA JOLLA CA 92037 LILI 2675 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SU HONG&CAI LING 2677 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 TANTOD BINDI S 2678 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 BAEK SEUNG HO&CHANG SEOK MEE 2680 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOHNSON JESSICA E 2681 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALLEN JANE E 2683 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 DONOGHUE ANDREW 2684 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 JOHNSON JACI MICHELE 2686 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 NELSON RUTH A FAMILY TRUST 09-09-13 2673 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 FINN FRANCIS J 2674 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 KING DANA M&HANNAH D 2676 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 PARK JONG WHA 2677 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SILVA JOAO C&ROSALVA N 2679 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 EAKIN KEVIN B&OLIVIA L 2680 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CHU XIAOMEI LIVING TRUST 02-12-14 2682 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALAM ZEYN&KHANAM SHRIN 2683 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 KAUTZ ROSE M 2685 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 ARROYO JULIETA M 2686 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 WOLICKI ALICE F 2687 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 FELLOWS SUSAN M 2689 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SANCHEZ NOE&ADELA 270 TAMARACK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 L S F 5 CARLSBAD HOLDINGS L L C 2711 N HASKELL AVE #1800 DALLAS TX 75204 CALAVERA HILLS MASTER ASSN C/0 MCMILLIN HOMEBUILDERS INC 2727 HOOVER AVE NATIONAL CITY CA 91950 KENNEDY BETTY 2729 LA GRAN VIA CARLSBAD CA 92009 CALAVERA HILLS II HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION C/0 MCMILLIN CO 2750 WOMBLE RD SAN DIEGO CA 92106 KELLY ROBERT P&ROBINSON-KELL Y KAREN RTRS 2770 SUNNY CREEK RD CARLSBAD CA 92010 HODGES B S FAMILY TRUST 04-20-98 27814 N 71ST ST SCOTTSDALE AZ 85266 MITCHELL ASHLEY 28 HEATH DR LONDON NW3 7SB ENGLAND ABADILLA GABRIEL 2687 LEIGHTON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CURTIS JAMES L&JENNIFER L 26900B MARINA RD ORANGE BEACH AL 36561 MANN WILLIAM C SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 10-17-98 2701 OCEAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 CENTER FOR NATURAL LANDS MANAGEMENT INC 27258 VIA INDUSTRIA #B TEMECULA CA 92590 CYPRESS VALLEY L L C C/0 MCMILLIN HOMEBUILDERS INC 2727 HOOVER AVE NATIONAL CITY CA 91950 PRICE TRUST 08-02-94 C/0 JANE E GERMANO 2745 NE ROSALIE PL POULSBO WA 98370 GERBER PHILIPPE&ANNE 2753 LA GRAN VIA CARLSBAD CA 92009 SELVAGGIO DOROTHY TRUST 01-17-13 2775 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 THAYRE RICHARD BEST OF 2783 MARKET ST SAN DIEGO CA 92102 US BANK C/0 US BANK CORPORATE REAL EST AT 2800 E LAKE ST MINNEAPOLIS MN 55406 BLESSMAN DAWN E 2688 ALAMEDA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SEIDERMAN BRIAN&JOYCE TRUST 04-21-00 270 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 AVIARA RESORT ASSOCIATES SPELL C C/0 CORPORATION SERVICE CO 2711 CENTERVILLE RD #400 WILMINGTON DE 19808 CALAVERA HILLS II HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 MCMILLIN COMPANIES LLC 2727 HOOVER AVE NATIONAL CITY CA 91950 MILLIKEN SANDRA S 2728 GROVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 NEWLOVE JAMES H&JANICE B 2749 ABERDEEN LN ELDORADO HILLS CA 95762 NEEDLEMAN RICHARD&KWAN ADA 27641 AVENUE SCOTT VALENCIA CA 91355 SMITH TODD S&ELIZABETH K 278 VALLE VISTA DR DANVILLE CA 94526 WILLIAMS FAMILY TRUST 02-14-99 27931 VIA EST AN CIA SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CA 92675 BRODSKY STUART A&ILENE S 2803 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 GUNN DONALD P&CAROLE A REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 2805 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 CAMMINO MATHEW&MARY V TRUST A 11- 19-98 2811 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 BANUELOS GLORIA 2820 HOPE AVE #B CARLSBAD CA 92008 KURISU FAMILY TRUST 01-06-09 2820 HOPE AVE #F CARLSBAD CA 92008 KREBS JOHN JR&SCHMIDT-KREBS MARY E 2825 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARASSO FRED J FAMILY TRUST 10-09-75 2835 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAN PACIFICO COMMUNITY ASSN 28481 RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD #101 TEMECULA CA 92590 ROSALENA OWNERS ASSN INC THE C/0 NAMMIS PROPERTIES 285 WINDROSE CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 WOODMASTER TRUST 11-04-98 2855 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 UNDERHILL JAYNE E TRUST 03-18-04 2870 WINTERWARM WAY FALLBROOK CA 92028 MARTIN STEVEN K&DEBORAH K 28050 GLENMEADE WAY ESCONDIDO CA 92026 RUSS FAMILY TRUST 01-14-04 2815 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 JIMENEZ JOSEF 2820 HOPE AVE #C CARLSBAD CA 92008 WHEELER FAMILY LIVING TRUST 09-08-12 2820 HOPE AVE #H CARLSBAD CA 92008 EGGLESTON MICHAEL W 2831 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARRAHER TERRY S&TERRI R 2841 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 TRAMONTO HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 EQUITY MGMT 28481 RANCHO CALIFORNIA RD #101 TEMECULA CA 92590 MASS THOMAS A&JANET A REVOCABLE TRUST 02-16-97 2851 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 GERICOS 2858 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD CA 92008 VADGAMA PRATAP&ARUNA 2871 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 LANCIAL MARTHA L 2807 CREST DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 DOWNING FAMILY TRUST 07-22-04 2820 HOPE AVE #A CARLSBAD CA 92008 ASHTON RICHARD 2820 HOPE AVE #E CARLSBAD CA 92008 FUNCHES OTIS T&SATO MACHIKO LIVING TRUST 2821 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 BROOKFIELD OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC 2835 CAMINO DEL RIO S SAN DIEGO CA 92108 SINGHAL GOKUL C LIVING TRUST 12-16-88 2845 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 MOLINAR EDMUND R&MARIAN L FAMILY TRUST1 0-12-90 285 HEMLOCK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 QUILLIN FAMILY TRUST 04-25-89 2855 CARLSBAD BLVD #N208 CARLSBAD CA 92008 HERBST STEPHEN R 2861 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 JORDAN MICHAEL D 2875 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD WOODBRIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSN 2879 WOODRIDGE CIR CARLSBAD CA 92008 TOWNS JAMES W&MARLENE 2895 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 DONNELLY REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 06- 22-94 2905 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 DRASTRUP DEBORAH A REVOCABLE TRUST 12-22-03 2915 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 BARTNIKOWSKI REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 2925 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 BRETSCHNEIDER JAN&HOOK JULIA A 2940 S ARIZONA AVE YUMA AZ 85364 BEARBEAU PARTNERS LLC C/0 BARRY BLUE 2950 OCEAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 WALLS PHILLIP E&ECKE NOEL C 2954 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 DEPACE CINDY 2965 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD CA 92008 OLEXEY TERRILL FAMILY TRUST 06-23-09 2974 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 WEILLER CLAUDE S&SHARON J 2881 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 ERICKSON CLARK&CANDLER KAY L 29 CORNELL RD BALA CYNWYD PA 19004 NELSON LARRY R&LARA B 291 E COUNTRY CLUB DR HENDERSON NV 89015 KNOWLES WILLIAM R SURVIVORS TRUST 02-05-95 C/0 ROB KNOLES 2917 MAPLE AVE MANHATTAN BEACH CA 90266 SINISCAL JOHN A&REIKO 2931 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 TING TUZ CHIN&SHIRLEY M 2941 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD BLVD CONDO RENTAL LLC C/0 BARRY BLUE 2950 OCEAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 ROUSSJASONH&MARGARET 2958 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 ABRAMS BENNETT&GARY HANICK 2000 TRUST 03-13-00 2968 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 BOLTON WILLIAM D&YVONNE FAMILY TRUST 2978 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 PAYNE L SCOTT&MARIE K 2893 TORRY CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 NOLTE FAMILY TRUST 05-26-13 290 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 SILVA SAL A FAMILY TRUST 05-20-02 291 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 SCHARFF H CHRIS&MAUREEN FAMILY TRUST 11-01-94 2921 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALLEN DAVID&MICHELLE 2935 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 INGLISH BLAKE&KRISTI 2945 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 PASARNIKAR SACHIN S&THERESA M 2951 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 MANNING MICHAEL 2964 SONDRA CT CARLSBAD CA 92009 PACIFIC POINTE AT CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 LUCAS I MERCIER 29712 AVENIDA DE LAS BANDERA RCHO ST A MARG CA 92688 A C A A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 29848 LIVE OAK CANYON RD REDLANDS CA 92373 HARNISH MATTHEW R 2985 GLENBROOK ST CARLSBAD CA 92010 COURTNEY-MORONG DANIEL&MARIL YN FAMILY 2005 TRUS* 300 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR #1 08 CARLSBAD CA 92008 VANSLYKE ROBERT S&JAN B 300 HERMIT ST #8 JUNEAU AK 99801 HENTSCHEL ARTHUR W 301 SUNRISE RD BREA CA 92821 KING FAMILY TRUST 3024 STANFORD AVE MARINA DEL REY CA 90292 SAUNDERS FAMILY TRUST 02-20-07 3032 SKYLINE DR OCEANSIDE CA 92056 HARGIS-MCQUADE SUSAN 306 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 KAY NORMA R TRUST 10-15-09 C/0 NORMA KAY 3079 CASTLEBURY PL GALESBURG IL 61401 LA COSTA RIDGE COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 WARMINGTON GRP 3090 PULLMAN ST COSTA MESA CA 92626 TRACT 85-19 COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION 3103 VILLA WAY NEWPORT BEACH CA 92663 DRAWBRIDGE PACIFIC VIEW CORPORATE L LC 3 EMBARCADERO CTR #231 0 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94111 CRAIG BARBARA C TRUST 10-08-99 300 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR #1 08A363 CARLSBAD CA 92008 BLENDE SUSAN L T 1992 TRUST 301 HEADLANDS CT SAUSALITO CA 94965 CHERRY TREE WALK HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 THE OLSON COMPANY 3020 OLD RANCH PKWY #250 SEAL BEACH CA 907 40 REINDERS KATHLEEN E 30247 CHIHUAHUA VALLEY RD WARNER SPRINGS CA 92086 SHORE DRIVE L L C C/0 DAVID T LISONBEE 304 E 1600 N OREM UT 84057 MAROKI LUAY&SUMMER 3068 JAMACHA VIEW DR EL CAJON CA 92019 MITCHELL JENNIFER L TR 3080 CAMINITO TERCER VERDE DEL MAR CA 92014 LA COSTA GREENS COMM ASSN 3090 PULLMAN ST #A COSTA MESA CA 92626 AMAPOLO L L C C/0 BLAIR A NICHOLAS 3117 WILDFLOWER SMT ENCINITAS CA 92024 GIRDNER WILLIAM 30 N RAYMOND AVE #310 PASADENA CA 91103 FORESTER FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 05- 07-99 C/0 JOHN AND JULIE FORESTER 300 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR 1 08A-355 CARLSBAD CA 92008 TARVIN DEREK&MARCI FAMILY TRUST 12- 19-12 301 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 FITZGERALD TRUST 12-02-93 3021 VIA DE CABALLO ENCINITAS CA 92024 HELLMAN DAVID J&KAREN J 30300 CHURCHILL CT TEMECULA CA 92591 TERAN SARAC 305 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 WESTON KATHRYN A REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 10-11-12 3068 SERRANO RD SAN BERNARDINO CA 92405 MARBRISA MAINTENANCE CORP C/0 G R G MGMT INC 3088 PIO PI CO DR #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 RANSFORD SHARI L 31016 SADDLEBACK RD VALLEY CENTER CA 92082 CARAS GORDON W C/0 GORDON CARAS 312 S CEDROS AVE #308 SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 LA COSTA GREENS COMMUNITY ASSN 3121 MICHELSON DR#200 IRVINE CA 92612 TIMM JENS P&MELANIE G 314 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 LA CREST AAT COLINAS DE ORO HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 HOMES BY POLYGON 3152 RED HILL AVE #100 COSTA MESA CA 92626 PERSIDOK CHRISTOPHER P <AKA PERSIDOK KRZYSZTOF* 318 SPRUCEWOOD DR ENCINITAS CA 92024 FERRARI TODD 32110TH AVE #515 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 COHEN FAMILY 2014 TRUST 01-13-14 3217 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92009 ROWE BRIAN G& TAMARA J 3236 EUREKA PL CARLSBAD CA 92008 LOCKE KENNETH W&HEATHER C FAMILY TRUST 02-06-03 325 7TH AVE #2201 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 WILLIAMS LESLIE TRUST 10-19-10 327 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 MILAM TRUST 04-18-13 3286 JAMES DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 SEA CLIFF HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 PLAZA BUILDERS INC 3127 AIRWAY AVE #A COSTA MESA CA 92626 VOELKER HOLDINGS L L C 3145 VIA DEL MONTE LIBANO VISTA CA 92084 VAGENAS TRUST 08-16-01 316 COLORADO ST ARCADIA CA 91007 DAVISON JOHN A&ALICE M AB LIVING TRUST 3180 CANYON ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 STEENKEN RICHARD W DECEDENTS TRUST 06-04-05 ET * 3215 BARNES CIR GLENDALE CA 91208 HERTZ SUSAN B TRUST 04-01-13 3221 CORTE TAMARINDO CARLSBAD CA 92009 HLAWEK FAMILY TRUST 09-20-13 324 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 JEFFREY DAVID J FAMILY TRUST 10-29-14 326 ALAMO AVE SANTA CRUZ CA 95060 ROSE FRANK J&EVEL YN 32791 LUMERIA LN DANA POINT CA 92629 OSTERKAMP FAMILY TRUST 09-02-90 32889 LUISENO CIR PAUMA VALLEY CA 92061 SUMMER DAYS L L C 3135 DUSTY TRL ENCINITAS CA 92024 LA COSTA GREENS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 JULIANNE RACHECK 3150 PIO PICO DR#101 CARLSBAD CA 92008 DISPUN SURAVIT&SUPREEDA M 316 GOLDENROD DR WALNUT CA 91789 VINER JAMES R TRUST 10-17-13 320 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 WEINBERG FAMILY TRUST 09-21-89 3215 E ABBEY LN ORANGE CA 92867 CRUZ REVOCABLE TRUST 07-17-92 3230 EUREKA PL CARLSBAD CA 92008 LEDESMA LUPE REVOCABLE TRUST 01-20- 97 3244 EUREKA PL CARLSBAD CA 92008 KELLENBERGER FRED&PEGGY 3266 EUREKA PL CARLSBAD CA 92008 TARBELL SHANNON 3281 AVENIDA MAGORIA ESCONDIDO CA 92029 PRITTEN LEW I 330 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 KELLY/JRM-PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD I L L c 330 ENCINITAS BLVD #201 ENCINITAS CA 92024 JACOBSON ROSE 3301 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MOU KIZEN LIVING 1996 TRUST 07-24-96 3302 DON QUIXOTE DR #7 CARLSBAD CA 92010 RATHBONE FAMILY TRUST 03-04-05 3314 DON QUIXOTE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KOHL FAMILY TRUST 07-26-96 3317 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HARNJAMES 3322 DON QUIXOTE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 TURNER FAMILY TRUST 08-23-00 3327 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PICCINI DIANNE C 3330 DON QUIXOTE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MORENO FRANK A& SANDRA M TRUST 07- 22-11 3336 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD. CA 92010 JOHNSON JOANN 3339 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ODOM FAMILY TRUST 10-02-06 330 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 GENSLER CHARLES A&LUCIA G 3301 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PATCHEN MARSHAL 3302 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MAXVILLE JUNE D LIVING TRUST 06-23-03 3314 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BERSCHNEIDER ROCKLIN J&RONELL 3318 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 REINHOLZ RIKKI TRUST 12-22-10 3323 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SMITH MARY LOU TRUST 07-19-04 3328 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 STANDERFER TRUST 10-02-01 3332 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HENRY CHARLES H&LINDA L 3337 DON DIABLO DR #24 CARLSBAD CA 92010 NOVAK EDWARD T REVOCABLE TRUST 08- 19-02 3339 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WILSON FREDERICK L&DEBRA K 3301 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DONLEY FAMILY TRUST 07-29-04 3302 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JOHNSTONE MARILYN J 2003 TRUST 05-15- 03 3312 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MICELI RODGER J LIVING TRUST 1986 3315 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HANKIN FAMILY TRUST 10-07-93 3319 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PAEZ JOSE I&CLARA I IRREVOCABLE TRUST 08-10-10 3324 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CHANEY 2004 TRUST 333 HEMLOCK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 LEIBEL T FAMILY TRUST 03-30-10 3333 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CORNWELL DONALD P&JUNE M LIVING TRUST 3338 DON QUIXOTE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DAUN JULIE 0 2005 TRUST 01-27-05 334 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 JOHNSON JOSEPH M 3340 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WRIGHT ROBERT D&CINDY 3345 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RYFLE OSCAR&MARILYN TRUST 09-12-06 3349 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 THORPE MCGRATH-THORPE FAMILY TRUST 08-06-04 3358 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 STRANGE FRANK&MARIL YN REVOCABLE TRUST 08-03-92 3367 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FLANIGAN LAWRENCE E&NANCY A 3378 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PLESSNER JOAN LIVING TRUST 10-12-93 3384 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RAIBYS JUOZAS TRUST 07-20-10 34 CAPROCK CT GLENDALE CA 91206 DION MICHAEL S&MELODY A 3407 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 TURNER LAWRENCE D FAMILY TRUST 3411 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 OBERST ROBERTA M 3342 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FENDRICK BERNADINE 3346 DON QUIXOTE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HOOVER FAMILY TRUST 02-24-14 3350 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 NELSON FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 03-13- 91 33596 VIA DE AGUA SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO CA 92675 HARRIS DEANNA 3372 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SCHEURING LORI LIVING 2010 TRUST 04-09- 10 3379 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FOX FRANCIS T&BARBARA J 3385 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 MURRAY SUZANNE SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 07-18-00 3402 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ULLMAN DONNA M&SHEAHAN LAURIE A 3408 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WARD FAMILY TRUST 11-02-90 3413 DON COTA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DRIVER CELESTE M FAMILY TRUST 06-10-98 3343 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 POSYLUZNY NANCY E INHERITANCE TRUST 08-12-14 3347 DON TOMASO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 COLBURN CRAIG B&NANCY J FAMILY TRUST 05-01-92 3355 DON PABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KURTH FAMILY TRUST 06-18-93 3366 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ROSE THOMAS C&JENNIFER N 33741 HOLTZ HILL RD DANA POINT CA 92629 WHITE DAVID N REVOCABLE TRUST 11-05- 08 338 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 LEVINE BURTON A TRUST 04-21-94 3390 DON DIABLO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WALTRIP JAMES C&NOREEN M FAMILY TRUST 07-17-00 3406 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 TENEYCK SUE M TRUST 04-05-05 341 0 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KOHL MOTT REVOCABLE TRUST 3414 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LYMAN ROBERT H LIVING TRUST 03-08-01 3414 DON COTA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WOODS JOSEPH R&SHIRLEY J REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST* 3419 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ANDERSON SOCORRO R TRUST 01-15-09 3420 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CALLAHAN SURVIVORS TRUST 04-09-93 3423 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 QUEEN STEPHEN J&DORIS E 3426 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CUSTODERO FAMILY TRUST 3429 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CRAWFORD DAVID W&JEAN E INTERVIVOS TRUST 05-24-* 3430 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ALLEN FAMILY TRUST 12-09-91 3431 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PIPPEN NANCY M 3432 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PRICE FAMILY TRUST 10-19-72 3433 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SKINNER FAMILY TRUST 05-06-11 3415 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SCOTELLA FAMILY TRUST 11-20-89 3420 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PHEGLEY REVOCABLE TRUST 01-24-96 3422 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MARBEN RONALD&CAROL J 3424 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PARK TRUST 01-20-02 3427 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ANTOL JOHN D&KARLA 0 3429 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FISSORI NELLIE J LIVING TRUST 02-08-01 3430 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BAUMEISTER GENEVIEVE M <OVA> 3431 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ARNOLD FAMILY TRUST 07-01-09 3432 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RUNNER FAMILY LIVING TRUST 06-12-97 3433 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LAJOYE LIVING TRUST 05-13-04 3418 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BARNETT FAMILY TRUST 10-23-03 3420 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GLEDHILL JOHN&MARTHA M REVOCABLE TRUST 05-05-10 3422 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ANSELONA FLORENCE V 3426 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MYERS FAMILY TRUST 09-04-98 3428 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CORONA LA COSTA HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 HORIZONS 343 RICH MAR AVE SAN MARCOS CA 92069 BEVIS MERLE J&BARBARA S TRUST 08-13- 90 3431 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HARKINS STEVEN 3432 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SPRIGGS THEODORE F JR 3433 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MCCULLAH RONALD&MARIANNE TRUST 09- 10-07 3433 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DEVANY THOMAS&KAREN TRUST 3434 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 FLORES ROBERT W&ANITA M 3435 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 ALBERTS LILIANE G 3437 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 STRONG ALAN G&DOROTHY E FAMILY TRUST 08-30-93 3438 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HAARSTAD VERNA M LIVING TRUST 07-19- 89 3438 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RHEBERG FLORENCE H 3439 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KAMPMANN FRANK&RUTH REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 3440 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 COURTNEY LUCIEN&MARION FAMILY TRUST 3441 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BLACK RAIL RIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSN 3443 CAMINO DEL RIO S #312 SAN DIEGO CA 92108 WINTERS-DEREUS ROSA 3443 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 AVALLONE ELAINE M 3435 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CONWAY MONICAL REVOCABLE TRUST 02- 27-13 3436 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MCKINNEY FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 06- 01-98 <OVA> 3437 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ASPIRAS GRACE TRUST 09-21-01 3438 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MCCRACKEN JOANN TRUST 02-27-08 3438 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SCHUMACHER FAMILY TRUST 08-15-02 3439 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WILSON RAQUEL C SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 03-09-04 3441 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 PEDROTTA FAMILY SURVIVORS TRUST 08- 27-96 3442 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KILGORE NANCY A 3443 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 VANDE-ZANDE FAMILY TRUST 04-06-04 3443 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DINGLE BARRY L&KATHERINE J 3435 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ANSELL FAMILY LIVING TRUST 03-14-95 3437 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MATA MARGO 3437 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HUNSICKER JOHN&SANDRA L 3438 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MAIDMENT FAMILY LIVING TRUST 09-23-96 3438 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 NEVILLE THOMAS&MARILYNN N IRREVOCABLE TRUST 12-* 3440 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BOYLE JOYCE F TRUST 08-29-02 3441 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GERLICH ROCHELLE 3442 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WYATT FAMILY TRUST 12-22-10 3443 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HALEY MADELYN M 3443 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 NEAL FAMILY TRUST 06-02-00 3444 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 CRAMM GERALD G&KATHLEEN A JOINT LIVING TRUST 06* 3445 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 ALLEN KENT&MARIL YN M 3446 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JOHNSON WILLIAM LAWRENCE JR&NARISSE FRANCES REV* 3446 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WARREN RICHMOND H&VERONICA K 3446 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ADAMS PATRICIA A 3449 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MITCHELL GEORGE S&PHYLLIS J JOINT LIVING TRUST 3449 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HAINES JANET L REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 06-12-01 3450 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ARMSTRONG CHRISTINA R REVOCABLE TRUST 05-13-03 3452 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 TERSOLO REMO J&MARGARET C TRUST 04- 13-88 3453 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ENIGENBURG FAMILY TRUST 06-22-99 3444 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LOMBARDI VINCENT&JAN L 3445 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BOTTO JOAN REVOCABLE TRUST 01-20-93 3446 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GRITZMAKER MARITAL ONE TRUST 07-03-90 C/0 MAX GRITZMAKER 3446 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SCHNEIDER JOAN R 3448 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GREER ARTHUR&CARMEN REVOCABLE TRUST 12-08-92 3449 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MATSON EDWARD M 3450 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CRICKS MARGARET A C/0 MARGARET A RAMBO-CRICKS 3450 S OWL SLICK RD CORNVILLE AZ 86325 TIERNEY TRUST 09-22-92 3452 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GOOLEY DONNA 3454 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CHRISTY LIVING TRUST 11-05-02 3444 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SPRAGUE TED G&KATHLEEN A 3445 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BROWN RUTH S TRUST 04-08-99 3446 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BABA THOMAS V TRUST 3446 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 COUSINEAU RONALD L&PATRICIAA 3449 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HOBSON DENIS N 3449 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ODELL SUSAN M LIVING TRUST 09-18-07 3450 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DAPELLO/KEYES FAMILY TRUST 08-04-04 3451 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SPARKS DOROTHY S TRUST 04-20-05 3453 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SCHIMPF EMIL&JEAN FAMILY TRUST 09-21- 00 3454 DON COT A DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LARSON RAYMOND D&SHARON L 3454 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 SUTCLIFFE SCOTT J&CHERYL L 3455 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SAIDENBERG CHARLES&SHARON FAMILY TRUST 09-05-06 3456 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RICCI DOROTHY L LIVING TRUST 12-13-04 3457 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HANTHORN RUSSELL L&SUZANNE H 3457 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FOLEY LEONARD B&CAROL YN A 3458 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KRIETE MELANIE R TRUST 11-07-06 346 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CHU IRIS GOODRIDGE TRUST 03-03-11 3461 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 AFENTUL SUSAN K 3462 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BENNETT MARY 3464 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BOHEN ROBERTA REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 02-11-13 3454 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CRAIG CARRIE J REVOCABLE TRUST 06-20- 14 3455 DON ARTURO DR #303 CARLSBAD CA 92010 TRESHOW KENNETH F SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 01-16* 3456 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GIPNER VIRGINIA L REVOCABLE TRUST 04- 02-04 3457 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 THULIN GRACE LIVING TRUST 11-24-97 3458 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 VOLGAMORE FAMILY TRUST 02-08-12 3458 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PODRUP TRUST 06-25-96 3460 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SPECTOR RENEE N REVOCABLE TRUST 06- 07-00 3462 DON JOSE DR #303 CARLSBAD CA 92010 KLINKO FAMILY TRUST 05-07-90 3462 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 STONE FAMILY TRUST 12-14-92 3464 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 REZAC RONNY D&REBECCA K 3454 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WILLIAMS MARY J 3455 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 READ FAMILY TRUST 3456 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 EVANSON FAMILY TRUST 05-07-13 3457 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GLADDEN ELLEN J TRUST 04-19-11 3458 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GARRIGA DORIS F LIVING TRUST 09-29-97 3459 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 COREY BARBARA A 3461 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CORREIA LEWIS A&JENNIFER L REVOCABLE TRUST 03-2* 3462 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MURILLO RAYMUNDO&REBECCA C 3463 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MARKEY PATRICIA A 3464 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SIEH MURIEL TRUST 05-07-97 3465 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SULLIVAN FAMILY TRUST 3467 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 MEHEW MARILYN D 3467 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HEPNER JOEL P 2003 TRUST 03-24-03 3468 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KIRBY BRUCE 3468 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ANNABLE LOUISE K REVOCABLE TRUST 06- 06-06 3470 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MCDUFFEE ONE FAMILY TRUST 3472 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JOHNSON LLOYD M FAMILY TRUST 01-27-97 3473 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JORDAN KEITH M TRUST 01-19-05 3474 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD CA 92008 DENOOY HERMAN R TRUST 06-24-91 3474 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LAYMAN JAMES A&PATRICIA R 3465 DON PORFIRIO DR #284 CARLSBAD CA 92010 SAWYER BONNIE B 3467 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 OLEARY LIVING TRUST 05-02-12 3468 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MACE BRYAN A 3468 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LAYNE BONNIE L LIVING TRUST 09-20-02 3469 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HERMES DORIS F TR 3471 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 WILSON WILLIAM H&SUSAN P 3472 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DAWSON FAMILY SURVIVORS TRUST 3473 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HRACA JOSEPH A&BEATRICE H TRS 3474 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HARGADON PAUL F 3475 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MEZA LINDAM 3466 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BUTLER BARBARA A TR 3467 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DIMINNO VINCENZO D REVOCABLE TRUST 06-24-08 3468 DON JOSE DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 JABEZ TRUST 11-12-12 3468 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FRANCES JEAN 3470 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LEBARON ELIZABETH R 3471 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SLOVER TOBY S 3472 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SIMMONS FAMILY TRUST 03-19-90 3473 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 CLEMENT LON F SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 3474 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 STRINGER VIOLET B REVOCABLE TRUST 04- 12-02 3475 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SWEARINGEN DAVID R&MARILYN M 3475 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WEISS GARY F&REBECCA J REVOCABLE TRUST 09-09-05* 3478 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 REITER LAVONNE TRUST 04-16-14 3479 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RIDDLE CLARENCE&JANICE SURVIVORS TRUST 12-18-09 3480 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DESMOND PAMELA C 3481 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SMITH STEVEN 3485 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JONES FAMILY TRUST 01-12-04 3489 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SIMES RONALD V TRUST 05-13-03 3491 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WEBBER MARTHA D TRUST 03-03-05 3499 DON PORFIRIO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CLEMENTS WILLIAM W TR 3500 E LINCOLN DR #18 PHOENIX AZ 85018 CULBERT ROBERT D&LAURA 3476 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 NAUTA FAMILY TRUST 09-18-87 3478 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BRADY-RUBIN PAULA L 3479 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SULLIVAN FAMILY TRUST 3480 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 PAYNE NORMA R INTER VIVOS TRUST 01- 24-91 3484 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ROBLES ALBERT C&MARY P 3488 DON ARTURO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CATHOLIC CHARITIES DIOCESE OF SAN DIEGO 349 CEDAR ST SAN DIEGO CA 92101 GOLDSMITH CHRISTINE REVOCABLE TRUST 07-08-08 3496 DON ALBERTO DR #442 CARLSBAD CA 92010 SANDELL JEANNE F REVOCABLE TRUST 08- 18-05 350 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 BROOKS LEONA M TRUST 12-14-00 3505 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 BRENNAN ALLAN P&MARTHA S 3478 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CORWIN PAUL J&GERALDINE I FAMILY TRUST 06-04-96 3479 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HEADINGS FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 05- 09-07 3479 DON ORTEGA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SULLIVAN FAMILY TRUST 06-12-95 3480 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 OXLEY MARTHA L 3484 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BERRY FAMILY TRUST 04-09-03 3488 DON LORENZO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BURMEISTER FAMILY TRUST 11-09-01 3490 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FANT DOYLE&BONNIE REVOCABLE TRUST 11-11-04 3497 DON ALBERTO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 MUNOZ PEDRO LIVING TRUST 10-09-97 C/0 ALBERT MUNOZ 350 TAMARACK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 PRICE FAMILY TRUST 11-18-05 3506 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RHEAD DONALD J 351 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 OSHIMA FAMILY TRUST 03-30-92 352 OLIVE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD OFFICE PLAZA NO 1 LP C/0 URC MANAGEMENT 3525 DEL MAR HEIGHTS RD #294 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 ABBAMONTE SANDRA M LIVING TRUST 04- 25-06 3531 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 AMOS ALBERT A 2007 TRUST 3539 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WEKSLER DELORES J REVOCABLE TRUST 09-08-04 3545 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 PETRACH REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 05-03- 90 3547 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MILLER RONALD A&BARBARA L 3554 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JENKS FAMILY TRUST 3562 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 PALUMBO PATRICIA A 3570 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BROHARD JOHN& VIRGINIA <LE> MANCUSI JOANNA&MARIO 3512 PRINCETON AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92117 GULIZIA SHARON J 3522 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GHAFFARY KHOURY FAMILY 2003 TRUST 05-08-03 353 DATE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 KURLOVICH ANTHONY N&SAYLES NANCY J 3534 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KOSCIELSKI FAMILY TRUST 03-02-92 3539 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WEKSLER DELORES J REVOCABLE TRUST 09-18-04 3545 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WALDRIP RICHARD W LIVING TRUST 04-29- 08 3548 SIMSBURY CT CARLSBAD CA 92010 GILBERT LIVING TRUST 02-28-83 3555 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REALTY CO <LF> FLOIT DAN C/0 FLOIT PROPERTIES 3565 7TH AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92103 CINKO FAMILY TRUST 06-24-13 3571 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HESTER DAYL 3515 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 HANDELMAN FAMILY 1998 TRUST 3523 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MITCHELL FAMILY IRREVOCABLE TRUST 3530 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HORNA LOUISE M FAMILY TRUST 08-13-96 3538 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 WEKSLER DELORES J REVOCABLE TRUST 09-04-04 3545 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SIMONTON WILLIAM L&ANNIE M 3546 DON JUAN DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 FOSTER GARRY L&LAKE JOCELYN L 3553 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JOHNSTON PAUL M&MARJORIE E REVOCABLE TRUST 3561 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DELANGE PHYLLIS E TRUST 07-23-12 3569 DON CARLOS DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 FEINGOLD FAMILY TRUST 09-19-94 3575 CAMINITO EL RINCON #219 SAN DIEGO CA 92130 BULES CHARLES&LAVONN REVOCABLE TRUST 06-08-00 360 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 FOST SUE E TRUST 06-04-97 363 HEMLOCK AVE #A CARLSBAD CA 92008 SMITH MEGAN 365 HEMLOCK AVE #B CARLSBAD CA 92008 FARKAS LOUIS J JR 3665 MARIA LN CARLSBAD CA 92008 MUNOZ KELLEY K 367 HEMLOCK AVE #B CARLSBAD CA 92008 HERRERA LUPE C TRUST 07-02-93 371 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 BOURS GEORGE F&GRINER PAMELA L LIVING TRUST 11-* 3753 CAVERN PL CARLSBAD CA 92010 MATYN THOMAS A&KELLY K 3795 TRIESTE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MADRID GENEVIEVE C 3805 ALDER AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CLARK ROBERT J FAMILY TRUST A 08-31-89 3820 CARLSBAD BLVD #D CARLSBAD CA 92008 SARAZEN FAMILY LIVING TRUST 11-26-92 3603 W FOX RIDGE LN PALOS VERDES PENINSULA CA 90274 JONES JANIE LYNN TRUST 06-11-85 3630 SURFWOOD DR MALIBU CA 90265 BROOKFIELD OWNERS ASSN INC C/0 PCM 365 RANCHO SANTA FE RD #304 SAN MARCOS CA 92078 SHAS MANAGEMENT INC 3666 PIO PICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 GIRDNER WILLIAM L 370 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 HURST PROPERTIES LLC C/0 SHAUNA HURST 3737 SADDLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF CARLSBAD CA 3780 PIO PICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 GEE CHARLES P&DEE A FAMILY TRUST 10- 17-98 3800 ALDER AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 HALL FAMILY TRUST 3810ALDERAVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 BARBER TRUST 04-06-90 3825 HIGHLAND DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 WHEELER CAROL N IRREVOCABLE TRUST 06-30-05 C/0 EARL WHEELER 36240 PECAN CT FREMONT CA 94536 JONES JANIE LYNN TR 3630 SURFWOOD ROAD MALl BU CA 90265 STJOHN FAMILY TRUST 11-01-11 3657 MONROE ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 ETCH ELLS JOHN R 367 HEMLOCK AVE #A CARLSBAD CA 92008 4S ENTERPRISES L L C 3700 PIO PICO DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 JORDAN BRIAN& TOBY K REVOCABLE TRUST 3745 TRIESTE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SCHUMACHER STEVEN C 3792 WESTSIDE RD BONNERS FERRY ID 83805 HOERNLEIN SHIGEKO TRUST 08-26-99 3801 ALDER AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 AHUJA SONIA 3820 CARLSBAD BLVD #C CARLSBAD CA 92008 RICHARDS REVOCABLE TRUST 02-22-05 3839 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 BROWN BARBARA A 385 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CORBIN ALGIE R&PAMELA R 3870 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD CA 92008 AGNER KEVIN 3881 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 JONES PEYTON&ANDREA 390 CHINQUAPIN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 KNOLLS OF CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 JAY SUMMERS 3900 HARNEY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92110 ZATHAS JAMES&KIKI REVOCABLE TRUST 11-25-87 3905 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 BLACK LURA L TRUST 08-27-13 3921 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 NIEBUHR RODNEY L TRUST 05-11-06 3940 GRESHAM ST #354 SAN DIEGO CA 92109 MEADOW VISTA HOLDINGS L L C 3951 SIERRA LINDA DR ESCONDIDO CA 92025 THALASINOS JOHN A& TERRY L 39635 VINEYARD VIEW DR MURRIETA CA 92562 BASS FAMILY TRUST 3861 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 CERECEDES FAMILY TRUST 03-06-08 3875 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 STATE OF CALIFORNIA WARREN WONG, ECOLOGICAL RESERVE MANAGER 3883 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92123 BURNETTE RALPH F&LANA M TRS 390 GRAND AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 KNOLLS OF CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 PACIFIC SCENE INC 3900 HARNEY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92110 WILSON LESTER&MARJORIE 391 REDWOOD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC 393 E WALNUT ST PASADENA CA 91188 MILLER DAVID&JOHANNA FAMILY TRUST 08- 21-05 3940 SYME DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 MACHA WAYNE E&HERBERT-MACHA JOAN 3960 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 KUZMACK STEPHEN J&TEAL EILEEN M 3970 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 BLOCK ARTHURS TR&BLOCK KATHLEEN TR 38635 MARACAIBO CIR W PALM SPRINGS CA 92264 VIGNE THOMAS D&LUCINDA 3880 HIBISCUS CIR CARLSBAD CA 92008 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE WARREN WONG, ECOLOGICAL RESERVE MANAGER 3883 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92123 KNOLLS OF CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 GEORGE HAVIAR 3900 HARNEY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92110 VILLAS OF CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN THE 3900 HARNEY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92110 GOTOJAMEST&SHERYL 3911 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 JAMES JOYCE A TR 3931 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 LANNING NANCY J 3950 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 CHAMPION CAROLE J 3961 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 LISCH MICHAEL L&BRYANT KIMBERLY A 3990 HIGHLAND DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 MANZANITA PARTNERS L L C 3990 RUFFIN RD #100 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 TIDES AT CARLSBAD COMMUNITY ASSN INC K HOVNANIAN HOMES 400 EXCHANGE #200 IRVINE CA 92602 COX FAMILY 2001 TRUST 12-19-01 4015 SKYLINE RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 MCDOWELL DAVID J 4050 SKYLINE RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 BUCKLAND FAMILY TRUST 08-02-95 4060 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 MACEDO RICHARD&CONNIE 40816TH ST MANHATTAN BCH CA 90266 ROWLAND ROBERT T TRUST 08-02-78 4094 SUNNYHILL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD-WOODBRIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 GREG SPANIOL 4111VY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92101 DONOVAN WILLIAM EST OF C/0 JASON EBERT 415 LAUREL ST #117 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 S C HOTEL LLC 42 CORPORATE PARK #200 IRVINE CA 92606 OTA BLAIR G&PAULAA REVOCABLE TRUST 06-03-87 4 BELLEZZA IRVINE CA 92620 FOHRER LIVING TRUST 07-18-91 400 N OLD RANCH RD ARCADIA CA 91007 HART ROBERT K&WENDY M REVOCABLE TRUST 05-05-05 4016 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BRUCE APRIL, SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLNR 4050 TAYLOR STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92110 DICKINSON FAMILY TRUST 09-29-95 4072 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 SCHWAB RONALD S&PATTI L <PF> SUNSET PACIFIC LTD 4080 SKYLINE RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 SALTAIRE AT CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 KEYSTONE PACIFIC 4100 NEWPORT BLVD #350 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 PROMENADE AT LA COST A ASSOCIATION C/0 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE 4111VY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92101 GOLDEN EDWARD&JOAN REVOCABLE TRUST 05-08-97 4189 KIMBERLY LN OCEANSIDE CA 92056 BALLARD RONALD&MARTIN MARTA R 4211 BEACH BLUFF RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 ENCANTADA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION 4 PLAZA 16TH FLOOR IRVINE CA 92623 L C INVESTMENT 2010 LLC 4001 MAPLE AVE #600 DALLAS TX 75219 ESCAMILLA ALFRED R SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 06-0* 405 N PINE ST SAN GABRIEL CA 91775 THOMPSON ROBERT&SYLVIA FAMILY TRUST 02-01-91 4056 SKYLINE RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 MEESE FAMILY TRUST 12-13-95 4078 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 DIXON VINCENT R&CHERI L COMMUNITY PROPERTY 1999* 4084 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD WOODBRIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 FIRST AMERICAN TITLE 4111VY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92101 SMITH CHARLES&MARYANNE FAMILY2003 TRUST 09-25-* 4136 GARFIELD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 GOLDEN EDWARD&JOAN REVOCABLE TRUST 05-08-97 ET * 4189 KIMBERLY LN OCEANSIDE CA 92056 UKEGAWA JAMES S 4218 SKYLINE RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 ROBBERS MONICAL 4219 35TH ST S ARLINGTON VA 22206 KUSEL SCOTT&M MICHELE C/0 SCOTT KUSEL 43195 BUSINESS PARK DR TEMECULA CA 92590 SEABRIGHT CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 UDC HOMES 438 CAMINO DEL RIO S #112B SAN DIEGO CA 92108 SHINE ON PARK LANE L L C 4401 MANCHESTER AVE #206 ENCINITAS CA 92024 0 T 9 OWNER L L C ATTN:PAUL LEBEAU 450 B ST#400 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 KANE SHEILA C/0 SHEILA KANE 450 ROSEWOOD AVE SAN JOSE CA 95117 MORRIS KARA W 4513 COVE DR#15 CARLSBAD CA 92008 MEYERS MICHAELS 4513 COVE DR #9 CARLSBAD CA 92008 VIGILUCCI ROBERTO&JAIDENE A 4520 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 NEWKIRK KLEMENTYNA S TRUST 03-26-98 4525 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 LAMB ALLISON A 426 LOGAN ST SEWICKLEY PA 15143 CAMPBELL GREGORY S&MICHELLE J 4344 POINT REYES CT CARLSBAD CA 92010 HENKINS FAMILY TRUST 11-20-87 438 TAMARACK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CIPOLLA DAVID A&KANG LILY 4470 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 LA COST A VALLEY MASTER ASSN C/0 BANK OF AMERICA 450 B ST #620 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 AL TAM IRA MANAGEMENT ASSN NO 2 451 N HALE AVE ESCONDIDO CA 92029 PUGLISI LIVING TRUST 11-21-05 4513 COVE DR#22 CARLSBAD CA 92008 COOPER KENT&LESLIE 4519 E CARRIAGE WAY GILBERT AZ 85297 BOWEN DON&BOBBIE TRUST 12-16-04 4520 LA PORTALADA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 NING ALEX&JENNY LIVING TRUST 12-16-05 4529 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 MIJUSKOVIC BEN&RUTH 428 CARNATION #B CORONA DEL MAR CA 92625 RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES OF MARYLAND INC C/0 SUSAN M KLEID 4350 S MONACO ST #500 DENVER CO 80237 MCALLISTER TRUST 05-30-06 440 N GRANADOS AVE SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 PHILLIPS ROBERT&HOLL YCE REVOCABLE TRUST 02-27-07 4480 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 VILLAGES OF LA COSTA SOUTHWEST L L C C/0 BANK OF AMERICA 450 B ST #620 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 JOHNSON FAMILY TRUST 12-27-85 4513 COVE DR#12 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SHARP JAMES RIll 4513 COVE DR #6 CARLSBAD CA 92008 VIGILUCCI ROBERTO 4520 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 BOWER DONNA M REVOCABLE TRUST 03- 19-14 4523 ADAMS ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 STORTI MICHAEL A 4552 ESSEX CT CARLSBAD CA 92010 PETERSON CYNTHIA G 4565 PURDUE AVE NE SEATTLE WA 98105 LARSON FAMILYTRUST04-17-07 4639 TELESCOPE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 ALPACA PROPERTIES L L C C/0 COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL 4660 LA JOLLA VILLAGE DR #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92122 ESPEY FAMILY TRUST 04-10-93 470 36TH AVE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94121 INGELMAN REVOCABLE FAMILY TRUST 09- 18-92 473 30TH ST MANHATTAN BEACH CA 90266 L C GREENS 1.3 L L C C/0 DANNY GABRIEL 4747 MORENA BLVD #100 SAN DIEGO CA 92117 HARDY DAVID A&JOANNE F 4802 HAMER DR PLACENTIA CA 92870 ROMBOTIS MARTYR SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 08-13-* 4869 SEVILLA WAY CARLSBAD CA 92008 POINSETTIA COVE MAINT CORP C/0 GREYSTONE HOMES 495 E RINCON ST #115 CORONA CA 92879 LA COSTA GREENS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 PUL TE HOMES 5003 AVENIDA ENCINAS #101 CARLSBAD CA 92008 2010-1 R AD C/C AD C PROPERTY XII L L C 4601 COLLEGE BLVD #300 LEAWOOD KS 66211 OH SEI CHANG&MYUNG HEE 4640 ELMHURST DR BEAUMONT TX 77706 FAUSNER DAWN M REVOCABLE TRUST 04- 24-03 4671 PANNONIA RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 TABER ROBIN 4700 SILVER RANCH PL SAN JOSE CA 95138 M L C F C 2007-7 PASEO DEL NORTE LTD PTNSHP 4747 EXECUTIVE DR #900 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 EBERSHOFF DAVID A 476 BRADFORD ST PASADENA CA 91105 HOLT FAMILY SURVIVORS TRUST 10-12-84 C/0 DARRELL E HOLT 4817 PALM AVE #E LA MESA CA 91942 GORDON JEFFREY&BARBARA TRUST 03-03- 05 4915 DORENA CT SAN DIEGO CA 92122 ZHANG YUFENG&CHEN YU-HAN 4968 CALLE SOBRADO OCEANSIDE CA 92056 SMITH MARITAL TRUST 02-05-97 (SMITH VARROU FAM* 5005 TIERRA DEL ORO CARLSBAD CA 92008 BONILLA ALBERT&MARIAN 4616 DRIFTWOOD CIR CARLSBAD CA 92008 ALPACA PROPERTIES L L C 4660 LA JOLLA VILLAGE DR #1 00 SAN DIEGO CA 92122 T-C FORUM AT CARLSBAD L L C C/0 TIAA-CREF 4675 MACARTHUR CT #11 00 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 LEONARD FAMILY TRUST 06-20-96 4701 T ST SACRAMENTO CA 95819 OCEAN RIDGE OFFICE CORP C/0 CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD 4747 EXECUTIVE DR #900 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 VOULGARIS MARKOS&MELPO FAMILY TRUST 05-31-01 4769 NIAGARA AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92107 ONEIL FAMILY TRUST 05-02-1994 48485 BIG HORN DR LA QUINTA CA 92253 ON THE PARK MAINTENANCE CORP 495 E RINCON ST #115 CORONA CA 92879 OLSON PETER& IMELDA JOINT LIVING TRUST 4975 VIA MARTA CARLSBAD CA 92008 COSTANTINO FAMILY TRUST 03-16-11 5009 TIERRA DEL ORO CARLSBAD CA 92008 BATIQUITOS LAND L L C C/0 ANTHONY E PAPA 501 BATH ST SANTA BARBARA CA 93101 EATON HOMER L&NINA B FAMILY TRUST 08- 03-95 5025 TIERRA DEL ORO CARLSBAD CA 92008 M F T 2012 TRUST 12-13-12 5035 TIERRA DEL ORO CARLSBAD CA 92008 LA CREST AAT COLINAS DE ORO HOMEOWNERS ASSN 5075 SHOREHAM PL #160 SAN DIEGO CA 92122 RICHARDS STEVENF&PATRICA C 5099 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 TORNBORG MARY E TRUST 01-27-03 5101 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 TAYLOR FAMILY TRUST 10-25-12 5107 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 MICHIELI MARIA T SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 03-13-* 5114 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BROOKS MARGARET 5117 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SHAW HILDAJ 5120 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PALOMAR FITNESS PARTNERS L P 501 SANTA MONICA BLVD #312 SANTA MONICA CA 90401 KING HELEN TRUST 05-26-76 503 AVONDALE AVE #E LOS ANGELES CA 90049 KEBOW FAMILY TRUST 12-26-75 5061 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 TAMARACK POINT MASTER ASSN C/0 MERIT PROPERTY MGMT 5075 SHOREHAM PL #160 SAN DIEGO CA 92122 BLANCHARD FAMILY TRUST 06-30-93 510 EATONTOWN RD PORT JERVIS NY 12771 BLACKLEDGE FAMILY TRUST 05-14-09 5101 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BAILEY NANCY 5109 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 REICH DALE&DONNA 5115 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KERKLAAN-GRAY WILHELMINA J TRUST 05- 28-98 5118 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ZAGATA FAMILY REVOCABLE TRUST 02-23- 98 5120 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HALL FAMILY TRUST 07-21-03 5019 TIERRA DEL ORO CARLSBAD CA 92008 PINON CANYON LAND&CATTLE COMPANY L LC C/0 JAMES SEE 5031 TIERRA DEL ORO CARLSBAD CA 92008 GILSTRAP JAMES C TRUST 01-16-95 5067 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 MARBRISA MAINTENANCE CORP 5083 AVENDIA ENCINAS #101 CARLSBAD CA 92008 WAYMAN FAMILY TRUST 03-12-91 5101 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 RITTER DON W&BETTY A 5106 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 .STEPHENSON LIVING TRUST 04-13-90 5110 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DEELEY-BARNARD FAMILY TRUST 09-06-03 5116 DON MATADR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 GIBSON FAMILY TRUST 5119 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 MAXWELL ROBERTA M 5121 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CARBONE GLADYS K 5123 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PETSKA JAMES&JOYCE B REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 11-* 5126 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DUFFIN L FAMILY 2012 TRUST 04-21-12 5128 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 VERVAIR RICHARD D&JULIA Y 5132 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 J SQUARED DEVELOPMENT L L C 5135 AVENIDA ENCINAS #B CARLSBAD CA 92008 UNDERWOOD JAMES L&LOIS T 5136 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RADOGNA FAMILY TRUST 06-02-92 5139 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BREM LARRY R&JUDY L 5143 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GIESER FRANK A&PERRY CAROL J 5144 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 STEELE LARRY L&SHARI R REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 0* 5146 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GROGAN CHARLINE FAMILY 1993 TRUST 05- 18-83 5124 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LOWE BETTY E 1994 SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 5127 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MOORE JUDITH A TRUST 08-21-97 5129 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MALKIND LANCE&ANNETTE 5133 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BARKER N JEAN TRUST 03-18-93 5135 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PRUITT RAYNEL I REVOCABLE TRUST 04-21- 06 5136 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WINDEMULLER LARRY C&COOK KATHRYN L 5140 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 TURRO PAUL J TRUST 12-20-11 5143 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 JAFFE LIVING TRUST 10-10-91 5144 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 STEPHENS TERRY W&BARBARA E 5147 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BOWEN JAMES&CATHERIN TRUST 05-19-95 5125 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 CUNRADI FAMILY TRUST 06-23-11 5128 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JACOBSON WILLIAM G&DIXIE L 5132 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MOLINA CARLOS&PATRICIA LIVING TRUST 06-17-99 5134 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CAPITOL TRUST 5135 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SMITH DARRYL&CINDY 5139 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HILLIARD SURVIVORS FAMILY 1994 TRUST 07-18-94 5140 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BRADNER LINCOLN 5144 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 THEIS FAMILY TRUST 02-15-06 5145 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BRISTOW THOMAS N 5147 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WAGNON FAMILY TRUST 03-08-99 C/0 PAM BRISTOW 5147 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BARKER RICHARD&MELINDA FAMILY TRUST 11-05-04 5150 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 UPPAL MAN DEEP S 5155 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD CA 92008 MCMILLIAN SHARON L TR 5157 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD CA 92008 ZIEGMAN CAROLEE TRUST 01-14-14 5157 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WATSON TOM&HARRIET M 1989 LIVING TRUST 5160 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LIMJOCO JAIME&MILAGROS 5164 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 COURY ROBERT D REVOCABLE TRUST 08- 24-10 5167 LOS ROBLES DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 GALLERY FAMILY TRUST 07-31-96 5171 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 SERRANO LOUIS M&ZISKA CATHERINE A 5176 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WELLS ANNE S REVOCABLE TRUST 03-22-01 5148 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 KESSLER JACKIE L&MARIE T 5151 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CHRISTLE MARVIN B&LORRAINE F LIVING TRUST 05-07* 5155 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DEVANE SUSAN LIVING TRUST 03-19-99 5157 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BROWN ARTHUR&ALICE FAMILY TRUST 02- 16-00 5157 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 BUSBY CATHY L 5163 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 WOODARD ANNE C 5165 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DORFF KENNETH&LORINDA 5168 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KUVER GREGORY H&ISABEL INTER VIVOS TRUST 10-19-* 5172 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BOOZER ELYSIA LIVING TRUST 11-04-89 5177 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 METRO CA-OFFICE LLC C/0 COLONY AMC OPCO LLC 515 S FLOWER ST LOS ANGELES CA 90071 COTTINGHAM KENNETH E&DIANE B 5152 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HALL SANDRA J SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 11-25-97 5156 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PACE FAMILY LIVING TRUST 12-21-91 5157 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 THOMSON FAMILY TRUST 09-20-06 5158 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MILAM DORIS J 5163 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GUNN STEVEN H&ADR1ENNE C 5166 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MACMANUS PAUL C&JILL G 5171 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD CA 92008 JUHL CLARENCE A&JUDITH H 5172 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ROCK FAMILY TRUST 08-20-91 5178 DON MATA DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MURPHEY FAMILY TRUST 07-20-90 5180 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GAKING TOMMY L 5188 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BEEMER JOE R&SHIRLEY A 5194 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RANCHO CARLSBAD OWNERS ASSN C/0 KATHY GRIFFITH 5200 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92010 LAMBERT MICHAELS 5201 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 OTT LORA A TRUST 5209 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BENNETT PAULINE C LIVING TRUST 06-26-01 5217 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ASPIRAS RICHARD TRUST 10-23-14 5227 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WALDEN MALVIN A&ELIZABETH A REVOCABLE TRUST 5232 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BSHARAH FAMILY TRUST 11-15-06 5239 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 STOABS FAMILY TRUST 01-27-95 5184 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HARBOR POINTE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 CAL WEST MANAGEMENT 519 ENCINITAS BLVD #108 ENCINITAS CA 92024 GIBBS FAMILY TRUST 01-13-89 5195 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 HUNDSHAMER FRANCIS X&JULIANNE M 5201 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ATKINSON WILLIAM C JR&PAMELA J 5202 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 NEXT STEP INVESTMENTS FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP 5210 MIL TON RD CARLSBAD CA 92008 HARRIS ALVIN&JEWELL INTER VIVOS TRUST 03-03-00 5218 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HOFF MELANIE 5229 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PERRY JOSEPH&MARJORIE E TRUST 08-24- 05 5236 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GABLE FAMILY TRUST 02-26-91 5240 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HEATHMAN PHILIP W&LEOTA D 5186 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LAUBE FAMILYTRUST07-15-09 5190 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 OOSTEROM HARRY L SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 5198 DON RODOLFO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JONES BEVERLY J 5201 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PRIGG HARRY D&BARBARA FAMILY TRUST 08-14-92 5208 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LEE GLORIA A REVOCABLE TRUST 03-25-09 5216 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DANZIGER ROBERT B&CAROL N 5223 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WEST COAST PROPERTIES IRREVOCABLE INTER VIVOS T* 5229 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 MCKELVEY JACQUELINE 5238 CLEARBROOKE CT CASTLE ROCK CO 80104 FOSTER RICHARD L&JULITAA TRUST 02-27- 97 5241 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BROTZMAN STEPHANIE 5242 SAPPHIRE ST ALTA LOMA CA 91701 EAHEART LOUISE A TRUST 07-26-94 5246 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 SMITH LEONARD J 5257 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CHOYUN SOON 5265 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MARTINI MARCIE A FAMILY 2013 TRUST 5272 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JOHNSON DOLORES 5302 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MIDKIFF FAMILY TRUST 06-23-04 5307 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SCHOONOVERJOHNETTA 5313 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WONG ERIC&GRACE FAMILY TRUST 11-04- 06 5318 VALLEY VIEW RD RANCHO PALOS VERDES CA 90275 GOETZ DEAN A&BARBARA J 5323 CARLSBAD BLVD CARLSBAD CA 92008 PRYOR JEFFERY SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 12-14-04 5243 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 LEJA TRUST 03-19-96 52530 VAN BUREN ST COACHELLA CA 92236 DUNBAR PATRICIA A SURVIVORS TRUST 11- 14-72 5257 SHORE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 BARR GREGORY&EVA 5268 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BRADFIELD BETTY L 2010 TRUST 08-10-10 5279 DON RICARDO DR#127 CARLSBAD CA 92010 VANDERSLICE FAMILY REVOCABLE INTERVIVOS TRUST 0* 5302 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FITZPATRICK DIANE TRUST 05-13-13 5310 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DIONESE LOUIS C 5315 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BEAULIEU M GERTRUDE 5321 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BROWN LYMAN W 5326 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MCLOUGHLIN JAMES M TRUST 05-01-12 5245 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SAILER MICHAEL M&NINSUDA C 5256 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 AMORSEN LINDA 5258 DON VALDEZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DYER MARY E 5270 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GRIEPP SHERRY L 5301 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PELUSO ROBERT L&JANICE L REVOCABLE TRUST 06-14-* 5302 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MCALLISTER CONCETTA REVOCABLE TRUST 08-15-00 5310 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CADE INTER VIVOS TRUST 04-08-87 5318 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PHILLIPS JULIAN P&JOY L 5321 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SKAPIK MARK J&GERAL YN M 5327 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ESSERT NEOMA J TRUST 5327 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 FENTON RACEWAY BUSINESS PARK PROPERTY OWNERS AS* C/0 INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT SERVICE 5330 CARROLL CANYON RD #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 MARDEN FAMILY TRUST 02-27-09 5338 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WARREN WILLIAM J 5342 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 VEALE DONALD M&BARBARA M TRS 5346 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HARADA TOSHIAKI&SAILAJA P 5350 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 STILLIONS JESSE L&MAYER BARBARA J 5357 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SMITH KENNETH B&HILDEGARD S REVOCABLE TRUST 12-* 5362 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WYNNE HELEN P F REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 11-24-10 537 MARIPOSA AVE #9 MOUNTAIN VIEW CA 94041 HELFRICH WILLIAM A&JEAN E TRS 5376 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SIM M LLOYD&HAZEL D 5329 LAUREL WAY DELTA B C CANADA V4K4H5 KNOWLTON MARY D 5335 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GREEN JOHN F&DOROTHY E TRUST 05-13- 93 5341 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SEILER 1994 REVOCABLE TRUST 5343 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 HILL MARJORIE B REVOCABLE TRUST 08-01- 07 5348 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 RASMUSSEN JANET B TRUST 08-13-93 5354 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CLEM VALERIE A 5358 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 TITONE CARLO&MICHELE 5365 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JONES FAMILY TRUST 09-22-03 5370 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 CLINNIN JAMES&BONNIE L 5380 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 MANN MITZI S 533 BARBARA AVE SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 SHARPE MARY C 5336 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WRIGHT VA VEL J&JUDKINS CAROL J 5342 DON ALVAREZ DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA INC C/0 GARY HILL 5345 ARMADA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 FARROW SANDRA K LIVING TRUST 09-19-05 5349 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WALLIG FAMILY TRUST 12-06-03 5356 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BRANDT JAMES&BOWERS SUSAN 5359 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WARNER MICHAEL M 5367 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BURROUGHS NADINE C 5373 DON MIGUEL DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 DEFREITAS GENE&ARLENE 5382 DON RICARDO DR CARLSBAD CA 9201 0 TAYLOR PAULA A REVOCABLE TRUST 02-17- 04 5393 BALBOA AVE SAN DIEGOCA92117 FROKE FAMILY TRUST 08-12-02 5410 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SAAR CHARLES E LIVING TRUST 09-25-92 5415 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PRATT FAMILY TRUST 10-22-03 5422 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 VIADANA HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 PRESCOTT COMPANIES 543 ENCINITAS BLVD #111 ENCINITAS CA 92024 MENNING FAMILY TRUST 03-25-91 5431 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 VAUGHAN-CHALDY CAROLYN LIVING TRUST 09-03-01 5439 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ANDERSON FAMILY TRUST 02-22-91 5446 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GEISELHART JOAN 5452 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MINKS VIRGIL L&MARY 5459 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MEACHAM ROMY C FAMILY TRUST 08-24-94 5405 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ZANDER ARDIS 5413 FAIRGREEN WAY BONSALL CA 92003 WEIGEL C TED&JANET L 5418 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 BRADFORD ROBERT A J 2003 TRUST 02-26- 03 5423 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 OVERLAND JOANNE 5430 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 PITT PATRICIA FAMILY TRUST 04-16-13 5434 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 KNIGHT FAMILY TRUST 07-17-97 5443 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 MILLER JEAN A REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 07-07-93 5447 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 ERNST JOANNE C LIVING TRUST 07-01-11 5455 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 JEFFRESS PATRICIA A REVOCABLE TRUST 05-19-04 546 TAMARACK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 RUSSELL SAMUEL&NORMA FAMILY TRUST 12-08-04 5406 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 SEL TSER TRUST 06-28-11 5414 DON LUIS DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 NAJARIAN MOURAD FAMILY JOINT TRUST 08-09-77 5419 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 WOOD DOROTHY B TRUST 03-21-13 5426 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 GOLD JONATHAN&KIMBERLY 5430 SAUCON RIDGE RD COOPERSBURG PA 18036 PACE FRANK&SHEILA M FAMILY TRUST 11- 17-89 5435 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 FORMAN HARRY D TRUST 06-22-90 5443 VIA OLAS NEWBURY PARK CA 91320 GIBBIA FAMILY TRUST 04-24-07 5451 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 EASTON FAMILY TRUST 07-02-04 5458 CAMINITO VISTA LUJO SAN DIEGO CA 92130 BALANCIO BILL&PAMELA TRUST 10-26-11 5460 DON FELIPE DR CARLSBAD CA 92010 LANG GARYM 5461 LOS ROBLES DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 ALGA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 JIM HANSEN 5465 MOREHOUSE DR #250 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 FIELDSTONE FAIRWAYS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 VIETTA GRAY 5465 MOREHOUSE DR #250 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 AVIARA MASTER ASSN C/0 JAMES F DANOW 555 W BEECH ST #500 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 HANAWA MASAKI&JOY M 5573 COYOTE CT CARLSBAD CA 92010 I K 0 N 6495 FRANCISCAN LP 5650 EL CAMINO REAL #130 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SHOWALTER FAMILY TRUST 04-28-94 5687 YERBA ANITA DR SAN DIEGO CA 92115 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION C/0 JACKIE WRIGHT-FIDELITY TITLE 57 40 FLEET ST #130 CARLSBAD CA 92008 GREYSTONE HOMES INC C/0 SO DIV 5780 FLEET ST #300 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SANTALINAAT SAN PACIFICO HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 CONTINENTAL ESCROW 5780 FLEET ST #330 CARLSBAD CA 92008 LANG R M D TRUST 5461 LOS ROBLES DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 ALGA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 JUDY MEYNCKE 5465 MOREHOUSE DR #250 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 SEASCAPE APARTMENTS CARLSBAD LLC C/0 THE IRVINE CO 550 NEWPORT CENTER DR NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 AVIARA PREMIER COLLECTION ASSN C/0 PRESCOTT COMPANIES 555 W BEECH ST #502 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 BARBER ROSS G REVOCABLE TRUST 11-30- 09 5592 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 TRAILS OF CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 BRUNER I ROSI MGNT INC 5651 PALMER WAY#A CARLSBAD CA 92010 DEST AFNEY CHRISTOPHER S 569 CAVE CORONADO CA 92118 BAY COLLECTION HOMEOWNERS ASSN 5750 FLEET ST #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SAN PACIFICO COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 GREYSTONE HOMES INC 5780 FLEET ST #300 CARLSBAD CA 92008 NATIONAL ASSN OF MUSIC MERCHANTS INC C/0 LARRY MANLEY 5790 ARMADA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 SWARTZ RAYMOND P&MARETTA FAMILY TRUST 05-05-06 5462 COACH LN SAN DIEGO CA 92130 FIELDSTONE FAIRWAYS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 MIKE STEWART 5465 MOREHOUSE DR #250 SAN DIEGO CA 92121 BENATTOU REVOCABLE 2002 TRUST 5540 EL ARBOL DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 HANKEN GENE C TRUST 09-20-96 5550 BALTIMORE DR #200 LA MESA CA 91942 CARLSBAD RANCH MAINTENANCE ASSN II C/0 CHRIS C CALKINS 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS #100 CARLSBAD CA 92008 WELCH REVOCABLE FAMILY TRUST 11-27- 96 568 CYPRESS HILLS DR ENCINITAS CA 92024 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE 57 40 FLEET ST #130 CARLSBAD CA 92008 STANDARD PACIFIC CORP 5750 FLEET ST #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SANTALINA AT SAN PACIFICO HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 GREYSTONE HOMES 5780 FLEET ST #300 CARLSBAD CA 92008 NRG ENERGY INC 5790 FLEET ST STE 200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 W P GOLF&EQUESTRIAN L L C C/0 WEST DEVELOPMENT L L C 5796 ARMADA DR #300 CARLSBAD CA 92008 LOT 15 CARLSBAD RANCH L L C 5800 ARMADA DR #1 02 CARLSBAD CA 92008 COMAN CHASE H TRUST 06-04-96 5855 SUNNY CREEK RD CARLSBAD CA 92010 HARPER FAMILY TRUST 10-20-11 5905 WAYMAKER CV AUSTIN TX 78746 DEVARGAS ANGELA 59-456 PUPUKEA RD HALEIWA Hl96712 FOOTHILLS AT CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 THE PRESCOTT COMPANIES 5950 LA PLACE CT #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 FOOTHILLS AT CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 THE PRESCOTT COMPANIES 5966 LA PLACE CT #170 CARLSBAD CA 92008 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION C/0 PUL TE HOMES 5993 AVENIDA ENCINAS #101 CARLSBAD CA 92008 LA COST A VALLEY MASTER ASSN C/0 LUCE FORWARD HAMILTONJSCRIPPS 600 W BROADWAY #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 ROBERTSON GARY W&DIANNE M 6015 DEL MAR MESA RD SAN DIEGO CA 92130 W P GOLF&EQUESTRIAN L L C <LF> CAMINO CARLSBAD* 5796 ARMADA DR #300 CARLSBAD CA 92008 MCKENNA JOHN P&MARY P 5812 JUDGE DOBBIN CT ELKRIDGE MD 21075 GRAND PACIFIC PALISADES HOTEL L P 5900 PASTEUR CT #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CONTINENTAL RESIDENTIAL INC C/0 LARRY CORTES 5927 PRIESTLY DR #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 1000 AVIARA HOLDINGS L L C 595 S RIVERWOODS PKWY #400 LOGAN UT 84321 RANCH AT CARLSBAD OWNERS ASSN C/0 CENTEX HOMES 5962 LA PLACE CT #250 CARLSBAD CA 92008 HERON BAY/SPYGLASS HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 THE PRESCOTT COMPANIES 5966 LA PLACE CT #170 CARLSBAD CA 92008 REITER FAMILY TRUST 02-22-05 6 SADDLEBACK RD ROLLING HILLS CA 90274 LA COST A VALLEY MASTER ASSN C/0 LUCE FORWARD HAMIL TONJSCRIPPS 600 W BROADWAY #2600 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 CARROLL TIMOTHY 0 JR&MARGARET N 602 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 NEW SPARK HOLDINGS INC 580 SILVER SPUR RD RLLNG HLS EST CA 90275 GROSSE RUSSELL W&MARY E 5850 SUNNY CREEK RD CARLSBAD CA 92010 GRAND PACIFIC PALISADES OWNERS ASSN INC 5900 PASTEUR CT #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CHAMBERS RONALD&MARIA 5937 MONTE RD BONSALL CA 92003 CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT UTILITIES DEPT 5950 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 SANTA FE TRAILS OWNERS ASSN C/0 CENTEX HOMES 5962 LA PLACE CT #250 CARLSBAD CA 92008 LA COSTA PARCELS LLC TERRAMAR RET AIL CENTERS LLC 5973 AVENIDA ENCINAS #300 CARLSBAD CA 92008 JAIME TRUST 10-20-00 600 TAMARACK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 LA COST A VALLEY MASTER ASSN C/0 NANCY T SCULL 600 W BROADWAY #2600 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 FEINGOLD ALAN A 602 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 PAYNE NORMA INTER VIVOS TRUST 01-24- 91 602 SUN CIR VISTA CA 92081 HOFFMAN BERNARD A&MARGARET M SURVIVORS 1988 TRU* 60419TH ST MANHATTAN BCH CA 90266 VENKA TACHALAM EASWARAN&KRISHNAN SAN JAN 605 SAL TGRASS AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MANCUSO FAMILY TRUST 08-07-02 607 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 RAZUKAS JAMES W LIVING TRUST 03-18-05 609 SAL TGRASS AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 CRAWFORD THOMAS V&JILL A 611 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 SEA CLIFF HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 LOOMIS PROPERTIES INC 6120 PASEO DEL NORTE #J-1 CARLSBAD CA 92011 WILSON TOM L&STACIE C 614 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 TRAVER TIMOTHY C 618 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 TERRY PATRICK M&MARI L 619 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 HENRY PATRICK S&ELISA 603 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 MILANO SUSAN R 604 SAL TGRASS AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HASKAMP ADRIAN B&TARYNE C 605 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MASCHAL REVOCABLE TRUST 11-01-04 608 SAL TGRASS AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 COLBERT SHAD C&LISA M 610 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 JIANG BIN&CHENG SHUMIN 611 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 CRISTALLA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION C/0 LINDSAY MANAGEMENT SERVICES 61261NNOVATION WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 NUTTER NICHOLAS G&KATHY M 615 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 PRITCHETT STEPHANIE A 618 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 ZIMMERMAN BRENDA TRUST 02-21-12 620 SAL TGRASS AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MILLER DAVID J&MARTINE S 603 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 AGRIESTI CAROLINE A 604 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 WEIGLE GEORGE&STACIE L 606 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 WI DULSKI LAURA J 608 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 ARAUJO RONALD&SCHAIN-ARAUJO SALLY 610 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 TOP CHOICE INVESTMENTS L L C 6118 PASEO DEL NORTE CARLSBAD CA 92011 CUKER AARON&LINDSAY K 614 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 TARQUIN JOEL A&DIANA L REVOCABLE TRUST 08-13-04 616 SALTGRASS AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 6121 PASEO DEL NORTE LLC 6183 PASEO DEL NORTE #180 CARLSBAD CA 92011 FOSBURG JEFFREY C 620 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 EISENSON EVE 6204 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 KIM DEOK KI&HELEN 6207 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 KASHANIAN ELISA A 6209 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 BLACK RONALD J 621 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 KIPNIS KIM A 6211 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 BURNAND PATRICIA TRUST 6213 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 GUAJARDO-PEREZ LUIS S 6215 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 GERTZKI OLIVER&KELLEY 6217 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARRILLO FRANCISCO A&MANZO ROSA E 6219 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 ENGERER LORELEI 6221 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 ACEVEDO LAURA 6205 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALCANTAR SUSANA 6207 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 KORN MICHAEL D 6209 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 VU CHAU BUI 6210 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 JONES CASSANDRA R 6212 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 LASHER ROB 6214 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 POTASHOV FAMILY 2013 TRUST 6216 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 PETERSON RICHARD&SACHIKO 6218 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 HARDMAN DAVID M&BROWNE MARIANNE 622 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 SCIORTINO FRANCESCA LIVING 2009 TRUST 6222 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 DIEP BINH&LIEU CHINH 6205 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 MILLIRON ELSA A 6208 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALPS LODGING INC C/0 SHARAD KHANDWALA 621 S HIGHWAY #101 SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 GALEY BRADFORD C 6211 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 GERTZKI RUDOLPH A&HEATHER M 6213 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 GONZALEZ JAVIER 6215 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 CEDAR PEGGY J 6217 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILSON STEVE L 6219 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 WHENNEN MARK W&ASAKO 6221 LIBERTY PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 MCCONNELL BRIAN 6223 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS SERVICES DEPT 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 GUSTIN BENJAMIN W 623 STRAND ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 ARAIZA DAVID J 6235 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 PAVAGADHI MAYUR 624 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 PHAMWT 6243 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 RICHARDSON NICHOLAS P 625 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 OLTROGGE KENDALL&JONI 626 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HOFFMAN LEGACY TRUST 12-17-12 6284 FORESTER DR HUNTINGTN BCH CA 92648 AVIARA PREMIER COLLECTION ASSN C/0 FON FONTANA 630 ALTA VISTA DR #203 VISTA CA 92084 SMITH TIMOTHY J&SUZETTE T 631 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 OKAWA SOICHIRO&YOKO 6229 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 GOMEZ CYNTHIA L 6231 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 MEZA VERNAE J 6237 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAHM EDMOND V&JENNIFER J 624 SAL TGRASS AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 BAILY LAURA L 6245 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARANTZ FAMILY REVOCABLE 2005 TRUST 06-20-05 6250 E WEST VIEW DR ORANGE CA 92869 PACIFIC RIDGE SCHOOL ATTN:PHILIP HITCH 6269 EL FUERTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009 HOFFMAN LEGACY TRUST 12-27-12 6284 FORESTER DR HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 SAWICKI WILLIAM J&NATALIE A 630 PROSPECT ROW SAN MATEO CA 94401 FORD JAMES C III&ELIZABETH M 632 SAL TGRASS AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MANNING MICHAEL&ANNETTE 623 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ZAMAN SHAFIQ&JINNAT BEGUM M 6233 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 BENCOMO CLAUDIA 6239 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 HANEWINCKEL DERICK 6241 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 RUTHERFORD THERESA L TRUST 07-24-05 6247 SHAMROCK PL CARLSBAD CA 92009 TRACT 85-19 COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION 6256 GREENWICH DR #520 SAN DIEGO CA 92122 MCCORD SANCHEZ FAMILY TRUST 05-24-05 628 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 MARJA ACRES L L C 6284 FORESTER DR HUNTINGTN BCH CA 92648 STUBBS PHILLIP M JR&MARIA K 630 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARMAN ARON S&JULIE L 633 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 JAYROLLC 6339 PASEO DEL LAGO CARLSBAD CA 92011 NUTHI ASHA&KARANIKKIS CHRISTOS 636 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 J MORGAN RYAN INVESTMENTS L P 6391 KEENELAND DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 HUSHMAN FAMILY TRUST 10-18-05 640 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 RANGEL DEBRA S 641 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MUSE DENNIS E&LORAINE M FAMILY TRUST 6418 TORREY ANNA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 KRAMPFNER YEHUDA&BARBARA 6426 TORREY ANNA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 BACKES GEORGE M TRUST 05-07-87 6451 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLOS MARTY A&STORMY E 6455 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 KRUGER FAMILY TRUST 03-02-05 6456 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 B&C L P BUFFINS AND COMPANY 6349 PALOMAR OAKS CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 CORREA SERGIO&MARIA E 637 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 ANDRADE ALAN&DCUNHA ANNA 6394 TORREY ANNA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jl MENG 6402 TORREY ANNA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 WINROW EDWARD&LINDA TRUST 03-06-07 6410 TORREY ANNA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 LIETZKE LU JUAN TR 6420 INNSDALE DR LOS ANGELES CA 90068 MORGAN SCOTT 6448 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 WITT TRUST 03-12-07 6452 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 DUTTA FAMILY TRUST 07-07-97 6455 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 DONAHUE FAMILY TRUST 10-31-01 6458 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 POLLUM FAMILY 2013 TRUST 11-14-13 635 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ZATHAS JOHN REVOCABLE TRUST 11-23-10 6384 LOURDES TER SAN DIEGO CA 92120 SUWARNASARN NAT&ARUNI 6398 TORREY ANNA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 PAINE KIMBERLY 6404 RUBY WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 ROGERS KRISTEN 6414 TORREY ANNA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 CLARK FAMILY 2002 TRUST 12-03-02 6422 TORREY ANNA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 MASTER ANNE M 645 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 WHITE TOMMY B LIVING TRUST 09-15-00 6453 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 TURPIN JEFFREY S&BARBARA J 6456 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 HALL ERIC&LAURIE REVOCABLE LIVING 2004 TRUST 06* 6459 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 SHAKARIAN JOE H&SUZIE 6459 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 HANAN DANIEL E&JAMIE D 6464 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 SWAINWRENW 6476 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 MAXWELL/MCNAMARA FAMILY TRUST 01-08- 10 6480 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 DEGARIS RYAN&MICHELE 649 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 FIFIELD KATHLEEN J FAMILY TRUST 07-15- 04 6494 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 LAZENBY ROBERT W&PAMELA L 650 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 HISEY W 0 TRUST 09-09-91 6503 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 DAVISON KENNETH&KRISTEN 6549 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 CONCA FORNAL FAMILY TRUST 05-06-14 6460 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 OLIVER GUY&LISA 6467 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 WAZ MATTHEW C&ANNE M 6477 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 MOORE RANDAL J 6485 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 SEELEY FAMILY LIVING 1980 TRUST 04-28- 80 6491 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 WISENER FAMILY TRUST 04-12-02 6497 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 HALL ALEX G&KAREN I 6501 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 BARON DAVID L FAMILY TRUST 06-30-13 6506 SURFSIDE LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 SKRABLE RYAN&SUSAN 652 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 RAINERI SHAHIRA 6553 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 SHEVDE SUMUKH A&IYER SWETA P 6463 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 VALDEZ ROBERT&MARCIA A 6468 PYRUS PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 STEVENSON BRYAN P 648 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 MCCABE FAMILY TRUST 05-19-05 6489 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 ROWAN RALPH P TRUST 6492 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 SANCHEZ PATRICIA LV LIVING TRUST 08- 31-12 6498 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 WATHEN EDWARD E&MARLENE E 650-102 WAKEFILED CT LONG BEACH CA 90803 BENTON ROBERT J&LESLEY L 6507 FRANCISCAN RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 DEQUELJOE JASON A&MEGAN M 654 SANDSIDE CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 MAYORGA PATRICK R&SUSAN F 6556 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 REED DARRELL L&PHYLLIS A REVOCABLE TRUST 08-28-* 6557 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 KENNEDY WILLIAM D&PAMELA E 6560 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 YANG FAMILY TRUST 10-16-06 6565 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 PETERSON FAMILY TRUST 02-10-01 6572 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARDOSA MICHAEL J&NANCY C 6579 BLACK RAIL RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 GARCIA NEPAMUCENO 6583 BLACK RAIL RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 VANDEVENTER FAMILY TRUST 05-08-03 6587 PETUNIA PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 ITO YUJI&MAYUMI 660 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 PEARSON ROBERT W 6645 SURF CREST ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 PACHECO FAMILY TRUST 02-08-02 6701 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 . UNIAT TRUST 10-24-07 656 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 GOULD FAMILY TRUST 03-24-04 6561 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 CLAYTON WILLIAM R TRUST 01-21-99 6569 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 GORELICK FAMILY 1989 TRUST 6573 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 RAZMISEAN&SHAY 6579 PETUNIA PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 PIETROCINI FAMILY LIVING TRUST 04-16-98 6583 PETU N lA PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 STARKEY FAMILY TRUST 06-30-14 6588 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 CERKAN WALTER D&SHARON T 661 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 PROCH ERA ANN M 665 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ROMERO RAUL JR&LORI 6705 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 HOLT DENVER E TRUST 12-16-10 656 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 HIGGINS KEITH R&ERICAJ 6562 ALEXANDRIA DR HUNTINGTN BCH CA 92647 MAGNUS HARTNETT REVOCABLE 2014 TRUST 12-24-14 657 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 ENGSTROM FAMILY TRUST 07-20-02 6576 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 XIA WUJUN 6580 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 SMITH MARY GRACE TRUST 08-18-00 6584 CONEFLOWER DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 GHAFFARY-KHOURY 2003 FAMILY TRUST 05-08-03 6591 BLACK RAIL RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 WAN FENG&XIA PENG 664 SEAWARD AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 FAHEY PATRICK J 668 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 LINZEY DAVID M&CHERYL A TRS 6705 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 VIDANO FAMILY TRUST 08-30-79 6706 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 BASTIEN FAMILY TRUST 10-17-05 6710 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 TORCIVIA PHILIP 6714 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 STEFFY FAMILY TRUST 02-04-00 6717 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 SANDERS RICHARD&JANE FAMILY 1997 TRUST 12-1 0-97 672 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 SUNDSTROM ALLEN R&JUDITH L 6722 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 DUMOUCHEL LAWRENCE P&MARGARET A 6727 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 AMIRI ELHAM 6732 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 USUKA JONATHAN A&TERNERO GRACIELA 6735 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 CHENG HONG-CHIN&HUI-LIN 6738 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 PADILLA FAMILY 2000 TRUST 09-13-00 6708 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 REDLER LIVING TRUST 10-05-89 6711 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 ZAND FARIBA LIVING TRUST 07-31-13 6715 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 VELLA PENNY C 6718 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 BARNES FAMILY TRUST 08-27-91 6720 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 JOHNSON FAMILY TRUST 03-09-99 6725 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 ROSS FAMILY TRUST 11-18-88 6728 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 ZIRPOLO FAMILY 1989 TRUST 11-11-02 6733 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 POULADDEJ ALIX&SUSAN J H 6736 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 STAPLETON DONALD M&NOELLE A 6739 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 HUNNINGHAKE SHERRIE K 2012 TRUST 12- 07-12 6709 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 CROTTY LIVING TRUST 06-03-98 6713 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 HOOVER KYLE D&SALOME M 6716 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 KRAUS TIMOTHY&BOYLE MARY 6719 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 GILBERT JOHN D 6721 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 MABRA DEBS A JR&JOY V 6726 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 NADIR FAMILY TRUST 08-14-03 6729 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 OHARA KEITH&BE LISA M L 6734 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 ARMINO F ANTHONY&SUSAN M 6737 CAMPHOR PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 PROVINS AMANDA TRUST 04-02-04 674 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 GIFFORD FAMILY TRUST 10-07-98 67 42 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 HRADNANSKY JOHN J&BRIANNA L 6750 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 GLENDORA MOTORCARS CO INC 6830 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD CA 92011 TEMPESTA GERARDO N 69 RICE RD WAYLAND MA 01778 JAY MARK&SHANNON 6906 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 SCHOFIELD TRUST 08-14-12 6912 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 SHOCKLEY BRADLEY A 6917 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 BERNAUER BRIAN&ALCORTA MADELINE 692 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 HADJIS GEORGE J&RIOS GABRIELA 6922 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 STEPHENSON ANNE-MARIE TRUST 12-03-14 6927 CLEARWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 FERBER FAMILY TRUST 03-10-99 67 46 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 BURKE ANTHONY G&DIANA K 676 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 GONZALES JANICE C TRUST 02-07-00 684 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 MILLER MATTHEW R&RICKSECKER LISA L 6904 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 TRAN NGHI H 6908 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 MJELDE FAMILY TRUST 04-22-99 6914 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 GROCHOWIAK ERIK E 6918 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 PRICE RAY S REVOCABLE TRUST 01-06-1 0 6920 CLEARWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 BLEVINS BELTON M&MELISSA R 6923 CLEARWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 WHITE ROBERT&THERESE 6936 CLEARWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 ENGESETH JAMES&STEPHANIE A 6747 BARBERRY PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 TEMPESTAJERRY&SUZANNE 68 RICE RD WAYLAND MA 01778 MELIDEO FAMILY TRUST 05-29-12 6845 WISH AVE LAKE BALBOA CA 91406 VU FAMILY TRUST 11-21-14 6905 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 DIDIER LOUIS G&GERI L FAMILY WEALTH TRUST 02-03* 6910 3777 S 18TH AVE YUMA AZ 85365 SCHOCK LUKE D&PAMELA D 6916 CLEARWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 MANZI STEVEN F&JOANNE H 6919 CLEARWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 CAMERON KEVIN J&GERSZEWSKI- CAMERON JULIE A 6921 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 DELGUIDICE ROBERT&MARY 6925 WATERS END DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 LADHOFF DON&MARY 694 LAGUNA DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 FOSTER STEVEN E&CHERYL J 6944 CLEARWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 ALTAMIRA MANAGEMENT ASSN NO 1 C/0 LINDSAY MANAGEMENT SERVICES 6992 EL CAMINO REAL #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 TELESCOPE POINT HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 LINDSAY MGMT SERVICES 6992 EL CAMINO REAL #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 BLACKWELL LINDA T 7005 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 FERNANDEZ SUN I M 7012 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 MALANDRA MICHAEL&JENNIFER 7015 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 AL 1/LA COSTA SENIOR HOUSING L L C 7020 MANZANITA ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 CUTSHAW ROSS&SUSAN L 7040 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA 92011 BLOMBERG-PERICLES REVOCABLE TRUST 12-01-01 7040 AVENIDA ENCINAS #104 CARLSBAD CA 92011 ROSE TRUST 10-01-01 7079 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #A5 CARLSBAD CA 92009 ALMOND SUSAN J 6958 PEACH TREE RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 ALTAMIRA UNIT NO 4 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION CORP 6992 EL CAMINO REAL #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 THE CAPE AT CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN(NONP* 6992 EL CAMINO REAL #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 BURSTEIN CYNTHIA L 7008 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 WAVEFRONT TRUST 05-01-14 7012 WHITEWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 WAITE ERIC L 7019 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 SCHACK ERIC&COURTNEY 7024 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 BENDER M&C TRUST 11-09-07 7040 AVENIDA ENCINAS #104 CARLSBAD CA 92011 SWAIN STEVES 7040 AVENIDA ENCINAS #104 CARLSBAD CA 92011 DAITCHMAN JODY M LIVING TRUST 12-14-05 7079 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #C CARLSBAD CA 92009 SILVERMAN JEROME L 6965 EL CAMINO REAL #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 PALISADES POINT HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 LINDSAY MGMT SERVICES 6992 EL CAMINO REAL #105 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SCHREER JOSHUA A&MCCLURG HEATHER L 7004 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 LA COSTA GREENS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 CHICAGO TITLE 701 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD #160 CARLSBAD CA 92011 LUKA VSKY MARSHAL 7013 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 GIRARD SUZANNE M 7020 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 VILLEGAS CARLOS J&REIKO K 7028 GOLDENROD WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 BETTIS MICHELLE G 7040 AVENIDA ENCINAS #104 CARLSBAD CA 92011 ROUSH FAMILY TRUST 04-21-00 7075 WHITEWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 BERKOSKI JOHN K 7079 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #D CARLSBAD CA 92009 SEGRAVES JAKE L&BAYER GRETCHEN K 7083 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #B CARLSBAD CA 92009 COWAN DALLAS M&JACQUELINE E R 7087 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #C9 CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAN DIEGUITO UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT CONSTRUCTION AND PLANNING 710 ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS CA 92024 AGUILAR LETICIA LIVING TRUST 10-18-07 7109 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 SEMIEN RALPH M 7115 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARGOLIN MARCELA I 7127 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #C27 CARLSBAD CA 92009 RIEHL RICHARD J&KAREN T 7185 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 IRWIN LAWRENCE L 7185 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #D CARLSBAD CA 92009 PARVIZ SHAHRAM&LISA A 7189 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 FERDON SCOT&KEENE ANDREAE 7193 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #40 CARLSBAD CA 92009 RAOSACHI 7083 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #D CARLSBAD CA 92009 SOWELL BONNIE B 7095 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #1 CARLSBAD CA 92009 AVIARA RESORT CLUB OWNERS ASSN 7100 FOUR SEASONS POINT CARLSBAD CA 92011 SUMWALT FAMILY REVOCABLE 2007 TRUST 7115 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #2 CARLSBAD CA 92009 GELFOUND TRUST 12-17-07 7127 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #25A CARLSBAD CA 92009 PACIFIC VIEW ESTATES OF CARLSBAD HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 CONCORDIA HOMES 7130 AVENIDA ENCINAS #200 CARLSBAD CA 92011 RODRIGUEZ JANICE C 7185 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #B CARLSBAD CA 92009 CALVARY CHAPEL NO COAST 7188 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD CA 92011 NETTLE JAMES E 7189 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #C CARLSBAD CA 92009 PETERSEN ROBERT 7193 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #B CARLSBAD CA 92009 JANIS DELLA F TRUST 17-28-85 7087 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #7 CARLSBAD CA 92009 JORDAN HANNAH 7095 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #D CARLSBAD CA 92009 ORTEGA LUPE TRUST 04-13-04 7109 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #18B CARLSBAD CA 92009 HUNTER STEPHANIE L 7115 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #A CARLSBAD CA 92009 FOX FAMILY TRUST 08-28-91 7127 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #B CARLSBAD CA 92009 SCHREIBER DALE L TR 7163 ARGONAUT A WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 SMITH CAROLED 7185 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #C CARLSBAD CA 92009 CROGAN BRIAN K&DANA M 7189 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #34B CARLSBAD CA 92009 WILLETT JAMES E 7193 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #37A CARLSBAD CA 92009 ENDRISS MARIANNE LIVING TRUST 01-06-00 7193 ESTRELLA DE MAR RD #C CARLSBAD CA 92009 ENRIGHT LIVING TRUST 04-12-90 72 FREMONT PL LOS ANGELES CA 90005 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN 7400 CIRCULO SEQUOIA CARLSBAD CA 92009 NASKIEWICZ JANE TRUST 04-20-04 7447 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 BREHM-AVIARA GROUP LLC C/0 A MCKIBBIN I CO 7529 DRAPER AVE #D LA JOLLA CA 92037 FENTON RACEWAY LLC C/0 H G FENTON CO 7577 MISSION VALLEY RD SAN DIEGO CA 92108 ALTAMIRA MANAGEMENT ASSN NO 1 C/0 LINDSAY MANAGEMENT SERVICES 7720 EL CAMINO REAL #2-A CARLSBAD CA 92009 TAMARACK RETAIL PARTNERS LP C/0 CEDAR PREAL TY GROUP 7825 FAY AVE #210 LA JOLLA CA 92037 DELMAR TRUST 06-07-05 789 TURTLE POINT WAY SAN MARCOS CA 92069 WU MENG-FANG&YEUNG ANDA SIU LING 7955 REPRESA CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 801 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 R V N INC 727 S BREA BLVD BREA CA 92821 TODD FAMILY TRUST 12-28-06 7431 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 POINSETTIA SHORES MASTER HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 ANDREW M KAPLAN 750 B ST #21 00 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 HERRICK HOLDINGS LTD 755 RAINTREE DR #200 CARLSBAD CA 92011 VALLONE KENNETH L&MELINDA A TRUST 10-20-03 7668 EL CAMINO REAL #104-167 CARLSBAD CA 92009 BRISTOL COVE PROPERTY OWNERS ASSN C/0 LINDSAY MGMT SERVICES 7720 EL CAMINO REAL #2-A CARLSBAD CA 92009 SRINIVASAN ANUPAMA N 784 LOMA VERDE AVE PALO ALTO CA 94303 BARTON SAMUEL J&CASSANDRA 78925 STARLIGHT LN BERMUDADUNESCA92203 CONTINUING LIFE COMMUNITIES LLC C/0 RICHARD ASCHENBRENNER 800 MORNINGSIDE DR FULLERTON CA 92835 DEJONG ARIE E III&SILVA FAMILY TRUST 11- 29-95 807 E MISSION RD SAN MARCOS CA 92069 STANDARD-PACIFIC CORP 7290 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD SAN DIEGO CA 92111 LUNDBERG ALAN&ALVINA 744 CORTLANDT DR SACRAMENTO CA 95864 AVIARA MASTER ASSN C/0 A MCKIBBINICO 7529 DRAPER AVE #D LA JOLLA CA 92037 FENTON H G COMPANY 7577 MISSION VALLEY RD SAN DIEGO CA 92108 SUNSET PLACE ASSN OF CARLSBAD THE C/0 LINDSAY MANAGEMENT SERVICES 7720 EL CAMINO REAL #2A CARLSBAD CA 92009 FREY HARALD J&DEBORA J 7804 CALLE PINABETE CARLSBAD CA 92009 QUIRK EDWARD J&MARIA E REVOCABLE TRUST 11-15-84 7859 BERMUDA DUNES AVE LAS VEGAS NV 89113 MUCKEY ROY W&BARBARA L LIVING TRUST 04-30-08 C/O ANN ARM 7929 LOS PINOS CIR CARLSBAD CA 92009 FRONT PORCH COMMUNITIES AND SERVICES 800 N BRAND BLVD 19TH FL GLENDALE CA 91203 NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT 810 MISSION AVE OCEANSIDE CA 92054 QUETIVES RICKEY D&GAVUZZI DONNA LIVING TRUST 07* 816 MORSE ST OCEANSIDE CA 92054 A P F INVESTMENTS L P C/0 TINA GERRY 826 ORANGE AVE #295 CORONADO CA 92118 LEE FAMILY TRUST 04-17-13 830 CABRILLO AVE CORONADO CA 92118 PACIFIC BELL WIRELESS (LF) PINNACLE CARLSBAD L P PINNACLE HOTELS USA INC 8369 VICKERS ST #1 01 SAN DIEGO CA 92111 WOODWARD BRADLEY K 867 MIMOSA AVE VISTA CA 92081 PALOMAR OAKS BUSINESS CENTER ASSN C/0 CHARLES DUNN CO 888 PROSPECT ST #11 0 LA JOLLA CA 92037 LA COSTA VALLEY MASTER ASSOCIATION 906 SYCAMORE AVE #201 VISTA CA 92081 MAJIINVESTMENTS INC C/0 RON PIT AMBER 9249 SIERRA COLLEGE BLVD ROSEVILLE CA 95661 ROOHANI KHUSROW 9500 HILLWOOD DR LAS VEGAS NV 89134 GHOSH KRIS 955 BOARDWALK #100 SAN MARCOS CA 92078 ROWLEY TRUMAN J 821 COZY CT FALLBROOK CA 92028 BROYLES JOHN&CLELAND-BROYLES PAMELA 82750 ATLANTIC ST INDIO CA 92203 STEWART RANDALL 8315 COLEGIO DR LOS ANGELES CA 90045 SHARP LIETTE C REVOCABLE TRUST 03-24- 89 838 OAKWOOD AVE GLENDORA CA 91741 FIRST INTERSTATE BANK <LF> 110 KNOLL LLC 8677 VILLA LA JOLLA DR #1212 LA JOLLA CA 92037 CARLSBAD WESTOAKS PROJECT OWNER LLC 888 SAN CLEMENTE DR #100 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 MACDONALD FAMILY PARTNERSHIP 9121 ATLANTA AVE #701 HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92646 BUNNELL BRIAN B&CONCEPCION V 925 BUENA PL CARLSBAD CA 92008 CROWE EDWARD F&ANGELA A 9520 STOAKES AVE DOWNEY CA 90240 ALICANTE HILLS OWNERS ASSOCIATION INC C/0 THE DAVIDSON CO 9555 GENESEE AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92121 SCHWENK GREGORY A&STEPHANIE A 8241DAAVE SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 WAVE CREST OCEANFRONT L L C 829 2ND ST#A ENCINITAS CA 92024 SAN DIEGO GAS&ELECTRIC CO LAND SERVICES 8335 CENTURY PARK CT CP11 D SAN DIEGO CA 92123 BATIQUITOS LAND L L C 854 E ALGONQUIN RD #110 SCHAUMBURG IL 60173 LAU PEGGY L 8804 RIVER RISE DR CORDOVA TN 38016 AWERMAN MURRAY&BLANCHE B TRS 901 SW 128TH TER#A114 PEMBROKE PINES FL 33027 LACRESTAAT COLINAS DEORO HOMEOWNERS ASSN 9191 TOWNE CENTRE DR #L 101 SAN DIEGO CA 92122 SCARPELLI FAMILY TRUST 02-25-04 929 ORCHID WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 FIORENTINO MICHAEL J&ELIZABETH 9526 N 132ND PL SCOTTSDALE AZ 85259 SANTA FE TRAILS OWNERS ASSN C/0 PATRICK HIGGINS 9562 LA PLACE CT #250 CARLSBAD CA 92008 DORE JOHN&JANE REVOCABLE TRUST 01- 09-91 959 PASSIFLORA AVE LEUCADIA CA 92024 FIELDSTONE FAIRWAYS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 N N JAESCHKE INC 9610 WAPLES ST SAN DIEGO CA 92121 ROSSBACH JOHN B&MARIA L TRS 964 HOME AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 BRESSI RANCH COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 WALTERS MGMT CO 9665 CHESAPEAKE DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 LA COSTA RIDGE COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 WALTERS MANAGEMENT 9665 CHESAPEAKE DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 PHILLIPS ALLAN S&TANYA K 974 HOME AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 WATSON CAROLYN S 984 HOME AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 SCHAEFFER FAMILY TRUST 02-05-04 994 HOME AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD PARKSIDE HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 MARCIA GOODMAN 9990 MESA RIM RD SAN DIEGO CA 92121 WILKINSON ALLAN&RITA LES ORMES MONT ROSSIGNOL ST OUEN JERSEY CHANNEL ISLAND COURY D&J FAMILY TRUST 10-16-12 9602 W BUCKEYE RD TOLLESON Al 85353 LA COST A VALLEY MASTER ASSN C/0 N N JAESCHKE INC 9610 WAPLES ST SAN DIEGO CA 92121 LEIVONEN FAMILY TRUST 07-10-13 965 HOME AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 LA COSTA GREENS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 WALTERS MANAGEMENT 9665 CHESAPEAKE DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 WATERS END HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION C/0 WALTERS MANAGEMENT 9665 CHESAPEAKE DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 PRESIDIO MANA CARLSBAD 9 LLC 9740 APPALOOSA RD #230 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 BENJAMIN WILLIAM M 9860 LA TORTOLA PL SAN DIEGO CA 92129 JENSEN FAMILY TRUST 07-04-91 996 WHIMBREL CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 HERON BAY/SPYGLASS HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 MARCIA NELSON 9990 MESA RIM RD SAN DIEGO CA 92121 HAUSCH REVOCABLE TRUST 01-03-11 P 0 BOX 10155 ZEPHYR COVE NV 89448 CROWDER SCOTT SR&EILEEN 9602 W PEDERNALES RIVER DR CYPRESS TX 77 433 ACTIVCARE AT BRESSI RANCH L L C 9619 CHESAPEAKE DR #1 03 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 AVIARA PREMIER COLLECTION ASSOCIATION C/0 WALTERS MANAGEMENT 9665 CHESAPEAKE DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN C/0 WALTERS MANAGEMENT 9665 CHESAPEAKE DR #300 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 LA COSTA OAKS COMMUNITY ASSN 9665 CHESAPEAKE DR #800 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 RAFFERTY MICHAEL&ZAVALA ISABEL R 9741 KEENELAND ROW LA JOLLA CA 92037 FUJII CRAIG D&TINA W 9918 NE 157TH ST BOTHELL WA 98011 BCE DEVELOPMENT CORP 999 S HASTINGS ST VANCOUVER BC V6C2W7 SHEA HOMES INC 9990 MESA RIM RD SAN DIEGO CA 92121 LOH REAL EST ATE L P P 0 BOX 1021 SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 SELLSTROM BRIAN J&BARBARA L FAMILY TRUST 07-07-* P 0 BOX 1035 RCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 ALTAMIRA UNIT NO 4 HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION CORP C/0 LOOMIS CO P 0 BOX 1068 OCEANSIDE CA 92051 EUREKAL L C P 0 BOX 1131 CARDIFF CA 92007 G 6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY L L C C/0 G6 HOSPITALITY P 0 BOX 117508 CARROLL TON TX 75011 MARBRISA MAINTENANCE CORP P 0 BOX 1186 CARLSBAD CA 92018 JOHNSON AMOS JR&CARMONJOHNSON VERCIE FAMILY TRU* P 0 BOX 130189 CARLSBAD CA 92013 RUDVALIS BARBARA G TR P 0 BOX 130665 CARLSBAD CA 92013 RUDY STEPHANIE P 0 BOX 131330 CARLSBAD CA 92013 FIELDS LONDON P 0 BOX 131749 CARLSBAD CA 92013 FULL RANGE PROPERTIES L L C C/0 SUSAN ROLL P 0 BOX 1477 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 CASEY FAMILY TRUST 12-14-94 P 0 BOX 10547 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 PALMA DE LA PLAYA L L C P 0 BOX 1102 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 LAI JOHNSON K&SCHMIDT KIMBERLEY K P 0 BOX 1136 RCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 F W P W FARMING PARTNERS LTD P 0 BOX 1185 RCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 ON THE PARK MAINTENANCE CORP P 0 BOX 1186 CARLSBAD CA 92018 JONAS FRED P 0 BOX 130488 CARLSBAD CA 92013 CAMPBELL THOMAS W P 0 BOX 130812 CARLSBAD CA 92013 SEASHORE PROPERTIES LLC C/0 COL TON T GILCHRIST P 0 BOX 1316 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 LU HENG-l RANDALL P 0 BOX 131795 CARLSBAD CA 92013 LADWIG DAVID R&DIANE S P 0 BOX 150 WASHOUGAL WA 98671 PLAZA DEL NORTE INC P 0 BOX 1058 CARDIFF BY THE SEA CA 92007 HOEKSTRA LARRY&JOANN REVOCABLE TRUST 02-25-97 C/0 LORI A MAYBERRY P 0 BOX 1111 CARLSBAD CA 92018 SNELSON REAL PROPERTY TRUST P 0 BOX 1175 EASTSOUND WA 98245 LAS PLAYAS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 GRG MANAGEMENT CO P 0 BOX 1186 CARLSBAD CA 92018 VP/LP MASTER ASSN P 0 BOX 1186 CARLSBAD CA 92018 BATIQUITOS LAGOON FOUNDATION P 0 BOX 130491 CARLSBAD CA 92013 TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK L L C P 0 BOX 1310 OCEANSIDE CA 92051 HAMILL VICTORIA REVOCABLE LICING TRUST 05-09-12 P 0 BOX 131643 CARLSBAD CA 92013 CARLSBAD MEDICAL VILLAGE L P C/0 RUSS RIES P 0 BOX 1422 LA JOLLA CA 92038 HIALEAH WEST COAST INC P 0 BOX 158 HIALEAH FL 33011 ALEXANDER FAMILY TRUST 08-26-04 P 0 BOX 1687 OXFORD MS 38655 HECHT EDWARD P TRUST 05-12-07 P 0 BOX 1894 COSTA MESA CA 92628 HAYES LINDA E TRUST 09-14-09 P 0 BOX 230466 ENCINITAS CA 92023 DODSON DOUGLAS A LIFE TRUST 01-13-11 P 0 BOX2569 CARLSBAD CA 92018 KOEPKE FAMILY RESIDUAL TRUST 01-10-89 P 0 BOX27342 SAN DIEGO CA 92198 CHVRON USA INC C/0 CHEVRON P 0 BOX285 HOUSTON TX 77001 HAYNES RAY M&PATRICIA K TRUST 01-13-04 P 0 BOX387 CARLSBAD CA 92018 CARLSBAD INN LTD P 0 BOX4068 CARLSBAD CA 92018 BECKER MARK&PATIENCE J P 0 BOX458 CHELSEA Ml48118 ALTAMIRAUNITN04 C/0 WORDS I NUMBERS POBOX612 CARLSBAD CA 92018 TERRAMAR ASSN P 0 BOX 1711 CARLSBAD CA 92018 HOY KURT E&REBECCA A P 0 BOX 1911 CARLSBAD CA 92018 HOULDIN ROBERT F II P 0 BOX 232493 ENCINITAS CA 92023 CHESTNUT WILLIAM&HELEN INTERVIVOS TRUST 08-22-97 P 0 BOX2604 CARLSBAD CA 92018 KOEPKE SURVIVORS TRUST 01-10-89 P 0 BOX 27342 SAN DIEGO CA 92198 MIYAKE REX&CHERRY P 0 BOX3388 RCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 FERNANDEZ VICTORIA TR P 0 BOX395 CARDIFF CA 92007 CARLSBAD RANCH RESTAURANT COL L C C/0 ACCOUNTS PAYABLE DEPT. P 0 BOX4068 CARLSBAD CA 92018 BLUE RIVER TRUST 08-14-07 P 0 BOX 5119 OCEANSIDE CA 92052 MELIDEO CONSTANCE P 0 BOX6635 VENTURA CA 93006 VARAV KALLE&MICHELLE P 0 BOX 1865 CARMEL BY THECA 93921 COTTAGE ROW CARLSBAD L L C P 0 BOX2194 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92659 HOLLY SPRINGS L L C P 0 BOX2484 CARLSBAD CA 92018 S&S TRUST 04-04-84 C/0 STEPHEN MICHEA P 0 BOX2604 CARLSBAD CA 92018 HARRIES JOHN&CASSIE FAMILY TRUST 10- 14-03 P 0 BOX2829 RAMONA CA 92065 MAHRDT FAMILY MARITAL TRUST 05-24-90 P 0 BOX 3412 RCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 C B R MANAGEMENT L L C P 0 BOX4064 CARLSBAD CA 92018 KLETT FAMILY DECEASED SETTLORS TRUST 04-14-10 P 0 BOX4086 CARLSBAD CA 92018 BLACK RAIL RIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION P 0 BOX 602090 SAN DIEGO CA 92160 GUESS FAMILY EXEMPTION TRUST 06-05-74 C/0 JILL A ROBB P 0 BOX 675550 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 ROTH THEODORE D&JEANNE M P 0 BOX 675928 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 TORELL FAMILY TRUST 08-15-95 P 0 BOX7098 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658 PLUM TREE WALK L L C C/0 EUGENE BURGER MGNT CORP P 0 BOX786 POWAY CA 92074 SOLANA CARLSBAD OAKS LLC C/0 TECH BIT CONSTRUCTION CORP P 0 BOX 80036 SAN DIEGO CA 92138 S-H FORTY-NINE PROPCO-CALIFORNIA PACK LP C/0 HCPI TRUST POBOX847 CARLSBAD CA 92018 LA COST A VALLEY MASTER ASSN C/0 VILLAGES OF LA COSTA P 0 BOX 9000685 CARLSBAD CA 92018 BOYS&GIRLS CLUBS OF CARLSBAD C/0 RON SIPIORA P 0 BOX913 CARLSBAD CA 92018 ADLER JUDITH L SEPARATE PROPERTY TRUST 08-24-04 P 0 BOX 9507 RANCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 SIMUNOVICH JERRY&REBECCA 2000 TRUST PO BOX 9019 PMB 279 CALEXICO, CA 92232 CREST OF CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 PACIFIC SCENE INC 3900 HARNEY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92110 LA P REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST P 0 BOX6835 BRECKENRIDGE CO 80424 J B C B INC P 0 BOX 748 CARLSBAD CA 92018 BJ PROPERTIES&MANAGEMENT L L C SERIES C C/0 L. BRUCE BROWN P 0 BOX787 CARDIFF CA 92007 HARDEN FAMILY LLC P 0 BOX809 DEL MAR CA 92014 ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOP OF SAN DIEGO P 0 BOX85728 SAN DIEGO CA 92186 TIERRA DEL ORO L L C P 0 BOX906 RCHO SANTA FE CA 92067 WILBER SABINA B TR P 0 BOX94 CARLSBAD CA 92018 DABBS DONALD R&DEBRA A P 0 BOX966 BONSALL CA 92003 E S H/E SA PROPERTIES L L C POB 49550 PROP TAX CHARLOTTE, NC 28277 CREST OF CALAVERA HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN C/0 GARY CARTER 3900 HARNEY ST SAN DIEGO CA 92110 DALL SHARON E P 0 BOX684 BORREGO SPRINGS CA 92004 JANIS JAMES R&MARGARET T REVOCAB TRUST 12-12-* P 0 BOX749 CERRILLOS NM 8701 0 HOEHN GROUP L L C P 0 BOX789 CARLSBAD CA 92018 ALLEN DONNA L LIVING TRUST P 0 BOX8171 SURPRISE AZ 85374 MORAVEC FAMILY TRUST 03-09-00 P 0 BOX877 PAUMA VALLEY CA 92061 FORD MANCE CO P 0 BOX 910 CARDIFF CA 92007 DAVIS JOHN A&DENA M REVOCABLE TRL 12-27-06 P 0 BOX949 CAMP VERDE AZ 86322 MILLS JACK B TR P 0 BOX991 CARLSBAD CA 92018 ZANDER ARDIS TESORO CORPORATION TAX DEPT CALABASAS CA 91302 First Name Last Name Adam Witt Adrian McKibbin Ahmed Haque AI Gelbart AL SHAM I ALAN YOUNG Alelia Gillin Alex Ning Alex Zirpolo Ali Shashani ALIXE FESLER ALLEN JONES Allen Sweet ALLENE LAWSON Amy Sheets AmyJ Davis ANASTASIA BREWSTER Andrew Po at ANTHONY WANG ANTHONY R PI CO A RIC STARCK Arlene Hourdajian ARNULFO MANRIQUEZ Art & Alice Brown Aubrey Halverson AVRIL FERGUSON Barbara Hamilton Barbara Segal BARBARA WHITAKER Becky Larson Ben Costantino Betsy Lieberman Betty Williams Bill Arnold Bill Arnold Bill Divine BILL HOFMAN Bill Kennedy Bill Shuster Bill & Kathi Odom Bladimir Hernandez Blythe Doane Bob Nightengale BOB WILLIAMSON BRADFORD ROTH Bradley Wells BradleyWm Brunon Title for Burris Trust President Organization Senior Director, Busin NRG MailingAddre! MailingAddress2 SuiteD Suite 200 7529 Draper Avenue 5790 Fleet Street 5485 El Arbol Drive DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL 5796 CORPORATE AVENUE 5410 FOXTAIL LOOP HG FENTON COMPANY CHAIRPERSON SAN PASQUAL BAND OF MISSION INDIANS SAN DIEGO COM LANDS TRUST 1 061 Seahorse Court 4529 Adams Street PO Box 10249 1777 BUTTERS ROAD SUITE 200 7577 MISSION VALLEY ROAD PO Box4230 PO BOX 365 1285 Yourell Avenue 6006 Paseo Alameda 3295 MEADE AVENUE Vice President of Pub San Diego Regional Economic Development Corp. 7th Floor 530 B Street 2890 HIGHLAND CHAIRPERSON CEO VIEJAS BAND OF KUMEYAAY INDIANS BRE COMMERCIAL MAAC PROJECT Chair, External Relati< Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association Inc HOFMAN PLANNING & ENGINEERING CARLSBAD WATERSHED NETWORK Certified Specialist Criminal law SUITE 100 Suite 1400 PO BOX 908 1000 AVIARA PARKWAY 1355 THIRD AVENUE 5157 Shore Drive 4260 SUNNYHILL DRIVE 2335 Pio Pico Drive 2210 NOB HILL DRIVE 5009 Tierra Del Oro 1323 Forest Avenue 6854 Watercourse Drive 3432 Don Ortega Drive 5200 El Camino Real 5319 Forecastle Court 3152 LIONSHEAD AVENUE 330 Redwood Avenue 1365 Pine Avenue 1654 Calliandra Road 2277 CAMPO 1507 RUBENSTEIN AVENUE 11601 Wilshire Boulevard MailingAddress3 La Jolla CA 92037 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 CYPRESS CA 90630 CARLSBAD CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92011 Carlsbad CA 92008 Newport Beach CA 92658 Carlsbad CA 92008 SAN DIEGO CA 92108 Carlsbad CA 92018 VALLEY CENTER CA 92082 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 SAN DIEGO CA 92116 San Diego CA 92101 CARLSBAD CA 92008 ALPINE CA 91903 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CHULA VISTA CA 91911 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92011 Carlsbad CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92011 CARDIFF BY THE SEA CA 92007 Los Angeles CA 90025 Brian Brady BRIAN RAMSEIER Brian A & Teri Sal a Brian G Mcinerny Bruce Bandemer Bruce Grouse Bruce & Laurie Gibbs Bruce & Susan Hall Cami Mattson CARMEN LUCAS Carmen Sandoval Carol A Smith Carole Meredith Carrie M Timko Catherine Miller CHAD PHILLIPS Charles Rogers Charles B Goodsell Christina Rosenthal Christine Davis Christine Bevilacqua Cindy Molin Clay Antone I CLINT LINTON Connery Cepeda CONNIE BUNNELL CONNIE & VIC" CHAVEZ Courtney Heineman CPLO Craig Lindholm Craig K Beam Crystal Pipersburgh Crystal & Kevin Gillotti CURTIS & ANN HOFMEISTER Cynthia Eppeldauer DALE SCHREIBER DANIEL TUCKER Daniel & Amy Pleickhardt Daniel V Burke Dannie Mainwaring Dave Billings Dave Cline David Kaulcain David Landes David Sittner David Swagerty David Pestonjee David K Landes Kilroy Realty Corp. Pak West Paper & Packaging CEO North County Convis KWAAYMII LAGUNA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce Ener£ Suite 1000 Epsten Ginnell & Howell Suite 100 for Terramar Assn Realty Consultants & Associates Suite 103 La Costa Avenue Safety Group 4042 West Garry Avenue 5341 Forecastle Court 1343 Forest Avenue 6341 Allston Street 3729 Bennington Court 5195 Shore Drive 5019 Tierra Del Oro PO BOX 775 402 West Broadway 5005 Tierra Del Oro 6839 El Fuerte Street 1 0200 Willow Creek Road 1930 South Coast Highway 4105 Park Drive 7698 Sitio Algodon 5457 Wolverine Terrace PO BOX 507 DIRECTOR OF CULT IPAY NATION OF SANTA YSABEL Community Planning I Department of Transportation MAIL STOP 2~ 4050 Taylor Street CEH Management Cc Carlsbad Woodridge HOA COMMANDING OFFI MCAS MIRAMAR Rotary Club of Carlsbad ESQ Jackson, DeMarco, Tidus & Peckenpaugh CHAIRPERSON SYCUAN BAND OF THE KUMEYAAY NATION President Buena Vista Audubon Nature Center Carlsbad Hi-Noon Rotary Club Land Advisors Organization Suite 200 925 BUENA PLACE 2510 WILSON STREET P.O. Box 4669 PO BOX 452000 6450 Carlsbad Blvd 2815 Townsgate Road 3 MacArthur Place 7163 ARGONAUT A WAY 5459 SYCUAN ROAD 2712 Jefferson 3015 Glenbrook Street PO Box480 5215 Shore Drive P.O. Box 741 1 035 Loretta Lane 6740 Cantil Street 9707 Waples Street Santa Ana, CA 92704 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 PINE VALLEY CA 91962 San Diego CA 92101 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 San Diego CA 92131 Oceanside CA 92054 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92010 SANTA YSABEL CA 92070 San Diego CA 92110 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 SAN DIEGO CA 92145 Carlsbad CA 92011 Westlake Village CA 91361 Santa Ana CA 92707 CARLSBAD CA 92009 EL CAJON CA 92019 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 9201 0 Oceanside CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92018 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 San Diego CA 92121 David L Spencer 1848 Cottonwood Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 David M Bentley CCIM President Bentley-Wing Investments LP & Bentley-Wing Properties Inc 7449 Magellan Street Carlsbad CA 92011 David P Doane 1654 Calliandra Road Carlsbad CA 92011 Dean Goetz De'Ann Weimer 6606 Finoa Place Carlsbad CA 92011 DEBBIE VOUGHT WSL DOS COLINAS R/E LLC SUITE 300 5796 ARMADA DRIVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Dee Dee Campbell 5003 Tierra Del Oro Carlsbad CA 92008 DELIA & GERA CHARVEL Denise Hendricks Dennis & Barba Lambell 1411 Cressa Court Carlsbad CA 92011 DEREK EMPEY MKS RESIDENTIAL SUITE 180 444 SOUTH CEDROS AVENUE SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 Diane Nygaard Preserve Calavera 5020 Nighthawk Way Oceanside CA 92056 Diane & Patrick McGee 185 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Dianne Lee & R Neuman 5328 Forecastle Court Carlsbad CA 92008 Dick Howard Dixie Showalter Dolores Welty 2076 Sheridan Road Encinitas CA 92024 Don Christiansen Dona Wilcox 5583 Foxtail Loop Carlsbad CA 92010 Donald Houser DONALD PESCE 5244 DON MIGUEL DRIVE CARLSBAD CA 92010 Donald & Jeane Holmes 6943 Mimosa Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Doug Dodson 3085 Ocean Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Dr Devora Lockton Dr. Regg V Antle President Buena Vista Lagoon Foundation PO Box 4516 Carlsbad CA 92008 DUV MACGURN Dwain Deets Public Policy Team M SanDiego350 E. A. Orlowski 3729 Bennington Court Carlsbad CA 92010 Ed Corneio 3488 Camino Largo Carlsbad CA 92009 Ed Gowens Airport Lan Use Comr San Diego County Regional Airport Authority PO Box 82776 San Diego CA 92138 Ed Macken Edith Hannigan Board Staff State of CA Board of Forestry and Fire Protection PO Box 944246 Sacramento CA 94244-2460 EDWARDJ SINGER REAL ESTATE ASSE NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT 810 MISSION AVENUE OCEANSIDE CA 92054-2825 EDWIN ROMERO CHAIRPERSON 1095 SARONA ROAD LAKESIDE CA 92040 Eileen Ballack 5190 Shore Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Elaine Lions Club of Carlsbad 2858 Carlsbad Blvd Carlsbad CA 92008 Elizabeth Kruidenier 3005 Cadencia Street Carlsbad CA 92009 ELLEN IMMERGUT HABITAT FOR HUMANITY 10222 SAN DIEGO MISSION ROAI SAN DIEGO CA 92108 Elliot Feuerstein EMY REILLY 1305 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD CA 92008 Eric Hepfer ERICH GROSSE FOURSQUARE PROPERTIES SUITE A 5850 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD CA 92008 ERNIE COWAN N. SAN DIEGO ASSOC OF REAL TORS SUITE 104 906 SYCAMORE AVENUE VISTA CA 92081 Eugene Katz EVA SHAW 1758 YOURELL Carlsbad CA 92008 Evan & Leah Dwin Suite 250 2173 Salk Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Evelyn Montalbano La Costa Avenue Safety Group 2404 La Costa Avenue Carlsbad CA 92009 Everett L DeLano Delano & Delano 220 West Grand Avenue Escondido CA 92025 Farhad Mazandarany Fred Briggs Fred C Sandquist Fu Dong Shi Gail Carrol Gary Baker Gary Kinght Gary Larson GARY NESSIM GARY WRENCH Geoff Reeslund Geoffrey Sherman George Backes George Reh GEORGE L PIANTKA GERARDEEN SANTIAGO Gil Miltenberger Gil Solo GINGER & ERII DILL GIOVANNA SP PHILLIPS Glenn & Nancy Garbeil Gloria Shoden Graham Thorley Harry Habermann Heather C Turner HEIDI ROTH Helen Urton HEMANSHU TYAGI Henry Warshaw HOLLY MOYER Howard Krausz Howard T Coffey I an Pierson Ingrid Stichter Iris Mjelde Jack L Nelson Jackie Peacock Jacob Armstrong Jacqueline Gunther Jacqueline Lucas Jacques Romatier James Clark James O'Leonard JAMES SILVERWOOD JAMES UKEGAWA JAMES & BONI CLINNIN James (Ed) Jan Johnson Fretwill President & CEO North County Economic Development Council for Dejong and Silva trust Hughes Investments Excel Trust DIRECTOR OF ENVI' NRG ENERGY INC Integral Communities Aviara Resort Associates Limited Partnership KILROY REALTY FINANCE PARTNERSHIP LP VRE La Costa LLC North County Advocates Engineering Technici< Vallecitos Water District Chief, Development R Department of Transportation PRESIDENT AFFIRMED HOUSING GROUP Suite 124 Suite 300 SUITE 200 Suite 240 1578 Basswood Avenue 6408 Crossbill Court 1254 Mariposa Road 1 00 N. Rancho Santa Fe Road 2987 HIGHLAND DRIVE 3531 CHARTER OAK DRIVE 23 Corporate Plaza 17140 Bernardo Center Drive 5790 FLEET STREET 2890 HIGHLAND 2235 Encinitas Boulevard 5604 Foxtail Loop 2416 BADGER LANE 2539 El Gavilan Court 5419 Foxtail Loop 11828 La Grange Avenue PO BOX 64733 5172 Shore Drive 1 00 South Brentwood Boulevard 3461 SEACREST DRIVE 7515 Quinta Street 2399 Spruce Street 201 Vallecitos de Oro Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92011 Carlsbad CA 92011-4206 San Marcos CA 92069 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Newport Beach CA 92660 San Diego CA 92128 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Encinitas CA 92024 Carlsbad CA 92010 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92010 Los Angeles CA 90025 LOS ANGELES CA 90064 Carlsbad CA 92008 Saint Louis MO 63105 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92008 San Marcos CA 92069 1360 Las Flores Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 2306 Lanyard Place Carlsbad CA 92008 MAIL STOP 2<14050 Taylor Street San Diego CA 92110 5548 Foxtail Loop Carlsbad CA 92010 1744 Balckbird Circle Carlsbad CA 92011 7283 Spoonbill Lane Carlsbad CA 92011 6422 Torreyanna Circle Carlsbad CA 92011 2670 Cazadero Drive Carlsbad CA 92009 SUITE 160 13520 EVENING CREEK DRIVE N1 SAN DIEGO CA 92128 4218 SKYLINE ROAD CARLSBAD CA 92008 5380 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 7279 Spoonbill Lane Carlsbad CA 92011 Jan Kennard JANANN(JAN) TAYLOR JANY STALEY JARED ARNOWITZ Jason Jay JAYCE JB & RT JEFF Jeff Jeff & Cheri Jeff & Nancy luculano Stryker Meyer FITCH JOHNSON LEADS Lynch Pryor Dungan JEFF AND SOl\ PRATT Jeffrey Neichin Jennifer Bradley JENNIFER CHAVEZ Jennifer Jacobs JENNIFER A HE IN Jenny Ferrero Jenny Racine Jerry Dimolios JERRY & ANA HANSEN Jill Jim Comstock Jim Hogan Jim & Antje Hjerpe JIM & KAY HAWKINS Jinny & Mike Elder Jo Dawn Whitlock Joan Herrera Joan Herskowitz JoAnn V & Willi, Sweeney Joe Holman JOE & KATHY TAYLOR Joey Kratcoski John Anewalt John Chavez John Clements John Ireland John Manson John Min an John Osthimer John Rice JOHN RIM BACH John Bonanno John & Sylvia Biondolillo John E. Ponder John G Garcia CONTRACT GOVERI SDGE DISTRIBUTION OPERATIONS-SOUTH R CP22A K HOVNANIAN HOMES North County Times Editorial Board EWA 7251 Spoonbill Lane 1351 PINE AVENUE 8315 CENTURY PARK COURT 2525 CAMPUS DRIVE 2407 Sacada Circle 1722 South Coast Hwy 5400 El Arbol 6200 AVENIDA ENCINAS 5243 Shore Drive 1070 CHESTNUT AVENUE 2750 Argonauta Street LUCE FORWARD HAMIL TON & SCRIPPS LLP SUITE 2600 600 WEST BROADWAY GENERAL COUNSEL NRG ENERGY INC SUITE 200 5790 FLEET STREET 2399 Spruce Street Lindsay Management Cove Point, Telescope Point, Evans Point, Alta Mira Imagine Carlsbad Conservation Commit Buena Vista Audubon Society Southwest Quadrant Homeowners Association WEST LIVING SUITE 300 3982 Garfield Street 5349 Forecastle Court 2879 Woodridge Circle 5482 Wolverine Terrace 5330 Los Robles PO Box480 5242 Forecastle Court 2398 SPRUCE STREET 1306 Pine Avenue 2405 Granada Way 5021 Tierra Del Oro 2821 Luciernaga Street 5796 ARMADA DRIVE 17190 Bernardo Center Drive 2409 Sacada Circle Carlsbad CA 92011 Carlsbad CA 92008 SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1548 IRVINE CA 92602 Carlsbad CA 92009 Oceanside CA 92054 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92011 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 9201 0 Carlsbad CA 92008 Oceanside CA 92049 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92010 San Diego CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 CARLSBAD CA 92008 San Diego CA 92128 Carlsbad CA 92009 Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP 501 West Broadway, 19th Floor San Diego CA 92101 6771 Follette Street Carlsbad CA 92011 Johnson Lai Jon H Epsten Suite 100 1 0200 Willow Creek Road San Diego CA 92131 Jose M Feliciano Ill Joy Hanawa 5573 Coyote Court Carlsbad CA 92010 Judith A Martin 924 Begonia Court Carlsbad CA 92011 Julie Hynes 5348 Forecastle Court Carlsbad CA 92008 Julie B Decker Julie Peebles Peterson 2045 Linda Lane Carlsbad CA 92008 Justin Wilson Partner La Costa Glen 1940 Levante Street Carlsbad CA 92009 Karen Hall Karen Merrill 3681 Seaflower Lane Oceanside CA 92056 Karen O'Leonard 2670 Cazadero Drive Carlsbad CA 92009 Karen & Williarr Clements 5021 Tierra Del Oro San Diego CA 92008 Kasey Cinciarelli Carlsbad CA 92010 Katherine McHenry 3210 Via de Canto Carlsbad CA 92010 Kathryn & Joser Hall KATHY GRIFFITH RANCHO CARLSBAD OWNERS ASSN 5200 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92010 KATHY KINANE 2987 HIGHLAND DRIVE KEN CABLAY LIGHTHOUSE VENTURES SUITE 519 3529-2B CANNON ROAD OCEANSIDE CA 92056 Ken Chiang Utilities Engineer State of California Public Utilities Commission Suite 500 320 West 4th Street Los Angeles CA 90013 Kervin Krause Kevin Moriarty Vice President ActivCare Living Inc Suite 103 9619 Chesapeake Drive Carlsbad CA 92123 Khary S Knowles Executive Director, Fe San Marcos Unified School District Suite 250 255 Pico Avenue San Marcos CA 92069 Kieran J Purcell Epsten Ginnell & Howell Suite 100 10200 Willow Creek Rd. San Diego CA 92131 KIM BERKSHIRE Kim Goodsell 41 05 Park Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Kip McBane 2691 Crest Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Klementyna Newkirk 4525 Adams Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Kristina Anderson Kurt Hoy 305 Hemlock Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 L Miller 5133 El Arbol Carlsbad CA 92008 LANCE CARNOW AFFORDABLE HOUSING PEOPLE 2311 MARGA PLACE CARLSBAD CA 92009 Lance Johnson 5486 Carlsbad Boulevard Carlsbad CA 92008 LARRY PEIFER 2610 VALEWOOD AVENUE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Larry Waters LAURA NUNN POLICY COORDINAl SAN DIEGO HOUSING FEDERATION SUITE1811 110 WEST C STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92101 Laura and Davi< Kurner LAVONNE PECK CHAIRWOMAN LA JOLLA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS 22000 HIGHWAY 76 PAUMA VALLEY CA 92061 LaVonne Reiter Leann Carmichael Lee & Natalie Shapiro Unit114 7835 Rush Rose Drive Carlsbad CA 92009 LEO CRUZ 2435 PRUETT DRIVE VISTA CA 92084 LESLIE RAMIREZ 3965 MONROE Carlsbad CA 92008 Lin Ball Ocean Point HOA 7720 El Camino Real Carlsbad CA 92009 Linda Braun-Trautman 3925 Holly Brae Lane Carlsbad CA 92008 LINDSEY COHN 3420 WOODLAND WAY CARLSBAD CA 92008 LISA ASH APTC 3515 ROOSEVELT STREET CARLSBAD CA 92008 Lisa McKethan 1343 Forest Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 LISA RODMAN EXECUTIVE DIRECT AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOON FOUNDATION 1580 CANNON ROAD CARLSBAD CA 92008 Lisa Roop Secretary Carlsbad Community Garden Lora Zaroff 5430 Foxtail Loop Carlsbad CA 92010 LORI KELLER FIRST INTERSTATE BANK TR SUITE 1212 8677 VILLA LA JOLLA DRIVE LA JOLLA CA 92037 Louis J Hansen 5349 Forecastle Court Carlsbad CA 92008 Lucinda Vigne 3880 Hibiscus Circle Carlsbad CA 92008 LUIGI ANDELUCCI SUITE 215 9865 MESA RIM ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92121 Lydia & Myron Swize 6829 El Fuerte Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Lynda Wheeler Madeleine & Ale Szabo 5338 Forecastle Court Carlsbad CA 92008 MADHUSUDANGUJRAL Manny De Luna MANUEL CONTRERAS 2710 WILSON STREET CARLSBAD CA 92008 Marcia Biglaiser 1 004 Goldeneye View Carlsbad CA 92011 Margie Caruso 6624 Brookite Court Carlsbad CA 92009 Marguerite L Hunt 2733 Abejorro Street Carlsbad CA 92009 Marilyn B Hendron 335 McKinley Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Mario Monroy Suite B 749 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 MARITZA CONTRERAS-RIVERA 2710 WILSON STREET CARLSBAD CA 92008 MARK CUNNINGHAM 1776 FOREST AVENUE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Mark Gordey 7783 Palenque Street Carlsbad CA 92009-8026 MARK MACARRO CHAIRPERSON PECHANGA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS PO BOX 1477 TEMECULA CA 92593 Mark Rem as MA, CRC, ABVE 2757 Arland Road Carlsbad CA 92008 MARK ROMERO CHAIRPERSON MESA GRANDE BAND OF MISSION INDIANS PO BOX270 SANTA YSABEL CA 92070 Mark Wiehl 6006 Paseo Alameda Carlsbad CA 92009 Markus Spiegelberg San Diego Regional F Cener for Natural Lands Management MARSHA ADAMS 2515 WILSON STREET CARLSBAD CA 92008 Marta Hall Martha Law-Edwards 1366 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 MARVIN SIPPEL 5200 HEMINGWAY DRIVE Carlsbad CA 92008 Mary Branon Full Circle Property M Carlsbad Surfside Villas HOA Oceanside CA 92008 Mary Hansen 5283 Shore Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Mary Millet 824 Caminito Rosa Carlsbad CA 92011 MARY SCHERR 3244 MEADOWLARK LANE Carlsbad CA 92008 Mary & John Krebs 2825 Torry Court Carlsbad CA 92009 MARYANNE VINEY 2796 JAMES DRIVE Carlsbad CA 92008 Mary Beth Gauntt MATT OMALLEY WATERKEEPER, LE• SAN DIEGO COASTKEEPER SUITE 200 2825 DEWEY ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92106 MATT TITLOW 3330 ADAMS STREET Carlsbad CA 92008 Matthew VanEck Matthew F Hagemann P.G., C.Hg., QSD, Q~ SWAPE Suite 204 1640 5th Street Santa Monica CA 90401 Maureen & Jerr Bodow MAYELA MANASJAN SIERRA CLUB Suite 101 8304 Clairemont Mesa Boulevard San Diego CA 92111 MEGAN GOODWIN Mel Vennon 1 044 North Ivy Street Escondido CA 92026 Melia McCraw Merle Albin Fendrick MD, PhD 2781 Arland Road Carlsbad CA 92008 MICHAEL BARONE 2884 ELMWOOD STREET CARLSBAD CA 92008 Michael Michael MICHAEL MICHAEL Hedrick Heyer MCSWEENEY SCHERTZER Michael & Linda Thompson Michael & Marja Selna Michael J Kroopkin Michele Uke MICHELE & ST CULLEN Michele A. Staples MICHELLE LIN Mike Barnes MIKE HOWES Mike Primb Mike Bullock Mike Bullock Mike & Kathy McMahon Mitch Guarneros Mr. Mitchell NADJAA SPANO Najoo & Rohintc Panthaky NANCI CHARTIER Neil & Momo Bezaire Nick Ervin Nick Alex NICK VI NEZ NINA HAMMOND Nina & Homer Eaton Norma & Tom Bwarie Ofelia E Escobedo Osman Khawar Paige DeCino Pat & Terry Parsons Patricia Mehan Patricia C Bleha Patty Haugen Patty Segovia-Krause PAUL KLUKAS Paul McGurgan PaulE Robinson Paul J Turro Peggy Thrailkill Peggy & Harry Sanchez Penny Johnson PETE & JOAN SUFFREDINI Peter Drinkwater Peter Landreth PHILIP CRIMMINS Chair Chair BIA Jackson DeMarco Tidus Peckenpaugh HOWES WEILER & ASSOCIATES Sierra Club Sierra Club Apartment B 3557 Madison Street Carlsbad CA 92008 SUITE110 Suite 1200 SUITE 217 Suite 101 9201 SPECTRUM CENTER BOUU SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1407 2093 WESTWOOD DRIVE 5337 Forecastle Court 4901 El Camino Real 2322 Masters Road 1778 Cottonwood Avenue 2030 Main Street 2732 ARLAND ROAD 1313 Gull Court 2888 LOKER AVENUE EAST 5151 Los Robles 1800 Bayberry Drive 8304 Clairemont Mesa Boulevard 2645 Sutter Street 2390 SPRUCE STREET 5528 Foxtail Loop Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92011 Irvine CA 92614 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92008 Oceanside CA 92054 San Diego CA 92111 Carlsbad CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92010 5226 Shore Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Chair, Conservation C Sierra Club Ste. 101 8304 Clairmont Mesa Blvd. San Diego, CA 92111 Airport Planner County of San Diego Planning & Development Ser Suite 310 5510 Overland Avenue San Diego CA 92123 2796 JAMES DRIVE Carlsbad CA 92008 INTEGRAL COMMUNITIES SUITE 216 2235 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD ENCINITAS CA 92024 5025 Tierra Del Oro Carlsbad CA 92008 5273 Shore Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 1611 James Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 President San Diego Institute of Medical Research 4155 Skyline Road Carlsbad CA 92008 5333 Forecastle Court Carlsbad CA 92008 5403 FOXTAIL LOOP CARLSBAD CA 92010 President North County Advocates Suite 104-258 668 El Camino Real Carlsbad CA 92009 PLANNING SYSTEMS SUITE 100 1530 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Hecht Solberg Suite 800 600 West Broadway San Diego CA 92101 DDS 5143 Shore Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 1360 Hillview Court Carlsbad CA 92008 2635 CREST DRIVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Director of Airports County of San Diego Department of Public Works 1960 Joe Crosson Drive El Cajon CA 92020 Senior Director, Busin NRG Suite 200 5790 Fleet Street Carlsbad CA 92008 CAL TRANS DISTRICT 11 AERONAUTIC PO BOX 94287 4 SACRAMENTO CA 9427 4 Philip Preston Prudence V Ralph Winter Randall RANDELL Presser Maclean Sweeney Winter Lu MAJEL Randy & Barbar Broy RAY & CHRIST IMMELMAN Ray & Ellen RAYMOND REBECCA Rebecca Rhonda Bender HUNTER OSUNA Williams Vicker Ricardo Cisternas Rich Van Every Richard Somerville Richard & Bonn Bethel Richard E Crompton RICK LANTZ Rick Shellnutt Rob Hakim Rob Mayers Robert Cattolica Robert Craddick ROBERT DENTINO Robert Gilbert ROBERT & PRI GESS ROBERT & ROI KELLY Robert C Ladwig Robert C. Little Robert C. Little Robin Gartman Robin Young Ron Bedford Ron Gordon Ron Little RON & BLANCI RAMSWICK RON & JILL LEA RONALD W ROUSE ROON ROSA ROSAURA ROSE BROWN MUNOZ RIVERA DURO Rose Duro Ross Hartstock Russell Grosse RUSSELL & Mf! GROSSE for Donna Bower (Merhab) CHAIRPERSON PAUMA & YUIMA RESERVATION 2443 Sacada Circle 2349 Longfellow Court PO BOX369 5236 Shore Drive 2992 ELMWOOD Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92008 PAUMA VALLEY CA 92061 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92009 Palomar Airport Blogs 1015 Camino del Arroyo Drive San Marcos CA 92078 CHAIRPERSON JAMUL INDIAN VILLAGE PO BOX 612 JAMUL CA 91935 SPOKESPERSON INAJA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS 2005 SOUTH ESCONDIDO BOULE ESCONDIDO CA 92025 5051 Millay Ct. 2127 Pintoresco Court Director, Department County of San Diego Department of Public Works 1 960 Joe Crosson Drive 2844 WILSON STREET 6739 Corintia Street Librarian Carlsbad Resident The Art Institute of California-San Diego EXCEL ENGINEERING KAREN KELLY TRUST 5565 Coyote Court 4624 Dana Drive 440 STATE PLACE 1339 Buena Vista Way President Ladwig Design Group Inc 5550 COYOTE COURT 2770 SUNNY CREEK ROAD 2234 Faraday Avenue Sr. Vice President Kilroy Realty Corp. Suite 550 Suite 250 3611 Valley Centre Drive 3661 Valley Center Drive 2725 Anta Court MSN, NP-C CHAIRPERSON Carlsbad Village Business Association Suite B 2579 State Street 2435 Badger Lane 5201 Shore Drive 2886 ELMWOOD 1453 BUENA VISTA WAY LUCE FORWARD HAMIL TON & SCRIPPS LLP SUITE 2600 600 WEST BROADWAY 385 CHINQUAPIN CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION SUITE 500 320 WEST 4TH STREET 2710 WILSON STREET RINCON BAND OF MISSION INDIANS 1 WEST TRIBAL ROAD Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians 1 West Tribal Road CEO and President Four Square Properties Suite A 5850 Avenida Encinas 5850 SUNNY CREEK ROAD Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 El Cajon CA 92020 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92010 La Mesa CA 91 942 ESCONDIDO CA 92029 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92010 CARLSBAD CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92008 San Diego CA 92130 San Diego CA 92130 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 Carlsbad CA 92008 LOS ANGELES CA 90013 CARLSBAD CA 92008 VALLEY CENTER CA 92082 Valley Center CA 92082 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92010 RYAN & SUMM JOHNSON S Ellisor Sam DePrimo SAM & REBACI PATTEM Sandra Meador Sandy Colton Sarwat Suleiman SCOTT MORGAN Scott Morgan Scott Williams Scott & Merri Adams Scott R Trafford Shannon VanWyk Shannon & Glor Johnson Sharon Sova Sharon & Behro Abdi Shasikant Patel Sheila Brustkern Sheila & Duke Kebow Sheila & Jim Matthews Shelley Hayes Caron Shelly Carron Sherry & Gil Alvarado SIDNEY SMITH Stan Katz STEPHANIE OBRIEN STEVE BORSO Steve Jess Steve Lincoln Steve Linke Steven Handelman Steven Handelman SUE REYNOLDS SUSAN BERSON Susan McGuire Susan Baldwin TAMARA MOODY TAMMY VITTONE TAYLOR MORRISON TO Rolf Ted Quirk Ted Tchang TERESA SOUSA Teri Chalfant THEODORE TCHANG Theresa J Childs Thomas Krouse THOMAS REUTERS PTS DIRECTOR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE Seltzer Caplan McMahon Vitek Director of Retail AssE Global Real Estate TIAA-CREF Walters Management COMMUNITY HOUSING WORKS Senior Regional Planr SANDAG Principal President Align Tenant Strategies Greenberg Traurig Techbilt Construction Corp SHAPELL HOMES CARLSBAD OAKS NORTH VENTURES HCP AUR 1 CALIFORNIA A PACK LLC 1749 YOURELL AVENUE 5459 FOXTAIL LOOP 4098 Harbor Drive 5345 Forecastle Court PO BOX 3044 1400 TENTH STREET Suite 2100 Suite 1100 6448 Pyrus Place 750 B Street 7059 Cordgrass Court 4675 MacArthur Court 5365 Los Robles 1700 Buena Vista Way 5263 Shore Drive 5061 Shore Drive 1308 Pine Avenue PO Box 1502 3327 Tyler Street 2515 WILSON STREET 2711 Haymar Drive 6638 Towhee Lane 7513 Quinta Street 6164 Castejon Drive CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 SACRAMENTO CA 95812-3044 Carlsbad CA 92011 San Diego CA 92101 Carlsbad CA 92011 Newport Beach CA 92660 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92018 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92011 Carlsbad CA 92009 La Jolla CA 92037 SUITE 101 1820 SOUTH ESCONDIDO BOULE ESCONDIDO CA 92025 1847 BUTTERS ROAD CARLSBAD CA 92008 Suite 800 5035 Tierra Del Oro 401 B Street 1787 BUTTERS ROAD 2905 ELMWOOD 15 CUSHING Suite 400 Nortl3773 Howard Hughes Parkway PO Box 80036 SUITE 700 8383 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD 450 Marylynn Court 3575 KENYON STREET 3331 Madison Street 6637 Curlew Terrace PO BOX 847 Carlsbad CA 92008 San Diego CA 92101 Carlsbad CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92009 IRVINE CA 92618 Las Vegas NV 89169 San Diego CA 92138 BEVERLY HILLS CA 90211 Escondido CA 92025 SAN DIEGO CA 92110 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92018 Thomas Mark Powers Tiffany & Martin David Tim Johnson Tim & Patti Heers TODD GALARNEAU Todd Goldstein Todd Snyder TOM ACUNA Tony Armino Tony Richards Tuba Ebru Ozdil Ulrike von Meht. Helms THE CORKY MCMILLIN COMPANIES SUITE 200 Chief, Advance Plann County of San Diego Planning & Development Ser Suite 310 SEMPRA ENERGY-ENV SERVICES CITY VENTURES SUITE 150 5353 Forecastle Court 2257 Levante Street 5229 Shore Drive 2750 WOMBLE ROAD 5510 Overland Avenue 8315 CENTURY PARK COURT 3121 MICHELSON DRIVE Planning Specialist Pechanga Cltrl Rsrcs Temecula Band or Luiseno Mission Indians PO Box 2183 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 SANDIEGO CA 92106-6114 San Diego CA 92123 SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1548 IRVINE CA 92612 Temecula CA 92593 VALERIE TITLOW 3943 JAMES DRIVE Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 TUSTIN CA 92781 San Diego CA 92123 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92010 W.F. WARREN Sides KATO Warren R Ruis Wesley & Juditt Marx Wheeler North WHITNIE RASMUSSEN William William William William F Culbreth Morrison Stone Rowland Yehuda & Barb< Krampfner ZIV RAN Carl Weise PALOMAR AIRPORT MANAGER KATO FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP Public Affairs Manage San Diego Gas & Electric Company CP31D 5320 Carlsbad Drive PO BOX 537 8330 Century Park Court 2995 Ocean Street President Pastor Rancho Carlsbad Owners Association Inc Excel Trust Suite 300 Saint Patrick's Catholic Church 2725 Anta Court 3330 ADAMS STREET 5200 El Camino Real 17140 Bernardo Center Drive 3821 Adams Street 6426 Torreyanna Circle San Diego CA 92128 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92011 Keystone Pacific 7400 Circulo Sequoia Carlsbad CA 92009 Keystone Pacific Suite 100 16775 Von Karman Irvine, CA 92606 Curtis Management Suite 102 10455 Sorrento Valley Road San Diego CA 92121 Property Management Consultants Suite 220 11717 Bernardo Plaza Court San Diego CA 92128 John Forester 1195 Miramar Drive Vista CA 92083 City of Carlsbad Arts Commission c/o Vincent Kit<1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Prescott Management Suite 200 16880 West Bernando Drive San Diego CA 92127 Eugene Burger Management Corp. Suite 200 1935 Camino Vida Roble Carlsbad CA 92008 Walters Management Suite 320 1959 Palomar Oaks Way Carlsbad CA 92011 State Department of Housing and Community Development 2020 West El Camino Avenue Sacramento CA 95833 Association Management Group Suite A 2131 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad CA 92009 Pilot Property Management Suite 102 2146 Encinitas Boulevard Encinitas CA 92024 Cal West Management Suite 140 2185 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 2198 PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD CARLSBAD CA 92008 Bob Berti Arroya Vista Dave Biggers Barbara Mclain Properties GRG Management Co. Property Management Consultants Transcontinental Management George Berris Suite 100 Suite 200 Suite 208 Suite 111 2208 Harmony Grove Road 2237 Faraday Avenue 2490 Ocean Street 2715 Carlsbad Boulevard 3088 Pio Pico Drive 330 Rancheros Drive 3355 Mission Avenue 339 North Willowspring Drive Escondido CA 92029 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 San Marcos CA 92069 Oceanside CA 92054 Encinitas CA 92024 CPLO-COMMANDING OFFICER Marilyn Hendron Randal Fuller John Bosio Mary Bernheim Sheila Matthews James Matthews Neil Joebahen Carlsbad Convention and Visitors Bureau Curtis Management POSEIDON RESOURCES Property Advantage, Inc. Madison Square Properties Bruner & Rosi Management, Inc. CHAMPS/The Kelly Group Professional Community Management Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce The Prescott Companies Lindsay Management Services Thurza Heim Associated Professional Services Lindsay Management Services Preferred Property Managers Lawrence & Associates 4 Points Management N. N. Jaeschke, Inc. Silverado Community Management Full Circle Management 4 Points Management Merit Group Kiwanis Club of Carlsbad A and S Management Suite M SUITE 2020 Suite 140 Suite A Suite B Suite 110 Suite 170 Suite S-2A Suite B Suite 106 400 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 4059 Oceanside Boulevard Oceanside CA 92057 501 WEST BROADWAY SAN DIEGO CA 92101 5142 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad CA 92008 5414 Oberlin Drive San Diego CA 92121 5651 Palmer Way Carlsbad CA 92010 5731 Palmer Way Carlsbad CA 92008 5927 Priestly Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 5934 Priestly Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 5966 La Place Court Carlsbad CA 92008 6126 Innovation Way Carlsbad CA 92009 6643 Sitio Palmas Carlsbad CA 92009 7007 Mission Gorge Road San Diego CA 92120 7720 El Camino Real Carlsbad CA 92009 8963 Complex Drive San Diego CA 92123 911 Hacienda Drive Vista CA 92083 937 South Coast Highway Encinitas CA 92023 9610 Waples Street San Diego CA 92121 973 Vale Terrace Drive Vista CA 92084 BOX 555010 CAMP PENDLETON CA 92055 P. 0. Box 4669 Oceanside CA 92052 P.O. Box 230490 Encinitas CA 92023 P.O. Box 4177 Carlsbad CA 92018 P.O. Box 711 Carlsbad CA 92018 P.O. Box 786 Oceanside CA 92049 PO BOX3000 CARLSBAD CA 92018 3235 McKinley Street Carlsbad CA 92008 3235 McKinley Street Carlsbad CA 92008 3242 McKinley Street Carlsbad CA 92008 3220 McKinley Street Carlsbad CA 92008 1308 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 1308 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 1948 Skyline Road Carlsbad CA 92008 Peter Taylor 1351 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Vivien Joebchen Alison Sconyers 1750 Andrea Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Vanessa Davis 2130 Janis Way Carlsbad CA 92008 Jennifer Rolf 1345 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Christina Inman 3590 Highland Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Angie Walters 2357 Caringa Way Carlsbad CA 92008 Marti Vasquez 908 Marguerite Lane Carlsbad CA 92011 Amy Galvan 6929 La Paloma Carlsbad CA 92009 Tom Walters 2606 Galicia Way Carlsbad CA 92009 Pat Zifferblatt 1088 Laguna Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Rick Vasquez 908 Marguerite Lane Carlsbad CA 92011 John Galvan 6429 La Paloma Carlsbad CA 92009 Janel Walters PO BOX 362 2701 North El Camio Real Encinitas CA 92024 Allan Karl 2357 Caringa Way Carlsbad CA 92009 Donna Balancia 2987 Highland Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Terrie Mayfield Suite 34 2585 Jefferson Carlsbad CA 92008 Alan Marbleszore 4161 Parkside Place Carlsbad CA 92008 Naomi Marbleszore 4161 Parkside Place Carlsbad CA 92008 Angela Knappenberg 3886 Westhaven Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Leah Weyandt 3306 Donna Carlsbad CA 92008 Joey Kratcoski 1306 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Celine La cote 1436 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Raymond Ramirez 1460 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Sylvia Ramirez 1460 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Maya Ramirez Drake 1490 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Valerie Titlow 3943 James Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 David Bedwar 253-C Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Cameron Swales 3055 Maddison Carlsbad CA 92008 Chris Fergusa 155 Chinquapin Carlsbad CA 92008 Sonja Pratt 1070 Chestnut Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Nadja Spano 2390 Spruce Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Anita Trotta 3610 Donna Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Natalie Nelms 2441 Pio Pico Carlsbad CA 92008 Raymond Spano 3457 Adams Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Joan Herrera 2205 Nob Hill Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Kathleen Schroeder 2768 Olympia Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Marie Studer 127 4 Chestnut Carlsbad CA 92008 Martha Law Edwards 1366 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Smoka Thordarson 1365 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Avril Ferguson 4260 Sunnyhill Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Tracy Larimer 1315 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Rhett Larimer 1315 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Tasha Borders 1328 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Leslie P Ramirez 3965 Monroe Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Matthew J Titlow 3330 Adams Street Carlsbad CA 92008 John D Ramirez 3965 Monroe Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Lauren Conroy 1606 James Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Holly Moyer 3461 Seacrest Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Alysa Fialkosky 748 Granada Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Mel Custodio 1053 Santa Fe Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Raquel Mercedes Suite A 325 South Nevada Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Dave McKibben 1580 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Marguriette Bowden 1199 Oak Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 B Bowden 1199 Oak Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Elizabeth Hickey 1168 Oak Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Jane Bircher 1168 Oak Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Kelly Perez 1173 Oak Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Max Perez 1173 Oak Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Robert Wilkinson 2277 Cameo Road Carlsbad CA 92008 Valerie Norris 4617 Park Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Dawn Van Siclen 4620 Sunburst Road Carlsbad CA 92008 Gary Nessim 2987 Highland Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Kathy Kinane 2987 Highland Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 David Brahms 812 Kalpat Circle Carlsbad CA 92008 Owen Dana a Apartment C 899 Laguna Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Ed Shehab 294 Austin Terrace Carlsbad CA 92008 Julie King 1844 Butters Road Carlsbad CA 92008 Kalyn King 1844 Butters Road Carlsbad CA 92008 Susan Berson 1847 Butters Road Carlsbad CA 92008 Elizabeth Burton 1435 Yourell Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Tamara Moody 1787 Butters Road Carlsbad CA 92008 Alixe Fesler 1777 Butters Road Carlsbad CA 92008 Laura Kurner 2461 Buena Vista Circle Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlos Primo 2255 Highland Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Roan & Rob Brown 385 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Peyton & Andrea Jones 390 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Chelsea & Jonny Townsend Suite 5 360 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Paul & Amanda Luthman Suite 5 364 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Chris & Katie Garcia Suite 3 362 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Vanessa Wheylad 325 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Gabriel Kessler 370 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Jon Batara Suite 2 140 Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Anna Vroom 5147 Delaney Court Carlsbad CA 92008 Lois Curry 3197 James Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Joanne Deese 159 Redwood Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Jacque McKelvey 2844 Fairfield Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Sara Riccitelli 2810 Pia Pica Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Sandy Riccitelli 3622 Garfield Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Jane Valentine 1080 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Mary L Castro 6906 Tradewinds Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Kim McKibben 1380 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Rob Perkins 2885 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Jennifer Bradley 2805 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Tammy Vittone 2905 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Blanche Ramswich 2886 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Ron Ramswich 2886 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Brandon Bell 1851 Valencia Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Sylvia Britten 1370 Yourell Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Sidney Smith 251S Wilson Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Robert Gilbert 1339 Buena Vista Way Carlsbad CA 92008 Brian Mclnerwy 1343 Forest Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Sharon Sova 1700 Buena Vista Way Carlsbad CA 92008 Mary Anne Viney 2746 James Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Kip McBane 2691 Crest Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Conrad DeFion 1835 Forest Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Helen Lacey 2889 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Traci Perkins 2883 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 SueR Ladouceur 3460 Charter Oak Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Marqe Howard Jones 4823 Argosy Lane Carlsbad CA 92008 Patricia Hansen 4809 Flying Cloud Way Carlsbad CA 92008 Nancy Bruce 1733 Rogue Isle Court Carlsbad CA 92008 Marvin Sippel 5200 Heming Way Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Mary Scherr 3244 Meadowlark Lane Carlsbad CA 92008 Gary Wrench 3531CharterOakDrive Carlsbad CA 92008 Jacqueline Wrench 3531 Charter Oak Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Susan Gutierrez 1864 Palisades Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Victor Chavez 2510 Wilson Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Constance Chavez 2510 Wilson Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Michael Schertzer 2093 Westwood Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Roger Schrodek 2840 Highland Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Sharla Presley 2850 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 John Presley 2850 Elmwood Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Doug Desjardn 466 Chestnut Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Jane Finch 1444 Buena Vista Way Carlsbad CA 92008 Marsha Adams 2515 Wilson Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Dave McKibben 1380 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Kimberly McKibben 1380 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Lillian McKendry 1520 Grady Place Carlsbad CA 92008 Darren McKendry 1520 Grady Place Carlsbad CA 92008 Diann Gorchoff 4170 Park Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Audrey Fountain 1510 Grady Place Carlsbad CA 92D08 Tressie Armstrong 2663 Crest Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Barbara Swearatgan 3D30 Glenbrook Carlsbad CA 92008 Larry Gorchoff 4170 Park Drive Carlsbad CA 92008 Guy Sabala 1370 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Anne Sabala 1370 Pine Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Debbie Forward 3985 Stella Maris Lane Carlsbad CA 92008 Bryan Forward 3985 Stella Maris Lane Carlsbad CA 92008 Edith Luonza 4781 Argosy Lane Carlsbad CA 92008 Lea Wulf 1450 Ca na rio Street Carlsbad CA 92008 Mindy Sumitra 515 Avondale Circle Carlsbad CA 92008 Chris Ferguson 155 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Ada Kwan 145 Chinquapin Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Ulrike Menta Doreen Ryan Stacy Ferayorin Suzanne Femia Kathy Brach a Kim bra Long Justin Ferayorin Larry Tinnerstet Gaylor Tinnerstet Guy & Elaine Clossey Leah & Scott Weyandt Teresa & Tim Laughlin Jamie Hanen Don & Anna Rush worth Jane & Todd Palmer James & Julie Neushal Peter Meade Antje Hjerpe Patricia Mehan Carmen Mojado Adrian J. Peters Adrian J. Peters Adrian J. Peters Irma and Jack Maser Jane Norman Karen R. Kelly Michelle Miller San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians Vice President of Forwa Brookfield Residential Vice President of Forwa Brookfield Residential Vice President of Forwa Brookfield Residential Trustee Oshima Survivors Trust BATIQUITOS LAGOON FOUNDATION PLANNING DIVIS I Of\ CAL TRANS DISTRICT 11 Suite 180 Suite 1000 Suite 400 344 Chinquapin Avenue 152 Sequoia Avenue 151 Sequoia Avenue 2969 Lexington Drive 2974 Lexington Drive 3805 Garfield Street 151 Sequoia Avenue 3941 Garfield Street 3941 Garfield Street 169 Sequoia Avenue 3306 Donna Drive 3741 Yvette Way 6464 Pyrus Place 3942 May Court 4109 Parks Drive 4405 Sunnyhill 3511 Ridgecrest P.O. Box 4758 1889 Sunset Drive 12265 El Camino Real 3200 Park Center Drive 12045 East Waterfront Drive 2841 Vista Mariana 4400 Fairfield Way 2770 Sunny Creek Road P 0 BOX 130491 MAIL STOP 2~ 4050 TAYLOR STREET Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92010 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Scottsdale AZ 85261 Vista CA 92081 San Diego CA 92130 Costa .Mesa CA 92626 Playa Vista CA 90064 Carlsbad CA 92009 Cypress CA 90630 Carlsbad CA 92010 CARLSBAD CA 92013 SANDIEGO CA 92110 CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 5934 PRIESTLY DRIVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BUSINESS SE 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 CARLSBAD WATER DISTRICT 5950 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 CENTER FOR NATURAL LANDS MANAGEMENT INC 27258 VIA INDUSTRIA#B TEMECULA CA 92590 CITY OF CARLSBAD PROPERTY Al1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 PLANNING DIRECTC CITY OF ENCINITAS 505 SOUTH VULCAN AVENUE ENCINITAS CA 92024-3633 CITY PLANNER CITY OF OCEANSIDE 300 NORTH COAST HIGHWAY OCEANSIDE CA 92054 PLANNING DIRECTC CITY OF SAN MARCOS 1 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE SAN MARCOS CA 92069 PLANNING DIRECT( CITY OF VISTA 600 EUCALYPTUS VISTA CA 92084 COUNTY CLERK COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO MAIL STOP 82 PO BOX 1750 SAN DIEGO CA 92112 PLANNING AND LAN COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO SUITE 310 5510 OVERLAND AVENUE SAN DIEGO CA 92123 SUPERVISOR COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ROOM 335 1600 PACIFIC SAN DIEGO CA 92101 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO AIRPORTS AC 1960 JOE CROSSON DRIVE EL CAJON CA 92020 DEPT OF DEFENSE LOS ANGELE: PO BOX 2711 LOS ANGELES CA 90053 DEPT OF FISH & WILDLIFE AGRICULTURAL RE: DEPT OF FOOD & AGRICULTURE DEPT OF FORESTRY ENVIRONMENTAL 0 DEPT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEV DEPT OF ATTY GEN DEPT OF JUSTICE ENCINA WASTEWATER AUTHORITY ENCINITAS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT ENDANGERED HABITATS LEAGUE ENV SERV Dl' PO BOX 944246 ROOM 1 00 1220 NORTH STREET ENV COORD PO BOX 944246 REGION IX Su 611 WEST SIXTH STREET ROOM 700 11 0 WEST A STREET SACRAMENTO CA 94244 SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 94244 LOS ANGELES CA 90017 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 6200 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD CA 92011 101 SOUTH RANCHO SANTA FE I ENCINITAS CA 92024 BUSINESS SE 101 S RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD ENCINITAS CA 92024 SUITE 592 8424-A SANTA MONICA BOULEVI LOS ANGELES CA 90069-4267 FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSIO SUITE 2300 100 1ST STREET SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92008 GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMER INC 5345 ARMADA DR GEMOLOGICAL INSTITUTE OF AMERICA INC C/0 GARY Hll5345 ARMADA DR ENV SERVICES SPR MARINE REGION SUITE J 4665 LAMPSON AVENUE LOS ALAMITOS CA 90720 SAN DIEGO CA 92145 CPLO-COMMANDIN< MCAS MIRAMAR NORTH COUNTY HEALTH PROJECT INC EXECUTIVE DIRECT NORTH COUNTY LIFELINE NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT NRG ENERGY INC OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH OLIVENHAIN MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT PACIFIC RIDGE SCHOOL PALA BAND OF MISSION INDIANS SAN DIEGO AIR POLLUTION SAN DIEGO AIRPORT AUTHORITY SAN DIEGO ASSOC OF REAL TORS SAN DIEGO CO APARTMENT ASSOC SAN DIEGO COUNTY SAN DIEGO COUNTY WATER AUTHORITY SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CO SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CO SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CO SAN DIEGO GAS&ELECTRIC CO POLICY COORDINAl SAN DIEGO HOUSING FEDERATION PO BOX 452000 150 VALPREDA RD SUITE 400 3142 VISTA WAY 810 MISSION AVE SUITE 200 5790 FLEET STREET OFFICE OF L< PO BOX 3044 SAN MARCOS CA 92069 OCEANSIDE CA 92056-3629 OCEANSIDE CA 92054 CARLSBAD CA 92008 SACRAMENTO CA 95812 1966 OLIVENHAIN ROAD ENCINITAS CA 92024 ATTN PHILIP 16269 EL FUERTE ST CARLSBAD CA 92009 HISTORIC PRI35008 PALA TEMECULA ROAD, P PALA CA 92059 CONTROL Dl!: 10124 OLD GROVE ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92131 PO BOX 82776 SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776 4845 Ronson Court SAN DIEGO CA 92111 SUITE 310 5675 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92123 FARM BUREA 1670 EAST VALLEY PARKWAY ESCONDIDO CA 92027 4677 OVERLAND SAN DIEGO CA 92123 CP11 D 8335 CENTURY PARK COURT SAN DIEGO CA 92123 8315 CENTURY PARK COURT SAN DIEGO CA 92123 8326 CENTURY PARK COURT SAN DIEGO CA 92123 LAND SERVIC 8335 CENTURY PARK CT CP11 D SAN DIEGO CA 92123 SUITE 1811 110 WEST C STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92101 Mary Stanly Pierre Lavalle Ramona Featherby-Ramsey Richard Kapushinski Sarah Osborne Oscar Uranga Pete Hasapopoulos Michelle N. Black Steve Mercereau Terry Parsons Brent R. McManigal David DiPierro Ron Ashman Jack Henthorn Jack Henthorn lance Schulte lynda Halttunen Raj Altenhoff Jim McPherson Jim Nardi EXECUTIVE DIRECT SAN DIEGO INTERFAITH HOUSING FOUNDATION 7956 LESTER AVENUE LEMON GROVE CA 91945 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 SAN MARCOS CA 92078 ENCINITAS CA 92024 ENCINITAS CA 92024 SAN DIEGO LAFCO SUITE 200 9335 HAZARD WAY SAN DIEGO NORTH EDC SUITE 303 950 BOARDWALK SAN DIEGUITO UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 701 ENCINITAS BOULEVARD SAN DIEGUITO UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRIC CONSTRUCT! 710 ENCINITAS BLVD SAN FRANSISCO BAY CONSERV & DEV COMM SUITE 10600 455 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE TRIBAL COUNCIL SAN LUIS REY BAND OF MISSION INDIANS 1889 SUNSET DRIVE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102 VISTA CA 92081 SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT SUITE 250 255 PICO AVENUE SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT EXECUTIVE DIRECT SANDAG BUSINESS SE 255 PICO AVE, SUITE 250 SUITE 800 401 B STREET SAN MARCOS CA 92069 SAN MARCOS CA 92069 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 SAN DIEGO CA 92138 SACRAMENTO CA 95814 SACRAMENTO CA 95825 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 SAN DIEGO CA 92110 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 Carlsbad CA 92011 Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 SD COUNTY ARCHEOLOGICAL SOCIETY INC PO BOX A-81106 STATE CLEARINGHOUSE 1400 TENTH STREET STATE LANDS COMMISSION SUITE 1005 100 HOWE AVENUE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WARREN WO 3883 RUFFIN ROAD STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRA BRUCE APRIL 4050 TAYLOR STREET STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPT OF FISH AND WI WARREN WO 3883 RUFFIN ROAD 7340 Binnacle Drive 2222 Vista La Nisa 2240 Jefferson St. 2313 Masters Road Development Manager Shopoff Realty Investments, L.P. My Generation Campai€ Sierra Club Suite 700 Suite 1000 Suite 318 2 Park Plaza 714 West Olympic Blvd. 2200 Pacific Coast Highway 5289 Milton Rd. Irvine CA 92164 Los Angeles CA 90015 Hermosa Beach CA 90254 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Chatten-Brown & Carstens LLP Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden Suite 300 City Traffic Engineer City of Oceanside 5333 Forecastle Court 550 East Hospitality Lane 300 North Coast Highway San Bernardino CA 92408 Oceanside CA 92054-2885 c/o Dale Schreiber Jack Henthorn & Associates Jack Henthorn & Associates #A 5365 Avenida Encinas P.O. Box237 Carlsbad CA 92008 Carlsbad CA 92008 Manager-Rincon Culter< Rincon Band of luiseno Indians President San Pacifico HOA ALLGIRE BUILDERS INC B.A. WORTHING BARRATT AMERICAN INC BOYS&GIRLS CLUBS OF CARLSBAD 7239 Plaza de Ia Costa 7 443 Capstan Drive Carlsbad CA 92009 Carlsbad CA 92011 1 West Tribal Road Valley Center CA 92082 3278 GREY HAWK COURT CARLSBAD CA 92010 PO BOX 1041 CARLSBAD CA 92018 2035 CORTE DEL NOGAL #160 CARLSBAD CA 92011 2730 BRESS! RANCH WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009-3058 BREHM COMMUNITIES SUITE 300 2714 LOKER AVENUE WEST CARLSBAD CA 92010 BRIDGE HOUSING CORPORATION 2202 30TH STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92104 BROOKFIELD RESIDENTIAL SUITE 180 12265 EL CAMINO REAL SAN DIEGO CA 92130 BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF SAND SUITE 110 9201 SPECTRUM CENTER BOULI SAN DIEGO CA 92123 BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS 2800 COTTAGE WAY SACRAMENTO CA 95825 CA DEPT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE ENVIRON SEF 3883 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGO CA 92123 CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SUITE 103 7575 METROPOLITAN DRIVE SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402 CALIFORNIA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY 3650 SCHRIEVER AVENUE MATHER CA 95655 Nanci Adler s Adler Kim Aft Lorri Aiello Michelle Altenhoff Melanie Andersen Carol Anderson J Applegate Timothy Arcaris Beverly Atkinson CALIFORNIA NATIVE PLANT SOCIETY CALIFORNIA RESOURCES AGENCIES CALIFORNIAL RURAL LEGAL ASSIST CARLSBAD AQUA FARM INC CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT CHANNEL ISLANDS NATL PARK COASTAL CONSERVANCY COLRICH RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION CONTINENTAL RESIDENTIAL INC FAA WESTERN-PACIFIC REGION GREYSTONE HOMES INC GREYSTONE HOMES INC K HOVNANIAN AT CARLSBAD LLC KB HOME COASTAL INC LENNAR HOMES OF CALIFORNIA INC LEUCADIA WASTEWATER DISTRICT PO BOX 1390 SUITE 1311 1416 9TH STREET SUITE 108 640 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE SAN DIEGO CA 92112-1390 SACRAMENTO CA 95814 VISTA CA 92084 PO BOX 2600 CARLSBAD CA 92018 UTILITIES DEI5950 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 SUPERINTENI1901 SPINNAKER DRIVE VENTURA CA 93001 SUITE 1100 1330 BROADWAY OAKLAND CA 94612 SUITE 300 444 WEST BEECH STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92101 C/0 LARRY Cl 5927 PRIESTLY DR #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 PO BOX 92007 LOS ANGELES CA 90009 5780 FLEET ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 C/0 SO DIV 5780 FLEET ST #300 CARLSBAD CA 92008 800 N HAVEN AVE #300 ONTARIO CA 91764 36310 INLAND VALLEY DRIVE WILDOMAR CA 92595 200 S BISCAYNE BLVD #2500 MIAMI FL 33131 1960 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92009 LEUCADIA WATER DISTRICT 1960 LA COSTA AVENUE CARLSBAD CA 92009 META HOUSING CORPORATION SUITE 425 1640 SOUTH SEPULVEDA BOULE LOS ANGELES CA 90025 NATIONAL COMMUNITY RENAISSANCE 9421 HAVEN AVENUE RANCHO CUCAMONGA CA 91730 NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 1556 HARBOR BOULEVARD WEST SACRAMENTO CA 95691 PUL TE HOMES SUITE 101 5993 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD CA 92008 RICHMOND AMERICAN HOMES OF MARYLAND C/0 SUSAN M 4350 S MONACO ST #500 DENVER CO 80237 ARCHSTONE SUITE 100 2901 SABRE STREET VIRGINIA BEACH VA 23452-7376 SHEA HOMES INC 9990 MESA RIM RD SAN DIEGO CA 92121 SHEA HOMES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP STANDARD PACIFIC CORP STANDARD PACIFIC CORP STANDARD PACIFIC HOMES U S ARMY CORPS OF ENG U S FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS US BUREAU OF LAND MGMT US BUREAU OF RECLAMATION US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE USDA RURAL DEVELOPMENT EXECUTIVE DIRECT WAKELAND HOUSING & DEVEL CORP WARMINGTON RESIDENTIAL CALIF WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD 10721 TREENA ST #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92131 5750 FLEET ST #200 CARLSBAD CA 92008 7290 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD SAN DIEGO CA 92111 15360 BARRANCA PARKWAY IRVINE CA 92618 SUITE 100 5900 LA PLACE COURT CARLSBAD CA 92008-8832 6010 HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD FLOOR 17 1455 MARKET STREET SUITE ROOM 2800 COTTAGE WAY SUITE 202 27708 JEFFERSON AVENUE SUITE W-260e 2800 COTTAGE WAY DEPT 4169 430 G STREET SUITE 950 1230 COLUMBIA STREET 3090 PULLMAN STREET PO BOX 100 502 KNOTS LN 502 KNOTS LN 7 409 MAGELLAN ST 569 ANCHORAGE AV 7443 CAPSTAN DRIVE 7521 NAVIGATOR CIR 7128 SAN LUIS 516 DEW POINT AV 2877 WOODRIDGE CIR 7126 SAN LUIS CARLSBAD CA 92011 SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103 SACRAMENTO CA 95825 TEMECULA CA 92590 SACRAMENTO CA 95825 DAVIS CA 95606 SAN DIEGO CA 92101 COSTA MESA CA 92626 SACRAMENTO CA 95801 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92011 CARLSBAD CA 92008 CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sydney Atkinson 7126 SAN LUIS CARLSBSD CA 92011 Raja Attenhoff 7443 CAPSTAN DRIVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Pat Bachand 549 BURTON LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Richard Bachand 549 BURTON LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jennifer Baer 6800 WATERCOURSE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Susan Baker 7450 TRIBUL LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Salvatore Barone 7346 PORTAGE WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Amy Barrion 7315 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jim Be hun 7237 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lisa Be hun 7237 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ed Beimel 7058 ROCK DOVE ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Pamela Beimel 7058 ROCK DOVE ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jodi Berbstein 7311 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 s Berger 7420 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Aaron Betsy 2537 NAVIGATOR CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kendra Bishop Pinamonti 7086 LEEWARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Caleb Bolen 7340 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Andrew Boll 7395 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Brittany Boll 7395 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lulu Bouillon 540 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Marie Bouillon 540 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sanford Braver 7311 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kate Brehmer 528 WINDSOCK WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Alice Brewster 7358 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jinny Brown 546 BURTON CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Wayne Brown 546 BURTON CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jim Burke 7328 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Terry Burke 7328 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Janet Buster 505 KNOTS LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Wm" Buster 505 KNOTS LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kevin Byers 7316 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Alexandra Cabrera 7314 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBSD CA 92011 Lisa Cabrera 7314 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ruben Cabrera 7314 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 David Camp 7464 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jeanne Camp 7464 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Frank Cardena 7124 SAN LUIS CARLSBAD CA 92011 Diana Carey 568 DEW POINT AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Cole Carter 7451 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Craig Carter 7451 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jessica Carter 7451 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sean Carter 7344 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ed & June Caruso 7426 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Alan Casagrande 7354 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Julie Casagrande 7354 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Melanie Centers 7303 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Tweed Centers 7303 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Karen Chastain 4015 JAMES DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Greg Chenowith 7035 WHITEWATER CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sandi Chenowith 7035 WHITEWATER CARLSBAD CA 92011 J. Chepetsky 7509 SAN BENITO ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Dennis Chodorow 630 COMPAASS CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kurtina Chodorow 630 COMPASS CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ross Cohen 7349 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Samantha Collier 518 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Marg Cook 7344 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Christy Cowan 7366 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Dennis Cowan 7366 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Val Cowan 7366 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Karen Crosby 543 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Crosby 543 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Christine Crowley 7450 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mike Crowley 7450 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Eve Dallery 7336 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Dallery 7336 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Brad DeBow 7128 SAN LUIS CARLSBAD CA 92011 Judy DePagter 7380 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Anthony Dean 7330 STARBOARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 J Doyle 7472 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kim Doyle 7472 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Wendy Dube 565 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 E Eaterino 7026 LEEWARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 Bonny Edison 521 ANCHORAGE AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ralph Edison 521 ANCHORAGE AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jeff Faley 550 BURTON CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ellen Fawls 538 WINDSOCK WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mike Ferrante 503 RUDDER CARLSBAD CA 92011 Teri Fitzgibbons 7391 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Danielle Flore 510 HALSING CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jim Francis 500 RUDDER AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lucinda Francis 500 RUDDER AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jan Friedman 7421 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jimmy Friedrich 6629 HOLL YLEAF CARLSBAD CA 92011 Robin Friend 7348 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Tom Friend 7348 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Eric Fulman 7447 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Loren Galdiano 7519 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Maria Galdiano 7519 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Chris Galindo 7386 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Karie Galindo 7386 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Barbara Galka 7476 CAPSTAN CARLSBAD CA 92011 John Gam a 7358 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 G Gardner 543 WINDSOCK CARLSBAD CA 92009 Brittney Garrett 502 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Chad Garrett 502 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Andrea Gatto rna 7320 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Andy Gatto rna 7320 NAVIGATOR CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Matthew Geriak 4015 JAMES DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Eric Gibson 7375 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sandrine Gibson 7375 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sandy Gilley 7455 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 M Goetz 521 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Aaron Golde 7388 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Diane Golde 7388 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 M Gomez 7015 LEEWARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Heather Graade 7393 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Helene Graham 7374 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Graham 7374 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mike Graham 7374 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 David Gramse 7309 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Albert Greely Jr 7382 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kenneth Greenlee 539 WINDSOCK WY CARLSBSD CA 92011 Kristin Greenlee 549 WIND SOCK WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Daryl Groeh 120 BREAKWATER RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 Paul Gros 7034 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Greg Groves 7523 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Melody Hall 7311 STARBOARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Robert Hall 7311 STARBOARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Alice Han 6590 HALITE PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Eric Hanscom 7395 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Teresa Hardy 7130 SANTA ROSA CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Harnett 7374 PORTAGE WY CARLSBAD CA 92008 Paula Harwood 7516 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Joe Hayes 7372 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kristy Hayes 7372 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Carl Herrman 7446 TRIBUL LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Daniel Hof 7336 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sue Hof 7336 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Delynn Hood 7234 SAN LUIS CARLSBAD CA 92011 Pamela Horne UNIT 1 314 ACACIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sherry Houston 376 N EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 James Howe 567 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Linda Howes 7519 NAVIGATOR CIR CARLSBSD CA 92009 Amy Irving 7439 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jill Janek 7363 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 A ram Jatikian 7453 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Hong Johnson 7442 TRIBUL LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Gregorio Kahn 7388 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ryan Kane 523 WINDSOCK WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Noelle Katai 503 DEW POINT AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Connie Keating-Hudson 508 RUDDER AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Steven Kesten 7476 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sangbo Kim 525 HALSING CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lisa King 7419 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Andrew Kissick 521 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Minnie Kokab 612 MARLIN LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Tony Kokab 612 MARLIN LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Paul Kramph 7391 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Cara Krenn 614 NAVIGATOR CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 James Krenn 614 NAVIGATOR CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Julie Krone 7305 MARINE PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Christine Kwak 7432 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael La Douce 7438 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jeanne Lambert 517 STERN WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Wm. Lambert 517 STERN WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Tonya Lane 7362 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 D Ledereu 7912 CALLE OLIVIA CARLSBAD CA 92009 Josh Lenahan 2894 WOODRIDGE CIR CARLSBAD CA 92008 Wing Leong 545 BURTON CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Frederick Liberatore 7335 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Colette Licata 523 DEW PT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Harry Linebly 506 KNOTTS LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Helen Lipka 600 MARLIN LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Wesley Low 7319 STARBOARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sophia Lum 7319 STARBOARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 John Lundy 7332 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kelsey Lundy 7332 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Pat Macri 523 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Tricia Macri 523 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Aaron Maddox 7054 HERON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mandy Maddox 7054 HERON CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Vicky Mann 506 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Cordell Mansfield 566 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Rochelle Marcus 7388 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 John Marino 520 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jay Marquaad 7397 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Trinka Marquand 7397 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ken McKenzie 7065 SITIO FRONTERA CARLSBAD CA 92009 Taylor McKenzie 7065 SITIO FRONTERA CARLSBAD CA 92009 Jeffrey McKinney 7441 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sandra McKinney 7441 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 c Mclarty 7337 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Megan Mclarty 7337 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Mclarty 7337 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Shelby Mclarty 7337 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Graham McMillan 7413 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Erin Meoli 7400 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mike Meoli 7400 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jim Merkel 524 RUDDER AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Julia Merkel 524 RUDDER AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Dana Mikel 7463 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ken Miller 525 STERN WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Farhad Minco 7408 CAPSTAN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Robert Miron 7424 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Alan Moberg 7318 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Karen Moberg 7318 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Nancy Munn-Fess 7459 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jim Nardi 7463 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 David Nash 544 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Robin Nash 544 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Rod Nash 7020 WHITEWATER CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jane Naskiewicz 7447 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kyle Neail 7397 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 Shannon Neail 7397 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 Jessica Nelson 7377 PORTAGE WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Nick Nelson 7377 PORTAGE WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 T Niho 7026 LEEWARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Gail Norman 7445 TRIBUL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mary Ann Nucci 7467 NEPTUNE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Richard Nucci 7467 NEPTUNE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Louise O'Fiaherty 7394 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ingrid O'Keefe 7321 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Dale Ordas 7325 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 May Orosz 7348 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jackie O'Shea 553 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Shawn O'Shea 553 DEW POINT AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Vipul Pabari 7349 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michele Pal ley 7347 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 John Park 6955 TRADEWINDS DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Chris Parkinson 7544 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Cyrelle Pasco 7416 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Les Pasco 7416 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Helen Patterson 532 DEW POINT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Barbara Peacock 7434 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Harry Peacock 7434 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Thomas Perecko 7390 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Pat Pinamont 7086 LEEWARD ST CARLSBAD CA 9201,1 Ann Plunkett 541 BURTON CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mike Plunkett 541 BURTON CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 John Powell 7401 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Marianne Powell 7401 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Heather Pratt 7468 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Karina Pratt 7468 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Gina Prentice 7508 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jen Prentice 7508 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Amanda Prestage 7330 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Todd Prestage 7330 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Julie Prince 541 HALSING CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kathleen Pulcho 537 ANCHORAGE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lillian Radetzky 7368 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Waldemar Radziszewski 7532 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Chris Rangel 537 ANCHORAGE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Bahi Red a 533 STERN WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Roy Redman 2804 JACARANDA AVE CARLSBSD CA 92009 s Rice 7377 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 D Richards 526 WINDSOCK WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Tracey Richards 526 WINDSOCK WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Colin Robertson 7375 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lauren Robertson 7375 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jim Roche 7456 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lisa Roche 7456 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Janis Rohner 528 WINDSOCK WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Chris Rood 533 HALSING CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lisa Rood 533 HALSING CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kent RothsKelley 7340 BINNACLE DRIVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 John Rowen 7429 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Renee Runle 7445 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Tracy Sabin 7333 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Stephanie San Antonio 7390 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mekenna Sanchez 7372 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kyra Saren 6684 LEMON LEAF DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Scott Sa vern 6684 LEMON LEAF DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Karen Schlonsky 7390 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Derek Schultz 7432 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jake Schultz 7432 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jurgen Schulz 7037 LEEWARD ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Patricia Scott 7389 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sharon Scranton 7362 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Karen Sebahar 7442 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Sebahar 7442 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Elaine Shady 7539 REEVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Shady 7539 REEVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Bonnie Shaw 7348 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Conner Shaw 7348 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kacia Sheehan 535 ANCHORAGE AV CARLSBAD CA 92011 Riley Shin 4625 PARK DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 Doug Shover 507 DEW POINT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Merritt Shover 507 DEW POINT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Stephen Simon 7060 WHITEWATER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Erica Simpson 7316 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Corey Sims 7324 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Scott Sims 7324 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Rosalie Skaff 527 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Roy Skaff 527 MERIDIAN WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Doreen Sladavic 513 HALSING CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 John Sladavic 513 HALSING CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kevin Smith 654 COMPASS CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Stellar Snow 517 HALSING CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Gregory Sonzogni 7367 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mary Spencer 549 ANCHORAGE AV CARLSBSD CA 92011 Tracy Steeke 524 WINDSOCK WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Steelman 7336 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Stacie Steelman 7336 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mary Steely 7340 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Andy Stein 7302 SPINNAKER ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Tracy Stevens 7349 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Robert Stojanovic 520 RUDDER CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Such 517 KNOTS LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Cheryl Supancich 7454 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Supancich 7454 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jeff Swift 549 DEWPOINT AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Andy Sybrandy 7460 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Lisa Sybrandy 7460 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Eric Tague 527 WINDSOCK WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Judy Tague 527 WINDSOCK WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Chris Taylor 620 MARLIN LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Deborah Taylor 620 MARLIN LN CARLSBSD CA 92011 Joanna Taylor 7424 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Robert Tchindel 554 DEW POINT AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kim Todd 7431 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Steve Town 7344 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Viviane Town 7344 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Patti Travis 7391 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Chris Turl 3427 CAMINO CORTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 Stephanie Turl 3427 CAMINO CORTE CARLSBAD CA 92009 Diane Tye 7316 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 George Tye 7316 BINNACLE DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Patricia Van Cleve 7301 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Bill VanCleve 7301 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Bryan VanNoy 7425 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Danna VanNoy 7425 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Adrian Varni 513 KNOTS LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kathleen Varni 513 KNOTS LN CARLSBAD CA 92011 James Vecchio 7417 MAGELLAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92011 Brian Wainford 7394 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Drew Wakgreb 7533 NAVIGATOR CIR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mary Beth Walsh 3452 CIRCULO ADORNO CARLSBAD CA 92009 Wanda Watson 7213 SAN LUIS CARLSBAD CA 92011 Geoff White 7454 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jody White 7454 SUNDIAL PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Mellisa White 520 DEW POINT AV CARLSBSD CA 92011 D Whitehead 7313 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Sandy Whitehead 7313 SEAFARER PL CARLSBAD CA 92011 Kevin Williamson 7452 CAPSTAN DR CARLSBAD CA 92011 Michael Winderlin 7235 LINDEN AVE CARLSBAD CA 92011 Gabriela Wood 7376 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Ron Wood 7376 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 M Woods 7384 PORTAGE WY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Chris Wren 7389 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 David Zerfing 7389 PORTAGE WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 Laura Zerfing 7384 ESCALLONIA CT CARLSBAD CA 92011 Jason Zinn 541 WINDSOCK WAY CARLSBAD CA 92011 ME LLANO & CO PO BOX 100 SAN LUIS REY, CA 92068 LOMA GRANDE FARMS PO BOX 728 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 PARKWAY NURSERY 1405 RIDGE ROAD VISTA, CA 92081 FRANCISCO VALDIVIA 3901 LIN MAR LANE CARLSBAD,CA 92008 MAN DANA CAL CO. PO BOX 18197 IRVINE, CA 92623 JAY & MARYON HOFFMAN TRUST 4901 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 9208 M &AGABAEE SUITE 130 6747 FRIARS ROAD SAN DIEGO, CA 92108 RUDAVLIS ORCHIDS PO BOX 130665 CARLSBAD, CA 92013 KATO FAMILY LTD PARTNERSHIP 3250 SUNNY CREEK ROAD CARLSBAD, CA 92010 MILES PACIFIC NURSERY 1833 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD, CA 92008-1543 CARLSBAD RANCH CO. SUITE 100 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS CARLSBAD, CA 92008 LYALL ENTERPRISES, INC. 15529 HIGHWAY 76 PAUMA VALLEY, CA 92061 OASIS NURSERY & LANDSCAPING 4901 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD, CA 92008 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC CO. 8315 CENTURY PARK COURT SAN DIEGO, CA 92123 MUROYA GROWERS 6697 BLACK RAIL ROAD CARLSBAD, CA 92011 LANCE CAR NOW AFFORDABLE HOUSING PEOPLE 2311 MARCA PLACE CARLSBAD, CA 92009 THE JOHN STEWART COMPANY SUITE 207 9948 HI BERT STREET SAN DIEGO, CA 92131 BRIDGE HOUSING CORPORATION 2202 30TH STREET SAN DIEGO, CA 92104 EPISCOPAL COMMUNITY SERVICES SUITE 350 401 MILE OF CARS WAY NATIONAL CITY, CA 91950-6629 MULLEN CONSTRUCTION SUITE 202 2890 PIO PICO DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92008 WILLIAM LYON HOMES, INC. FL 8 4695 MACARTHUR CT NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 BROOKFIELD HOMES SUITE 180 12265 EL CAMINO REAL SAN DIEGO CA 92130 SCHROEDER CONSTRUCTION & DEV 2691 STATE STREET CARLSBAD, CA 92008 TAPPER DEVELOPMENT CO SUITE 225 2551 STATE STREET CARLSBAD, CA 92008 WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING SUITE 100 2280 WARDLOW CIRCLE CORONA, CA 92880 TODD GALARNEAU THE CORKY MCMILLIN COMPANIES P.O. BOX 85104 SAN DIEGO, CA 92186-5104 DR HORTON SUITE 2107 1021 COSTA PACIFICA WAY OCEANSIDE, CA 92054 REYLENN PROPERTIES LLC SUITE 180 444 S CEDROS AVENUE SOLANA BEACH CA 92075 COASTAL LIVING LLC 7668 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92009 US ARMY CORPS OF ENG STE 105 6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD CARLSBAD CA 92011-4219 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD-SAN DIE REGION (9) STE • 9174 SKY PARK CT SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340 VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT 201 VALLECITOS DE ORO SAN MARCOS CA 92069 BUENA VISTA AUDUBON SOCIETY P.O. BOX480 OCEANSIDE CA 92049 DIVISION OF AERONAUl DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION MS40 P.O. BOX 942874 SACREMENTO, CA 94274-0001 BUSINESS, TRANS & HSG AGENCY #305B 915 CAPITOL MALL SACRAMENTO CA 95814 AVIARA PARKWAY FARMS INC 1205 AVIARA PARKWAY CARLSBAD CA 92009 MARJA ACRES LLC 4901 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92008 C/0 SAFEWAY INC PROPERTY DEV CENTERS LLC 5918 STONERIDGE MALL RD PLEASANTON CA 94588 TAYLOR MORRISON 100 SPECTRUM CENTER DRIVE IRVINE CA 92618 HOFFMAN LEGACY TRUST 6284 FORESTER DR HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 WAL-MARTSTORES INC MAIL STOP 055C 1301 SE 10TH ST BENTONVILLE AR 72712 Dan Randall Kristen Ruth Tom Ness Metz Sieffert Wasserman Willardson LSFS CARLSBAD HOLDINGS LLC PACIFIC SOUTHWEST REAL TV CO EXCEL GIV LA COSTA OWNER LLC US BANK CORPORATE REAL ESTATE C/0 COLLIERS INTERNA-ALPACA PROPERTIES LLC C/0 URC MANAGEMEN. CARLSBAD OFFICE PLAZA NO 1 LP C/0 LEGAL/JVW WESTERN CONSUMER SERVICES INC SHINE ON PARK LANE LLC Fire Marshal JOHN & CASSIE HARRIES FAMILY TR LNR PROPERTIES LLC ELEVEN SAC SELF-STORAGE CORP GREENLAW PARTNERS 1000 AVIARA HOLDINGS LLC KELLY/JRM-PALOMAR AIRPORT RD LLC PALOMAR FITNESS PARTNERSHIP LP CARLSBAD PALOMAR OAKS LP SHINING MOUNTAIN ENTERPRISES Mellano & Company Carlsbad Aquafarm NORTH COUNTY LIFELINE TOLL BROTHERS, INC. The Corky McMillin Companies City of Carlsbad Fire Dept STE 1800 STE 300 STE 200 STE 294 STE 206 STE 700 STE 350 STE 400 STE 201 STE 312 STE 210 #20 2711 N HASKELL AVE DALLAS TX 75204 PO BOX400 FALLBROOK CA 92088 17140 BERNARDO CENTER DR SAN DIEGO CA 92128 2800 E LAKE ST MINNEAPOLIS MN 55406 4660 LA JOLLA VILLAGE DR SAN DIEGO CA 92122 3525 DEL MAR HEIGHTS RD SAN DIEGO CA 92130 23 PASTEUR IRVINE CA 92618 4401 MANCHESTER AVE ENCINITAS CA 92024 PO BOX 2829 RAMONA CA 92065 1601 WASHINGTON AVE MIAMI BEACH FL 33139 1250 E MISSOURI AVE PHOENIX AZ 85014 4440 VON KARMAN AVE NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660 595 S RIVERWOODS PKWY LOGAN UT 84321 330 ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS CA 92024 5015ANTA MONICA BLVD SANTA MONICA CA 90401 1000 PIONEER WY EL CAJON CA 92020 3511 CAMINO DEL RIO S SAN DIEGO CA 92108 5600 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, CA 92008 4600 Carlsbad Blvd Carlsbad CA 92018 1210 Division St Oceanside CA 92054 250 GIBRALTER ROAD HORSHAM PA 19044 2750 Womble Road San Diego, CA 92106 2560 Orion Way Carlsbad CA 92008 3422 Sitio Sandia Carlsbad CA 92009 6539 Via Alcazar Carlsbad CA 92009 3411 Sitio Sandia Carlsbad CA 92009 -----~------~ -- NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Co u ncil of t h e City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chamber, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 4:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 22, 2015, t o consider certification of a Program Environmental Impact Report (including Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Con s iderations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) for the Draft General Plan and Climate Action Plan; and approval of a comprehensive update to the General Plan, including the Housing Element, and a n e w Climate Action Plan; and approval of associated amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Local Coastal Program, Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, and an allocation from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. Whereas, on July 18, 22, 23 and 24, 2015 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission vot ed 7 -0 to recommend to the City Council certification of a Program Environment al Impact Report (includ- ing Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program) for the proposed draft General Plan, Climate Act ion Plan and associated ame nd- ments to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Local Coastal Program land use and zoning maps, and Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan; approval of a General Plan Amendment to comprehensively update the General Plan, including the Housing Element, approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendme n t to amend the Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance for consistency with the draft Gene ral Plan, approval of a Zoning Map amendment for consistency with the draft General Plan, approval of a Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendment to amend the LCP Land Use and Zoning maps and LCP implement ation plan consistent with the draft General Plan Land Use Map a nd Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance, approval of an amendment to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to a mend the Growth Management circulation performance standard, approval of a Climate Action Plan, and approval of an allocation from the Excess Dw elling Unit Bank. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after September 18, 201 5. If you have any que s - tions, please contact Dave de Cordova in the Planning Division a t (760) 602-4604 or david.decordova@ carl sbadca.gov. If you challenge the Environmental Impact Report, General Plan Update, Zone Code Ame ndmen t , Zone Change, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Climate Action Plan and/or an a mendment to t h e Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, in court, you may be limit ed to raising only thos e issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in w ritte n corres pondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive , Carlsbad , CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CASE NAME: PUBLISH: EIR 13-02/GPA 07-02/ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02/SS 15-05/SS 15-06 GENERAL PLAN UPDATE Septembe r11 .2015 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL Notice of Determination To: Office of Planning and Research PO Box 3044 150156 Sacra,mento, CA 95812-3044 From: CITY OF CARLSBAD Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-4600 r?ol1og® F.rne>\.1 Dr.-lnet;l•ufg. j,:. ftQC~,;~~f Coull\~ Clerk SD County Clerk Attn: James Scott 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 260 PO Box 121750 San Diego, CA 92101 SEP 2 3 2015 BY~ bEPTY Project No: EIR 13-02/GPA 07-02/ZCA 07-01/ZC 15-02/LCPA 07-02/SS 15-05/SS 15-06 Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE Project Title 211011004 Jennifer Jesser (760) 602-4637 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego Project Location (include County) Name of Applicant: ,C"'it:t__;;o"-f ,_ca"'rccls,b,a,d _____________________ _c_ __ Applicant's Address: 1635 Faraday Ave .. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Applicant's Telephone Number: _,_7,_60,_-_,6"'0"'2-=4,6"'0"-0.,--------,------,------------ Project Description: This project consists of a comprehensive update to the Carlsbad General Plan, which provides goals and policies to guide city actions relative to the city's development through year 2035; the General Plan update also includes an update to the Housing Element for the 2013-2021 housing planning period. For consistency with the General Plan's updated land use and mobility policies, amendments are proposed to the General Pion Land Use Map, Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, Loco/ Coastal Program land use and zoning maps, and the city's Growth Management circulation performance standard. In addition, a Climate Action Plan is proposed, which supplements the draft General Plan's sustainability policies by establishing a plan to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions within the city. A program Environmental Impact Report (EIR} has been prepared for the project and includes an analysis of potential environmental impacts associated with the project. This. is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on Sept. 22, 2015, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will have a significant effect on the environment. FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY CLERK 2. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. San Diego County on SEP 7 3 2015 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the ~'egt S E P 2 3 2015 Removed _____ _ 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this projelittturned to ager.cy on 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations was adopted for this projE@ilputy ~--,----;:;------- 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. . ~ This is to certify that the final EIR with comments and responses and record of project approval is available t~.h<e G:::e~ublic at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. 'Am.~ 9-23-/0- DON NEU, City Planner Date Date received for filing at OPR: Revised 05/13