HomeMy WebLinkAbout2024-09-24; City Council; ; Carlsbad Village Drive Mixed-Use Project bounded by Carlsbad Village Drive to the north, Interstate 5 Freeway to the east and Oak Avenue to the south (SDP 2023-0014)CA Review __AF__
Meeting Date: Sept. 24, 2024
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Scott Chadwick, City Manager
Staff Contact: Jason Goff, Senior Planner
jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov, 442-339-2643
Subject: Carlsbad Village Drive Mixed-Use Project bounded by Carlsbad Village
Drive to the north, Interstate 5 Freeway to the east and Oak Avenue to
the south (SDP 2023-0014)
District: 1
Recommended Action
1.Hold a public hearing; and
2.Adopt a resolution approving a site development plan to demolish five existing
commercial structures and consolidate four parcels of land into two parcels and construct
a mixed-use development consisting of 13,800 square feet of neighborhood-serving
commercial space within two one-story buildings, 218 multiple-family residential
apartment units within two five-story buildings and a five-story above grade parking
structure on a 4.12-acre property located at 945-1065 Carlsbad Village Drive in the
northwest quadrant of the city, the Village & Barrio Master Plan area, and Local Facilities
Management Zone 1 (Exhibit 1).
Executive Summary
The City Council is being asked to approve a site development plan that proposes to replace the
existing Smart & Final shopping center near the southeast corner of Carlsbad Village Drive and
Harding Street with a mixed-use development consisting of 13,800 square feet of commercial
space, 218 multiple-family residential apartment units within two five-story buildings and a five-
story above grade parking structure.
The developer is seeking a 50% increase in the density of the project (number of units on the
site) over the city’s maximum density allowed on this site, which is allowed under state density
bonus law, as detailed below.
Applying this state law allowance, the developer proposes a project with a density of 53 dwelling
units per acre, compared to the city’s maximum density for this site, 35 dwelling units per acre.
In return, at least 15% of the proposed units – 27 of the 218 – will be affordable to very low-
income households. This satisfies the requirements of both state density bonus law and the city’s
Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. As part of the state density bonus application, the applicant is
seeking five waivers from certain city development standards to accommodate the density
increase.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 1 of 476
For the reasons explained below, including recent state housing laws that preempt certain city
discretionary authorities, city staff have concluded that all required findings can be made to
approve this request and are recommending approval of the project, consistent with local and
state laws. The Planning Commission has also recommended the City Council approve the site
development plan for the project.
This item is being brought before the City Council because the property is subject to the Village &
Barrio Master Plan, which requires City Council review and approval of any proposed structures
over 5,000 square feet, or projects with more than four dwelling units.
Explanation & Analysis
Project description
The 4.12-acre site consists of four legal
parcels, bounded by Carlsbad Village Drive to
the north, Oak Avenue to the south,
Interstate-5 to the east, and the Hope Avenue
Alley to the west. The project site does not
include the adjacent convenience store with
gas station, which is just northeast of the site.
The properties are currently developed with
an existing retail shopping center consisting of
five buildings with a total of 58,735 square
feet.
The proposed mixed-use development
consists of:
• 13,800 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial space in two stand-alone one-
story buildings. One building is to be 8,000 square feet and the other 5,800 square feet.
• 218 multiple-family residential apartment units in two stand-alone five-story buildings,
with a bridge connecting the fourth levels.
• 340 parking spaces, with 289 spaces in an above grade, five-level parking garage and the
remaining 51 spaces in surface parking.
The project proposes the demolition of the existing retail shopping center, which includes a
grocery store, hardware store and other smaller retail/commercial establishments.
A complete summary of the proposed development and the zoning and master plan
requirements for the project can be found in the Planning Commission staff report provided as
Exhibit 3.
California Density Bonus Law
Definition
State density bonus law (California Government Code Section 65915) gives a developer the legal
right to increase the total number of homes allowed on a property above a city’s maximum limits
by as much as 100% in exchange for making some of those units affordable to lower-income
families. The law also allows developers to reduce or exceed city established development
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 2 of 476
standards such as building setback requirements and building height limitations when those
standards prevent them from achieving the increased density allowed under state density bonus
law.
Application
Under the city’s General Plan, the designation for this site is Freeway-Commercial, which allows
residential use at a density of 35 dwelling units per acre. That allows for a maximum of 145
dwelling units on this 4.12-acre property. To construct 218 units, the applicant is applying a 50%
density bonus, which allows an additional 73 units. To achieve this 50% density bonus, the
developer is required under state law to designate at least 15% of the 145 base density units, or
22 units, as affordable to very low-income households1 for a period of 55 years. The applicant is
including five additional very low-income units, for a total of 27 affordable units, to satisfy the
city’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requirements, as discussed further below.
In addition to an increase in overall project density, state law also allows developers to waive,
reduce or exceed city development standards when such standards prevent the applicant from
achieving the maximum density allowed under state law. The applicant is requesting waivers to
five development standards in the Village & Barrio Master Plan:
• Increase maximum building height from 45 feet and 4 stories to 65 feet and five stories
(Supplemental District Standard 2.7.4(G)(1)).
• Increase the limitation of architectural features located within 10 feet of a building face
from a cumulative 30% maximum to allow 100% of all architectural features to be located
within 10 feet of the façade. (Area-Wide Standard 2.6.2(C)(4)(c)).
• Increase maximum building height limit of roof structures (specifically, the elevator and
stairway housing) from 10 feet to 14 feet (Area-Wide Standard 2.6.2(C)(4)(b)).
• Waive the limitation requiring the total square footage of enclosed fourth floor space not
to exceed 80% of the largest floor space below, which will allow the fourth floor to be the
same size of the third floor in order to accommodate the fifth story (Supplemental District
Standard 2.7.4(G)(2)(b)).
• Waive the requirement that access be taken from an alley (as opposed to Carlsbad Village
Drive) and limit driveway apron to 20 feet, which will allow the project to retain certain
existing driveways that access Carlsbad Village Drive and Oak Avenue (Area-Wide
Standard 2.6.1(A)(3)).
1 The U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development defines a very low-income household family as one whose income does
not exceed 50% of the average area median income for the region. In 2024, HUD reported that the average area median income
for the San Diego County region is $119,500, so a very low-income family of four makes no more than $75,750 annually.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 3 of 476
Carlsbad Inclusionary Housing Ordinance
Definition
To help address the ongoing need for affordable housing, the city adopted an Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.85), which established the legal basis for
requiring affordable (or inclusionary) housing units in new residential development in the city.
The law, which applies to all proposed development projects that include residential units,
requires that at least 15% of the units within a project be affordable to lower-income
households.
The ordinance allows the City Council to authorize “alternative means of compliance” when it’s
found that the alternative meets the intent of the ordinance and the goals and policies of the
city’s 2021-2029 Housing Element, the element of the city’s General Plan focused on housing.
Council Policy No. 57 (Policy 57) lists the alternatives that have been found to meet the intent of
the city’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and help address its affordable housing needs. Refer to
Planning Commission Staff Report (Exhibit 3, pages 72-84) for more information.
Application
To meet inclusionary housing requirements, most developers designate 15% of their total units
as affordable to low-income households2. However, to incentivize and encourage the
development of affordable housing to even lower-income families, a housing type needed in the
city, Policy 57 allows the applicant to reduce the inclusionary percentage requirement from 15%
to 12.5%, if all of the following conditions are met:
• All affordable units are restricted to very low or extremely low-income households, or a
combination of those income levels
• The units are located on the same site as the market-rate units
• No financial assistance or other subsidy is required from the city
For this project, the applicant is proposing to satisfy the affordable housing requirements by
restricting 12.5% of the 218 proposed units, or 27 units, as affordable to very low-income
households. The inclusionary units will be located on the same site and comprise the same mix of
unit sizes as the market-rate units, and no financial assistance from the city is being provided.
Under state law, any affordability requirements under state density bonus law are also applied to
any local affordability requirements. In other words, the 22 very low-income units required
under state density bonus law apply towards the city’s inclusionary requirement for 27 very low-
income units. (The Planning Commission staff report – Exhibit 3, pages. 7-8 – provides the
detailed calculation of compliance with affordable housing requirements and density bonus
waivers.)
State housing laws and limits to local control
Overview
Over the past decade, the California Legislature has amended state law to expand and
strengthen measures intended to create more affordable housing, in recognition of the critically
2 Pursuant to HUD, the income of a low-income household family does not exceed 80% of the region AMI. As such, a low-income
family of four makes no more than $121,250 annually.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 4 of 476
low volumes of housing stock across the state and the belief that local jurisdictions are not doing
enough to address the need for more affordable housing.
In response, most bills passed by state legislators have made it easier and faster for housing
projects to be approved while limiting a local government’s ability to deny, reduce the density of,
or make infeasible those housing projects. Below are specific housing laws that are being applied
to the proposed development project and worth highlighting.
State Density Bonus Law
Under state law, projects that restrict a percentage of units as affordable are entitled to a density
increase above a city’s maximums. Local jurisdictions cannot deny or limit the density increase,
nor can the city require that the applicant amend its General Plan to reflect the increase in
housing units. This is a developer right under state law.
Further, density bonus allows applicants as many waivers as they deem necessary to achieve the
increased density they are entitled to under state law. The state law does give local cities the
ability to deny waivers, but the findings are, by design, extremely difficult to make.
• To deny a waiver, the city must identify a specific adverse impact on public health and
safety and conclude that there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the
impact.
• An adverse impact means a significant, quantifiable, direct and unavoidable impact based
on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies or conditions as
they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.
This is a high bar to overcome, and cities have previously tried to challenge such waivers, only to
be denied in court. For example, in 2022, the state Court of Appeal ruled in the case of Bankers
Hill 150 v. City of San Diego that the developers of density bonus projects are entitled to waive
development standards that would prevent the project from being built as designed – even if the
project could be redesigned to comply with the relevant standards. In other words, the courts
have held that a city cannot redesign a qualifying density bonus project on the theory that, if the
project were configured differently, it would not need the requested waivers.
State Housing Accountability Act
The Housing Accountability Act, Government Code Section, 65589.5 is a state law that limits a
local government’s decision-making authority over certain housing development projects. The
legislature first enacted the act in 1982, but over the years has amended the law and it now
involves a multitude of interconnected and overlapping Government Code sections. Many of the
most significant amendments were added in the past seven years.
Most notably, the Housing Accountability Act states that when a proposed housing development
project complies with the applicable general plan, zoning, subdivision standards, and objective
design criteria that were in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, cities
cannot disapprove the project or impose a condition requiring lower density unless the city finds,
based on a preponderance of evidence, that:
• The project would have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety, unless
disapproved or approved at a lower density; and
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 5 of 476
• There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact.
A “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact,
based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as
they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. For the proposed application,
city staff found no “specific, adverse impact” that could not be mitigated or adequately
addressed.
State Housing Crisis Act
The Housing Crisis Act of 2019, commonly referred to as Senate Bill 330, amended the Housing
Accountability Act, with several pro-housing provisions that further limited a city’s ability to deny
an application for housing project that meets established development requirements.
SB 330 also placed limits on permit processing. The law:
• Established vesting rights that limit the city to only apply those codes, requirements and
fees that were in place at the time the application is filed
• Shortened timelines to review applications
• Limits the number of public meetings to five, which includes any required community
meetings.
• Requires that any new requirement established must be objective, meaning clear and
measurable, or provides specific direction for how to apply requirements, criteria or
standards.
• Prohibits a city from “downzoning” properties, that is, reducing residential density,
through land use designations or other development standards unless a city concurrently
“upzones” another location to ensure there is no net loss in residential capacity.
• Prohibits a city from imposing housing caps or moratoriums on housing developments
California Environmental Quality Act
The California Environmental Quality Act requires agencies to be aware of the environmental
effects of their proposed actions, to give the public an opportunity to comment on
environmental issues, and to avoid or reduce significant environmental impacts when it’s feasible
to do so.
The CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3) establish
certain project types as being exempt from CEQA. One of those exemptions, set forth in CEQA
Guidelines Section 15332 and called a Class 32 Exemption, is for “In-Fill Development.” This
exemption applies to projects that meet the following criteria:
• Project site is no larger than five acres in size and substantially surrounded by urban uses
• The site has no value as habitat for rare, endangered or threatened species
• Project is consistent with the city’s General Plan and zoning regulations for the property
• The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 6 of 476
• Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise,
air quality or water quality
State Assembly Bill 1633, effective January 2024, expanded the definition of “disapproving a
housing development project” for purposes of the Housing Accountability Act to include a local
agency’s failure to complete the CEQA review and issue an in-fill development exemption for
projects that met referenced criteria.
The City Planner, as required by the city’s Zoning Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 19),
and consistent with the Housing Accountability Act, completed a review of the project and
potential environmental impacts associated with the project in accordance with CEQA. Through
this review, the City Planner was required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 19.04.060 to make
a determination consistent with the Housing Accountability Act.
The City Planner determined that the project qualified for an exemption from CEQA under CEQA
Guidelines Section 15332 – In-Fill Development.
The requirement for the City Planner to make final decisions on CEQA exemptions has been
established in the Carlsbad Municipal Code since early 2000.
Planning Commission
The Planning Commission considered the project over the course of three public hearings.
• The first was held on June 5, 2024, which was continued to June 19, 2024, at the request
of the applicant due to a Planning Commissioner absence and a Planning Commissioner
vacancy.
• The second public hearing was held on June 19, 2024, and was continued again by the
Planning Commission to July 17, 2024, at the request of community members in order to
allow more time to review the proposed project.
• The third public hearing was held on July 17, 2024, and the Planning Commission took
public testimony and considered the proposed project.
A total of four speakers spoke in favor of the project, while 39 spoke in opposition. After
questions and discussion, the Planning Commission voted 5-2 to recommend approval of the
project to the City Council. The following is a summary of major issues of concern raised at the
Planning Commission, and staff’s response.
Public outreach
Multiple concerns were raised by community members, in verbal and written testimony, about
what they said was a lack of public outreach and comment during the processing of the
application.
City Council Policy No. 84 (Exhibit 8) provides the framework for project applicants to identify
potentially interested and affected members of the public, provide additional opportunities for
input, and report public input and how it was considered by city staff, stakeholders and city
decision makers during the public hearing process. City Council Policy No. 84 also does not
mandate that an applicant hold a public meeting to inform and solicit public input. Rather, public
meetings are listed as one of several public engagement methods available to an applicant under
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 7 of 476
the policy. For this project, the applicant applied the following public engagement methods,
consistent with city policy:
Early public notice
A notice was mailed on June 15, 2023, to property owners within 600 feet of the project site,
where a total of 132 property owners were provided notice. Additionally, a two-foot-tall by
three-foot-wide “Notice of Project Application Sign” was posted at the project site on June
15, 2023, facing Carlsbad Village Drive. The sign was yellow in color so that it would stand out
and be noticed by passersby traffic.
Enhanced stakeholder outreach
Because of the size of the project, additional public outreach was required under Policy 84.
Consistent with the policy, the applicant chose to develop and host a project website
(www.carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com), which was activated on June 15, 2023, and advertised
via the early public notice mailed out on the same day. A total of seven comments were
received at the time the stakeholder outreach report was submitted to the city, on Aug. 10,
2023. The report details how outreach was conducted, and who was invited, provides a
summary of issues discussed, developer commitments made and the follow-up action taken,
if any. Results of the applicant’s public outreach met the legal requirements of the city, as
covered in Exhibit 6.
(A February 2024 internal email between members of the Planning Division staff was referenced
in public correspondence and during a community member presentation to the Planning
Commission, where staff suggested that inadequate public outreach had been performed. To
clarify the record: The email in question was sent before staff had reviewed the formal submittal
of the applicant’s stakeholder outreach report.)
Loss of existing commercial businesses
Commenters also raised concerns about the loss of longstanding commercial businesses, only to
be replaced with more residential development.
The zoning for the subject property (Freeway Commercial District) was approved by the City
Council in 2018 and intended to consist of traveler services normally associated with urban
freeway interchanges. Uses allowed under this zone include lodging, restaurants, retail and gas
stations. Residential units are also allowed in this district.
The Freeway Commercial District provides for a maximum residential density of 35 dwelling units
per acre (state density bonus law not withstanding) and sets no limit on the total amount of
commercial space for this site. The proposed development project is consistent with the
residential use and density for the property as adopted in 2018.
Increased traffic
Concerns about traffic were raised in several forms by members of the public.
Before addressing the public comments that were raised at the Planning Commission hearing, it
is important to clarify certain terms. Traffic can be measured in two different ways; level of
service, a measure of traffic volume and delay; and vehicle miles travelled. Measuring level of
service is the method used in many land use planning documents (i.e., the city’s General Plan)
and in environmental studies that were conducted before 2020, when the state changed the
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 8 of 476
CEQA standards for studying transportation impacts to the current method, measuring vehicle
miles traveled.
The City Planner’s determination that the project was exempt from CEQA exemption was final,
for the reasons explained in the California Environmental Quality Act section above and in the
Environmental Review section below, so it was not subject to consideration by the Planning
Commission (or City Council). However, to provide additional background to the Planning
Commission, and additional clarification to the City Council, staff provided the commission with
information on the project’s potential transportation impacts that were part of the
environmental review.
Vehicle miles travelled
In keeping with the guidelines on vehicle miles travelled issued by the Governor’s Office of
Planning and Research, development projects located within a ½ mile radius of a major public
transit stop (such as the Carlsbad Village Station) are automatically considered not to have an
impact on vehicle miles travelled under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Public comments were made before and during the hearing suggesting that the
measurement should be taken based on the “path of travel,” in other words, the route a
pedestrian would take, which is typically not in a straight line. According to the Office of
Planning and Research, the measurement is to be taken in a straight line. (Exhibit 9 provides a
screen capture of the relevant training slide.) Similarly, the California Department of Housing
and Community Development also expressed in a technical letter (Exhibit 10) dated Nov. 17,
2023, that the measurement is not based on walking distance but is instead measured in a
straight line, "as the crow flies."
Level of service
Level of service measures traffic volumes compared to assumed capacity and gives roadways
a letter grade based on vehicular delay. This method has been used in transportation
planning based on general planning assumptions and modeling for decades. The primary
measure for transportation for level of service is daily traffic volumes assumed by the types
of land uses. In all of these models, a commercial land use will have more trips assumed than
a residential one, because the commercial use will have more customers going to and from
the location.
Based on this standard traffic methodology, the existing operations at the site are estimated
to generate 7,044 trips, while the proposed development is expected to generate only 2,242
trips, resulting in a reduction of 4,802 trips.
The Mobility Element, the element of the city’s General Plan focused on transportation,
establishes the level-of-service standards for Carlsbad’s roadways. Carlsbad Village Drive in
this area is designated as an “identity street,” which means it is not subject to vehicle level of
service standards.3
3 The primary streets that are subject to the level of service standard are arterial streets, such as El Camino Real and
Cannon Road, and industrial streets, such as Camino Vida Roble. The city’s Growth Management Program uses the
same standard as the General Plan.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 9 of 476
Safety
Many commentors expressed concerns about traffic safety. However, vehicular, pedestrian
and bike safety are anticipated to be enhanced because of the project. That’s because along
with the reduced traffic from the site, the project will have fewer access points for vehicles
than it has now, with just one driveway, not two along Carlsbad Village Drive. This will reduce
potential conflicts with street traffic, pedestrians and bicyclists.
The projects will also widen portion of the alley to improve fire access.
Project scale, design and neighborhood character
Many comments addressed the design of the project, namely the height of the residential
buildings and parking garage, which will reach up to five stories. As noted above, the Housing
Accountability Act and the Housing Crisis Act (SB 330) limit the city’s review to established
objective design standards, not subjective standards open to interpretation.4 Furthermore, the
state density bonus law allows applicants to modify such objective design standards when those
standards prevent the project from achieving the density it is allowed.
Concerns the commercial use will not be developed as proposed
Two issues were raised during the Planning Commission hearing regarding the proposed
commercial use:
1) That the commercial building, which will be located on a separate parcel from the
residential development, could be sold and never developed.
2) And once the property is sold, a developer could abandon the commercial use and
propose more housing on the site.
Regarding the first concern, the developer has chosen to modify the project to consolidate it into
two lots that separates the uses. The Village & Barrio Master Plan allows for either an entirely
residential project, or an entirely commercial one. Even if the project were consolidated into one
lot, there is no requirement that a developer construct the commercial component at the same
time as the residential development. There also are no requirements or adopted city standards
to keep this, or any other, private commercial development open.
Regarding the second concern, while there will be two separate legal parcels, this is still
considered one development project. Any deviation or change from what is permitted and
authorized under this permit application, including the commercial use, will require city review
and approval by the City Council.
The developer plans to use all of the density allocated in the Village & Barrio Master Plan, a
maximum of 35 dwelling units per acre within the Freeway Commercial District, resulting in 145
units for the 4.12-acre site, before applying the density bonus. No future project could include
any more dwelling units on this site unless the site development plan or Village & Barrio Master
Plan is amended. The permits, if approved, will be associated with any future parcels that are
created and recorded on the property’s title.
4 Objective standards provide clear, measurable and specific direction for how to apply development criteria. They should be so
clear that everyone will interpret them the same way. In contrast, subjective standards (or guidelines) are vague, unmeasurable
and include language that may mean different things to different people.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 10 of 476
Community Engagement
A public notice of this meeting, as well as for the Planning Commission hearing, was mailed to
property owners within 600 feet of the project site and posted consistent with the requirements
of the Ralph M. Brown Act, which resulted in 132 property owners being notified, including 32
other members of the public who had been in contact with staff and requested to be notified.
Public hearing notices were also posted in The San Diego Union-Tribune and on the website for
the Office of the City Clerk 10 days prior to the meeting.
The developer completed both the early public notice procedures and the enhanced stakeholder
outreach program required pursuant to City Council Policy No. 84 - Development Project Public
Involvement Policy.
For the enhanced stakeholder outreach, the applicant elected to create a project website. The
early public notice was mailed to 132 property owners on June 15, 2023, and included a URL to
the project’s website (carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com) for those interested in learning more about
the project and/or providing feedback. The project website provided a project overview and
included information about the project design, community benefits, conceptual project images,
and a fillable form to provide feedback.
In summary, the applicant’s stakeholder outreach report is included as Exhibit 6, with seven
public comment letters included. All comment letters received during the processing of this
project have been compiled and are included in Exhibit 7. Some comments are duplicated from
the Planning Commission staff report, but they are included separately to make sure a complete
record of comments, including those received between the continued hearings, are accessible in
one place. Any comments received after the publishing of this report will be posted by the City
Clerk and distributed to the City Council.
Fiscal Analysis
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with the proposed project.
Options
The City Council can approve or deny the project. The City Council should be aware that under
the state’s Housing Accountability Act, a project cannot be denied, and the density cannot be
reduced, unless the project is found to have a specific adverse impact on public health or safety
and there is no feasible method to mitigate or avoid the adverse impact.
Under these laws, a Housing Development Project is limited to five total hearings for
consideration. This City Council hearing is the fourth of the five allowed hearings. The City
Council would need to cite specific findings as to its reasons for a denial and must comply with
the terms of the state’s Housing Accountability Act.
Next Steps
If the City Council approves the project, the next steps for development of the site would be
completion of a ministerial parcel map to consolidate the four parcels into two parcels, and
ministerial grading and building plans prior to authorization of work.5 The specific schedule
would be determined by the applicant. Grading permits typically take between six and twelve
months to process before any work could begin. If approved, the site development plan will
5 Ministerial permits (or actions) are those that allow for little or no subjective judgment by public officials. Such
permits must be approved by staff if the project complies with objective requirements.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 11 of 476
expire in two years unless construction commences and could be extended for up to six
additional years.
Environmental Evaluation
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and its implementing regulations, the CEQA
Guidelines adopted by the Secretary of the California Natural Resources Agency, list classes of
projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and as a
result are exempt from further environmental review under CEQA. The City Planner, through the
process outlined in CMC Section 19.04.060, completed a review of the project and potential
environmental impacts associated with the project in accordance with CEQA and determined that
the project qualified for an exemption pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – In-Fill
Development. CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 is a Class 32 exemption for projects under five
acres, located within urbanized areas, and consistent with the General Plan and the zoning
regulations for the site.
This notice was posted on Feb. 29, 2024, for a period of 10 days. No appeals from the public
were filed and no letters were received from the public on the CEQA determination. Therefore,
the determination that the project is exempt from CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 – In-Fill
Development, is final and is not subject to consideration by the public or the Planning
Commission.
Exhibits
1. City Council resolution
2. Location Map
3. July 17, 2024, Planning Commission hearing staff report, (on file in the Office of the City
Clerk)
4. Minutes of July 17, 2024, Planning Commission hearing, (on file in the Office of the City
Clerk)
5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7517, (on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
6. Applicant’s stakeholder outreach report
7. Correspondence Received from June 27, 2023 to Noon, Sept. 18, 2024
8. City Council Policy No. 84
9. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research: Implementing SB 743 training, April 20, 2020.
Screen Capture dated Aug. 27, 2024.
10. California Department of Housing & Community Development letter to City of San
Clemente, Nov. 17, 2023
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 12 of 476
RESOLUTION NO. 2024-221
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEMOLISH FIVE
EXISTING COMMERCIAL STRUCTURES AND CONSOLIDATE FOUR PARCELS
OF LAND INTO TWO PARCELS; AND CONSTRUCT A MIXED-USE
DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 13,800 SQUARE FEET OF NEIGHBORHOOD-
SERVING COMMERCIAL SPACE WITHIN TWO ONE-STORY BUILDINGS, 218
MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL APARTMENT UNITS WITHIN TWO FIVE-
STORY BUILDINGS AND A FIVE-STORY ABOVE GRADE PARKING STRUCTURE
ON A 4.12-ACRE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 945-1065 CARLSBAD VILLAGE
DRIVE IN THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF THE CITY, THE VILLAGE & BARRIO
MASTER PLAN AREA, AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1
CASE NAME: CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
CASE NO.: SOP 2023-0014 (DEV2023-0078)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California has determined that pursuant to
the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on July 17, 2024, hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider Site Development Plan, SOP 2023-0014, as
referenced in Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 7517 recommending to the City Council
that it be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council ofthe City of Carlsbad held a duly noticed public hearing to consider
said site development 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 the site
development plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as
follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of Site
Development Plan, SOP 2023-0014, is adopted and approved, and that the findings and conditions of
the Planning Commission contained in the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 7517 on file
with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City
Council.
3. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions
of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply:
Exhibit 1
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 13 of 476
OAK
A
V
H
A
R
D
I
N
G
S
T
H
O
P
E
A
V
A
L
L
E
Y
CARL
S
B
A
D
V
I
L
L
A
G
E
D
R
PIO
PI
C
O
D
R
I-
5
C
V
D
S
B
O
N
R
A
M
P
I-
5
C
V
D
N
B
O
F
F
R
A
M
P
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
A
L
L
E
Y
E
L
C
AMINO R
E
A
L
LA COSTA AV
A L G A R D
C
A
R
L
S
B
A
D
B
L
SDP 2023-0014
Carlsbad Village Mixed Use
SITE MAP
J
SITE
Map generated on: 1/31/2024
Exhibit 2
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 15 of 476
Exhibit 3
July 17, 2024, Planning Commission Hearing Staff Report
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 16 of 476
Exhibit 4
Minutes of July 17, 2024, Planning Commission Hearing
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 17 of 476
Exhibit 5
Planning Commission Resolution No. 7517
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 18 of 476
CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE (SDP 2023-0014)
ENHANCED STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH REPORT
August 10, 2023
City of Carlsbad
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 90028
ATTN: Jason Goff
SUBJECT: Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach Report for Carlsbad Village Mixed Use – 945-1065
Carlsbad Village Drive – Project No. SDP 2023-0014
GRT Carlsbad Village, LLC conducted an Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach Program for Carlsbad Village
Mixed Use (SDP 2023-0014) in accordance with Carlsbad Council Policy No. 84, Development Project
Public Involvement Policy.
REQUIREMENTS
Applicants of certain types of larger development projects must conduct an Enhanced Stakeholder
Outreach Program following submittal of project applications to the city, as outlined in the Guidance on
Development Project Involvement (P-21) document written by the City of Carlsbad (City). The proposed
project meets the following requirement as a project that must engage in Enhanced Stakeholder
Outreach: Residential Development consisting of 50 or more residential lots or residential units.
The City recognizes that a one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work for all projects and gives applicants
options for how to engage stakeholders in a discussion on their projects. The Carlsbad Village Mixed Use
project conducted the following outreach option provided by the City to engage the community on the
project: A project website that enables the public to learn about the project and understand how to
provide input.
PROJECT WEBSITE
The project entitlement application was submitted to the City on May 17, 2023 and a project website
was created following the requirements in the form P-21 guidance.
In accordance with City Council Policy No. 84, a Notice of Project Application (Appendix A) was mailed to
132 property owners within 600 feet of the project site on June 15, 2023. The mailed notice included a
URL to the project website (www.carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com) for those interested in learning more
about the project and/or providing feedback.
The website includes information about the project, conceptual project images, and a fillable form to
provide feedback (Exhibit 1). On the website landing page, there are several direct links that lead users
to the feedback form (Exhibit 2).
As of August 10, 2023, seven (7) comments have been received from members of the public. These
comments are included in Appendix B. The general nature of the comments focused on the project’s
height.
Exhibit 6
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 19 of 476
The project website will continue to remain active and allow stakeholders to visit and/or provide
feedback throughout the approval process.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSION
While community outreach efforts for the project will continue throughout the application and approval
process, the Applicant has demonstrated compliance with both Part A and Part B of City Council Policy
No. 84. If you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact me at
the contact information below.
Regards,
Jonathan Frankel – Applicant’s Representative
Atlantis Group
2488 Historic Decatur Road, Suite 220
San Diego, CA 92106
925-708-3638
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 20 of 476
EXHIBIT 1 – PROJECT WEBSITE FEEDBACK FORM
EXHIBIT 2 – PROJECT WEBSITE LANDING PAGE
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 21 of 476
APPENDIX A
NOTICE OF PROJECT APPLICATION
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 22 of 476
NOTICE OF PROJECT APPLICATION
GRT CARLSBAD VILLAGE LLC
June 13, 2023
SUBJECT: Notice of Project Application: SDP 2023-0014 – Carlsbad Village Mixed Use
Dear Neighbors and Interested Stakeholders:
Per City Council Policy No. 84, this is to inform you that GRT CARLSBAD VILLAGE, LLC has
submitted the following development application to the City of Carlsbad:
PROJECT NUMBER: SDP 2023-0014
PROJECT NAME: Carlsbad Village Mixed Use
PROJECT ADDRESS: 945-1065 Carlsbad Village Drive
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 203-320-53, -54, -55 and -56
DATE OF APPLICATION: May 17, 2023
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Site Development Plan to redevelop an existing shopping center and
construct a 218-unit mixed use project with 13,800 square feet of neighborhood serving retail on a
4.12-acre site. The project will include 22 very-low-income affordable units. The retail component
will be contained in two one-story buildings and the residential component in two five-story
buildings. The project will include approximately 350 parking spaces at-grade and in a parking
structure, as well as open space and landscaped areas. See attached site plan and elevations.
APPLICANT CONTACT: Jonathan Frankel
Atlantis Group
2488 Historic Decatur Road
San Diego, CA 92106
619-796-2205
jfrankel@atlantissd.com
CITY PROJECT PLANNER: Jason Goff, Senior Planner
Jason.Goff@carlsbadca.gov
If you would like more information or would like to provide input on the project, please do not hesitate
to contact me at the email address above. The project is currently under review by the City and your
input is welcome. You can also provide your feedback by visiting www.carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com.
A decision to approve or deny this application will be made by the City at a future public hearing and
you will be notified of the hearing in advance.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Frankel
Atlantis Group
Attachment: Site Plan and Building Elevations
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 23 of 476
View from Carlsbad Village Drive, looking south.
View from internal drive aisle, looking east.
SITE PLAN AND BUILDING ELEVATIONS
Site Plan.
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
4
o
f
4
7
6
CERTIFICATIONS
EQUALIZED ASSESSMENT INFORMATION
NOTICE OF PROJECT APPLICATION MAILING
AND SIGN POSTING
I certify ALL of the following:
The radius map and property owners list utilized for the Notice of Project Application
represent the latest information from the County Assessor’s Equalized Assessment Roll.
The “Notice of Project Application” was mailed on _________________(DATE) to property
owners within a 600-foot radius of the subject property, affected property/homeowner’s
association(s) (if any), those notified for Part B Stakeholder Outreach if the Notices were
combined, and, if in the Coastal Zone, occupants within a 100-foot radius of the subject
property. A complete copy of the mailed notice (and included exhibits, if any), radius map
and mailing lists are attached to this certification.
The “Notice of Project Application” sign has been posted at a conspicuous location on the site
on ___________________(DATE). A photograph of the posted sign is attached.
SIGNATURE:
PRINT NAME:
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT NUMBER:
LOCATION:
RETURN TO:
(Project Planner)
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DIVISION 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314
_____ Initial
_____ Initial
_____ Initial
Carlsbad Village Mixed Use (CVMU)
SDP 2023-0014
945-1065 Carlsbad Village Drive
Jason Goff
June 15, 2023
June 15, 2023
Jonathan Frankel
Carlsbad CA 90028
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 25 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 26 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 27 of 476
APN NAME ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP
1 203-320-53 G R T CARLSBAD VILLAGE LLC 2001 WILSHIRE BLVD #420 SANTA MONICA CA 90403
1 203-320-54 G R T CARLSBAD VILLAGE LLC 2001 WILSHIRE BLVD #420 SANTA MONICA CA 90403
1 203-320-55 G R T CARLSBAD VILLAGE LLC 2001 WILSHIRE BLVD #420 SANTA MONICA CA 90403
1 203-320-56 G R T CARLSBAD VILLAGE LLC 2001 WILSHIRE BLVD #420 SANTA MONICA CA 90403
2 156-180-15 ARDIS ZANDER/SHICK FAMILY TRUST 5230 LAS VIRGENES RD #200 CALABASAS CA 91302
3 156-180-26 ARDIS ZANDER/SHICK FAMILY TRUST 5413 FAIRGREEN WAY BONSALL CA 92003
4 156-180-28 ARDIS ZANDER/SHICK FAMILY TRUST 5230 LAS VIRGENES RD #200 CALABASAS CA 91302
5 156-180-30 ARDIS ZANDER/SHICK FAMILY TRUST 5230 LAS VIRGENES RD #200 CALABASAS CA 91302
6 156-180-41 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
7 156-180-42 ANEWALT FAMILY TRUST 01-21-04 11835 SPRINGSIDE RD SAN DIEGO CA 92128
8 156-180-43 LYONS REVOCABLE FAMILY TRUST 02-04-90 7515 MIRAMAR AVE LA JOLLA CA 92037
9 156-180-44 GOLABATON L L C P O BOX 911005 SAN DIEGO CA 92191
10 156-180-45 PHOENIX RETAIL PARTNERS LLC 10721 TREENA ST #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92131
11 156-180-46 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
12 203-130-20 E S A P PORTFOLIO LLC POB 49550 PROP TAX CHARLOTTE NC 28277
13 203-130-22 A B 3 LLC 20 W 64TH ST #9V NEW YORK NY 10023
14 203-130-23 RODRIQUEZ FAMILY TRUST 1010 GRAND AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
15 203-130-24 JACK B MILLS 3110 AZAHAR ST CARLSBAD CA 92009
16 203-130-27 AMAPOLO L L C 3117 WILDFLOWER SMT ENCINITAS CA 92024
17 203-130-34 E S A P PORTFOLIO LLC POB 49550 PROP TAX CHARLOTTE NC 28277
18 203-202-13 CHOSEN WISE PROPERTIES LLC 3144 EL CAMINO REAL #104 CARLSBAD CA 92008
19 203-202-18-01 HEKMAT FAMILY TRUST 02-24-06 17234 SILVER GUM WAY SAN DIEGO CA 92127
20 203-202-18-02 UCKER FAMILY LIVING TRUST 11-01-02 800 GRAND AVE #102 CARLSBAD CA 92008
21 203-202-18-03 HAVILUK BARBARA D REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST 11-26-84 800 GRAND AVE #103 CARLSBAD CA 92008
22 203-202-18-04 KROENER REVOCABLE TRUST 11-30-83 2516 MONTGOMERY AVE CARDIFF CA 92007
23 203-202-18-05 MICHAEL & DAWN B OBRIEN 800 GRAND AVE #105 CARLSBAD CA 92008
24 203-202-18-06 BURNETT JAMES D & KIMBERLY REVOCABLE TRUST 02-06-06 208 GIBSON PT SOLANA BEACH CA 92075
25 203-202-18-07 SAFFO DR & MRS KARL S TRUST 09-14-20 800 GRAND AVE #107 CARLSBAD CA 92008
26 203-202-18-08 BROSNAN JAMES J & PAMELA A BROSNAN TRUST 03-03-20 800 GRAND AVE #108 CARLSBAD CA 92008
27 203-202-18-09 GARCIA-ROSS FAITH M 2019 TRUST 05-20-19 800 GRAND AVE #109 CARLSBAD CA 92008
28 203-202-18-10 LOPEZ-PANAMA MIGUEL A & LOPEZ MARIVIC T 2308 MENDOTA WAY ROSEVILLE CA 95747
29 203-202-18-11 JOHNSON LISA K FAMILY TRUST 01-10-03 3306 E KACHINA DR PHOENIX AZ 85044
30 203-202-18-12 BUCKMASTER CHAD & AMANDA FAMILY TRUST 02-01-12 3119 CIRCA DE TIERRA ENCINITAS CA 92024
31 203-202-18-13 DAVID R WILLIAMS 5041 N CAMINO SUMO TUCSON AZ 85718
32 203-202-18-14 MELANIE MAURO 800 GRAND AVE #203 CARLSBAD CA 92008
33 203-202-18-15 REED CALVIN L & LINDA E REVOCABLE LIVING SURVIVORS 800 GRAND AVE #204 CARLSBAD CA 92008
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
8
o
f
4
7
6
34 203-202-18-16 MAKATURA FAMILY TRUST 10-25-01 2052 KIRKLAND CIR THOUSAND OAKS CA 91360
35 203-202-18-17 BERGAMASCHI RICHARD J & MARCHELE A FAMILY TRUST 800 GRAND AVE #206 CARLSBAD CA 92008
36 203-202-18-18 THUM FAMILY TRUST 07-18-12 800 GRAND AVE #207 CARLSBAD CA 92008
37 203-202-18-19 JOSEPH S & JOYCE M QUINCE 800 GRAND AVE #208 SAN DIEGO CA 92109
38 203-202-18-20 BUBB FAMILY 2012 TRUST 04-23-12 800 GRAND AVE #209 CARLSBAD CA 92008
39 203-202-18-21 SUSAN M BERGER 22506 SE 45TH LN ISSAQUAH WA 98029
40 203-202-18-22 ZARNOW FAMILY TRUST 02-14-03 800 GRAND AVE #211 CARLSBAD CA 92008
41 203-202-18-23 MARK A & JULIA G BUTCHKO 7534 SEDGE MEADOW DR INDIANAPOLIS IN 46278
42 203-202-18-24 HAVER FAMILY 2011 TRUST 05-18-11 16520 SENTERRA DR DELRAY BEACH FL 33484
43 203-202-18-25 STIDMAN VALERIE H REVOCABLE TRUST 07-25-16 6504 CHEROKEE TRL MINNEAPOLIS MN 55439
44 203-202-18-26 JAN E & MARGARETA JANSSON 800 GRAND AVE #304 CARLSBAD CA 92008
45 203-202-18-27 STADNICK FAMILY TRUST 07-03-00 27684 N 71ST WAY SCOTTSDALE AZ 85266
46 203-202-18-28 KING TRUST 12-22-10 61341 TRIPLE KNOT RD BEND OR 97702
47 203-202-18-29 HERBERT LEE & BEVERLY ANN JONES 800 GRAND AVE #307 CARLSBAD CA 92008
48 203-202-18-30 WARWICK S & NOLA M FORD 142 W END AVE #26N NEW YORK NY 10023
49 203-202-18-31 SHEW STEVEN & TIFFANY FAMILY TRUST 04-04-20 800 GRAND AVE #309 CARLSBAD CA 92008
50 203-202-18-32 GABRIELE COURT LLC 328 VISTA VILLAGE DR #D VISTA CA 92083
51 203-202-18-33 WILSON CORY A & SUSAN J TRUST 12-06-18 1330 LONG LAKE RD FLORENCE WI 54121
52 203-202-20 CARLYLE RESIDENCES COMMUNITY ASSN 5075 SHOREHAM PL #280 SAN DIEGO CA 92122
53 203-320-02 CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC 3444 CAMINO DEL RIO N #202 SAN DIEGO CA 92108
54 203-320-20 CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC 3444 CAMINO DEL RIO N #202 SAN DIEGO CA 92108
55 203-320-27 ALLAHYARI FAMILY TRUST 07-17-02 19 TIERRA VISTA LAGUNA HILLS CA 92653
56 203-320-31 ALLAHYARI FAMILY TRUST 07-17-02 3008 EMINENCIA DEL SUR SAN CLEMENTE CA 92673
57 203-320-39 DENNYS INC P O BOX 260888 PLANO TX 75026
58 203-320-40 CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC 6700 TOWER CIR #1000 FRANKLIN TN 37067
59 203-320-41 CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC 6700 TOWER CIR #1000 FRANKLIN TN 37067
60 203-320-48 CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC 5120 SHOREHAM PL #150 SAN DIEGO CA 92122
61 203-320-49 CARLSBAD VILLAGE LLC 3444 CAMINO DEL RIO N #202 SAN DIEGO CA 92108
62 203-320-50 G6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC 3444 CAMINO DEL RIO N #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92108
63 203-320-51 CARLSBAD VILLAGE II LLC 5120 SHOREHAM PL #150 SAN DIEGO CA 92122
64 203-320-52 G6 HOSPITALITY PROPERTY LLC 3444 CAMINO DEL RIO N #200 SAN DIEGO CA 92108
65 203-352-02 CAVALEA 2023 TRUST 3640 FELIZ CREEK RD HOPLAND CA 95449
66 203-352-03 CAVALEA 2023 TRUST 3640 FELIZ CREEK RD HOPLAND CA 95449
67 203-352-04 CAVALEA 2023 TRUST 3640 FELIZ CREEK RD HOPLAND CA 95449
68 203-352-11 3095 HARDING L L C 10951 SORRENTO VALLEY RD #2A SAN DIEGO CA 92121
69 203-352-12 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
70 203-352-13 GASTELUM FAMILY SURVIVORS TRUST 11-16-94 323 HILL DR VISTA CA 92083
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
9
o
f
4
7
6
71 203-352-14 ZMACK LLC 1868 CREST DR ENCINITAS CA 92024
72 203-352-15 EZRA MINISTRIES INC 825 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
73 203-352-18 EZRA MINISTRIES INC <DBA MISSION CHURCH>825 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
74 203-352-19 P G P CARLSBAD SENIORS LTD 10951 SORRENTO VALLEY RD #2A SAN DIEGO CA 92121
75 203-353-04 BUCCHARE ERIC T & TRACY L TRUST 03-22-12 275 VILLAGE RUN W ENCINITAS CA 92024
76 203-353-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
77 203-353-06 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
78 203-353-07 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
79 203-353-09 JACK IN THE BOX INC/PACIFIC COAST INVESTMENTS GP P O BOX 7099 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92658
80 203-354-01 KENNETH J DAVIES/GEORGE W MERKLE 1576 PRIMERA ST LEMON GROVE CA 91945
81 203-354-05 3740 LP P O BOX 33628 SAN DIEGO CA 92163
82 203-354-07 GRAND & HARDING LLC P O BOX 3277 BEVERLY HILLS CA 90212
83 203-354-08 SCANLON FAMILY TRUST 05-16-16 3410 CAMINO ALEGRE CARLSBAD CA 92009
84 203-354-13 ORANGE LAND HOLDINGS LLC 264 PACIFIC AVE SOLANA BEACH CA 92075
85 203-354-15 BANK OF CALIFORNIA P O BOX 12734 LA JOLLA CA 92039
86 203-354-16 HELIX REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST P O BOX 15453 SAN DIEGO CA 92175
87 203-354-19 UEBER HAUN I LLC/GRANT HOLDINGS LLC 43650 LA CRUZ DR TEMECULA CA 92590
88 203-355-01 STARDUST HOMES L L C P O BOX 2100 COLTON CA 92324
89 203-355-02 JACKSON FAMILY TRUST 09-14-05 2504 MANCHESTER AVE CARDIFF CA 92007
90 203-355-03 JACKSON FAMILY TRUST 09-14-05 2504 MANCHESTER AVE CARDIFF CA 92007
91 203-355-04 2952 HARDING LLC 4899 CASALS PL SAN DIEGO CA 92124
92 203-355-05 G & M GAPCO LLC 16868 A LN HUNTINGTN BCH CA 92647
93 204-032-01 HATTER LARRY W & CATHLEEN E 1986 TRUST 5315 AVENIDA ENCINAS #130 CARLSBAD CA 92008
94 204-032-10 DARCUIEL FAMILY TRUST 04-15-15 601 E PALOMAR ST #C-243 CHULA VISTA CA 91911
95 204-032-12 CARLSBAD COMMUNITY CHURCH 3175 HARDING ST CARLSBAD CA 92008
96 204-100-06 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
97 204-110-01 MARY J JONES/JEANNE M STAMPER 1727 FIDDLERS RIDGE DR FLEMING ISLAND FL 32003
98 204-110-02 MARY J JONES/JEANNE M STAMPER 1727 FIDDLERS RIDGE DR FLEMING ISLAND FL 32003
99 204-110-32 COLLEEN Y MATSUBARA 983 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
100 204-110-33 KATZ FAMILY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 3302 NW PANORAMA DR BEND OR 97703
101 204-110-37 ROOSTER HOUSE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP 5252 BALBOA AVE #605 SAN DIEGO CA 92117
102 204-111-01 LEONE LAEL TRUST 08-15-22 985 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
103 204-111-02 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
104 204-111-03 OAK 51 APARTMENTS LLC 14336 OLDE HIGHWAY 80 EL CAJON CA 92021
105 204-111-04 OAK 47 APARTMENTS LLC P O BOX 21010 EL CAJON CA 92021
106 204-111-05 OAK 47 APARTMENTS LLC P O BOX 21010 EL CAJON CA 92021
107 204-111-06 RACHEL 2015 TRUST 04-02-15 931 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
3
0
o
f
4
7
6
108 204-111-09 STERNBERG TANYA 1998 TRUST 3156 HARDING ST CARLSBAD CA 92008
109 204-111-10 MARKS 2004 FAMILY TRUST 10-31-04 3166 HARDING ST CARLSBAD CA 92008
110 204-111-11 SMERUD FAMILY TRUST 03-27-97 928 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
111 204-111-12 SMERUD FAMILY TRUST 03-27-97 1099 BUENA VISTA WAY CARLSBAD CA 92008
112 204-111-13 SCHICK LUAN TRUST 11-30-99 938 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
113 204-111-14 INTERLAGOS INVESTMENTS L L C 7424 CIRCULO SEQUOIA CARLSBAD CA 92009
114 204-111-15 SEIDERMAN BRIAN & JOYCE TRUST 04-21-00 1415 FOREST AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
115 204-111-16 ANDY H ANSON 982 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
116 204-111-17 996 PINE AVE LLC P O BOX 624 SOLANA BEACH CA 92075
117 204-111-18 DOKKEN MARY T LIVING TRUST 03-08-99/DIANA DOKKEN 1022 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
118 204-111-19 DOKKEN MARY T LIVING TRUST 03-08-99/RICHARD & BARBARA BOOTH 1022 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
119 204-111-20 CARLSBAD COMMUNITY CHURCH 3175 HARDING ST CARLSBAD CA 92008
120 205-020-26 DONALD L KING 1155 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
121 205-020-27 SCHNEIDER FAMILY TRUST 03-20-19 P O BOX 891 CARLSBAD CA 92018
122 205-020-29 MAST POKEY FAMILY TRUST 1095 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
123 205-020-30 N & G LLC 7848 PRAIRIE SHADOW RD SAN DIEGO CA 92126
124 205-020-31 ST JOHN FAMILY TRUST 11-01-11 3657 MONROE ST CARLSBAD CA 92008
125 205-020-32 SCANLON FAMILY TRUST 05-16-16 3410 CAMINO ALEGRE CARLSBAD CA 92009
126 205-020-33 MARIANO HERNANDEZ 1325 HIGGINS ST OCEANSIDE CA 92058
127 205-020-34 DANIEL & ELIZABETH GLASSER 1210 PINE AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
128 205-020-53 TAMMY G MCDARIS 1103 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
129 205-020-54 BABE & BUNNY TRUST 11-16-22 1109 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
130 205-020-55 BABE & BUNNY TRUST 11-16-22 1109 OAK AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008
131 205-111-27 CITY OF CARLSBAD 1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DR CARLSBAD CA 92008
132 760-252-15 CARLSBAD VETERAN HOUSING L.P.13520 EVENING CREEK DR N #160 SAN DIEGO CA 92128
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
3
1
o
f
4
7
6
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 32 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 33 of 476
APPENDIX B
PROJECT WEBSITE COMMENTS
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 34 of 476
1
Andrew Cerrina
From:Carlsbad Village <donotreply@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com>
Sent:Friday, June 23, 2023 7:25 AM
To:info@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com
Subject:Carlsbad Village Web Inquiry
First Name
Don
Last Name
King
Email
dkingconstruction1155@gmail.com
Phone
7606725000
Address
1155 Oak Ave.
City
Carlsbad
State
CA
Zip
92008
Comments
You've already ruined the view and the feel of being near the beach. By putting a huge ugly biulding at the off ramp at Carlsbad
Village Drive. Stop putting tall huge structures at our beach cities. Quit always letting money be the main concern of every
greedy land owner. I can't believe you even have to ask. Leave the little beach town the way it is. You damaged it horrably
already. And why is this the first notice i've ever recieved . When there are a bunch of tall biuldings that have gone up?
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 35 of 476
1
Andrew Cerrina
From:Carlsbad Village <donotreply@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com>
Sent:Tuesday, June 27, 2023 11:37 PM
To:info@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com
Subject:Carlsbad Village Web Inquiry
First Name
Sam
Last Name
Doan
Email
samdoan23@yahoo.com
Phone
7608897706
Address
3985 hibiscus circle
City
Carlsbad
State
CA
Zip
92008
Comments
I think that all this development is happening way too fast the housing project across the street where dennys used to be just got finished and now there’s another one being planned. Smart and final is the only grocery store in the village and that parking lot is always full of cars from people using the services that poinsettia plaza provides. It is very questionable to me that we need more housing in the village especially right next to a freeway on ramp. There’s hundreds if not thousands of homes being built along el Camino between tamarack and cannon. I really hope this project gets turned down at least for now because doesn’t benefit any of our long standing local residents who are effectively being forced out of their neighborhoods as all these developments keep happening
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 36 of 476
1
Andrew Cerrina
From:Carlsbad Village <donotreply@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com>
Sent:Tuesday, July 11, 2023 9:02 AM
To:info@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com
Subject:Carlsbad Village Web Inquiry
First Name
Candy
Last Name
Kressman
Email
candy@yum-yoga.com
Phone
760-529-2767
Address
390 Oak Ave
City
Carlsbad
State
Ca
Zip
92008
Comments
I would like more information on this project
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 37 of 476
1
Andrew Cerrina
From:Carlsbad Village <donotreply@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com>
Sent:Tuesday, July 11, 2023 11:07 AM
To:info@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com
Subject:Carlsbad Village Web Inquiry
First Name
June
Last Name
Pasini
Email
junetune@att.net
Phone
760 213-2449
Address
233o Byron Place
City
Carlsbad
State
CA
Zip
92008
Comments
5 story buildings do NOT belong in our beautiful coastal city.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 38 of 476
1
Andrew Cerrina
From:Carlsbad Village <donotreply@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com>
Sent:Tuesday, July 11, 2023 9:07 AM
To:info@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com
Subject:Carlsbad Village Web Inquiry
First Name
Shari
Last Name
Roberts
Email
slkahnroberts@gmail.com
Phone
2018199596
Address
2787 State St
City
Carlsbad
State
CA
Zip
92008
Comments
The Height of 5 stories is an eyesore. If the height is reduced 2-3 stories this project would be more aesthetically pleasing.
The many residents of Carlsbad whom I spoke to, were not happy when discussing this development. Personally, I think if it was
smaller in scope it would be an ‘easier pill to swalllow’ and you would have the support of the community.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 39 of 476
1
Andrew Cerrina
From:Carlsbad Village <donotreply@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com>
Sent:Wednesday, July 12, 2023 11:09 AM
To:info@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com
Subject:Carlsbad Village Web Inquiry
First Name
Rosie
Last Name
Marks
Email
roromarks@gmail.com
Phone
760-845-7479
Address
3166 Harding Street
City
Carlsbad
State
CA
Zip
92008
Comments
What will happen to all of the small businesses that have been there 20+ years (El Puerto, French Pastry Cafe) and everyone
who works at the grocery store while this project happens? Will they get to remain open and employed? Will everyone now have
to walk to Von's on Tamarack for groceries? We already can see the top of the unattractive relatively NEW 4 story apartment
building next to the freeway. This project means we get to look at two 5-story buildings A LOT closer to us. And what exactly is
AFFORDABLE these days with every new housing project in the village selling for $900k up???? (the Carlyle on Grand, the
Fives on Madison, etc.). We really do feel like the we are getting squeezed out like the house in the Pixar movie UP!
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 40 of 476
1
Andrew Cerrina
From:Carlsbad Village <donotreply@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com>
Sent:Monday, July 17, 2023 2:58 PM
To:info@carlsbadvillagemixeduse.com
Subject:Carlsbad Village Web Inquiry
First Name
Rob
Last Name
Schupp
Email
rob.schupp2@gmail.com
Phone
760-583-0265
Address
2735 Wilson St.
City
Carlsbad
State
CA
Zip
92008
Comments
Thanks for posting information on your project. Some questions:
What is the current square footage of the shopping center?
What is the square footage of the proposed market and the square footage of the existing Smart & Final?
Will residences be for rent or for sale?
Please estimate rent/sales price ranges.
Looks like 7/11 stays, right?
I would suggest that while the project may reduce traffic trips to the shopping center, those same trips will be taken to other
businesses much further away.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 41 of 476
CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE (SDP 2023-0014)
ENHANCED STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH REPORT – ADDENDUM
September 17, 2024
City of Carlsbad
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 90028
ATTN: Jason Goff
SUBJECT: Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach Supplemental Addendum for Carlsbad Village
Mixed Use – 945-1065
Carlsbad Village Drive – Project No. SDP 2023-0014
In accordance with Carlsbad Council Policy No. 84, Development Project Public Involvement
Policy, the required Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach Report (“Outreach Report”) was submitted on
August 10, 2023. The initial Outreach Report indicated that seven (7) comments had been
submitted through the website1 at the time the Outreach Report was submitted to the city. The
Outreach Report was accepted2, and the Letter of Completeness was issued by the City on
September 14, 2023.
Since the date the Outreach Report was completed, 23 additional comments and inquiries have
been received through the project website, bringing the total to 30 comments and inquiries.
In addition to the project website, public engagement and education have been ongoing throughout
the entitlement process. A timeline is included as Exhibit A. Project support letters are included as
Exhibit B.
This addendum summarizes the supplemental actions and provides responses to the community
feedback received.
Supplemental Public Engagement and Education
Tenant Outreach
From the onset, outreach to the existing tenants at the strip center has been a primary focus.
The property was purchased in late 2021 and outreach to tenants began in December 2021 about
the plans for future redevelopment. Communication to tenants has been ongoing throughout the
process (Exhibit C). Through those conversations, the property owner extended the leases of 80%
of the existing tenants whose leases would have expired during the entitlement period to prolong
access to neighborhood services and avoid a blighted and vacant strip center. These extensions
were offered at lease rates significantly lower than market rental rates, further assuring consistent
presence at the plaza. The lease extensions also allowed tenants more time to evaluate their future
1 The project website was the method utilized from the list of options provided by Policy 84 to satisfy the
Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach requirement.
2 Submission of an Outreach Report is a requirement for the project application to be deemed complete by
the City.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 42 of 476
plans. Applicant also facilitated introductions to a local broker to assist with relocation efforts.
Tours and leasing discussions are in process.
Media
Cooperation with local media, including The Coast News (6/21/23 – left) and The San Diego Union
Tribune (7/2/23 – right) resulted in greater awareness of the project early on and increased traffic to
the project website. Media coverage on the project began as early as December 9, 2021, with the
announcement of the purchase of the property.
One-on-One and Small Group Meetings
Members of the project team have been available for one-on-one or small group meetings
throughout the entitlement process.
Thirteen one on one meetings with members of the community have been held, including with
some opposing the project.
Stakeholder Meetings
In addition to meeting with members of the community, the project team has made in-person and
virtual presentations to local and regional stakeholder groups. The local meetings were hosted by
the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce (4/3/24) and the Carlsbad Village Business Association
(“VBA”) (5/14/24). These two meetings were publicized to their respective networks, and on
multiple resident driven social media pages (example included below as figure 1). All interested
parties, including non-members, were welcome and present at the meetings. Roughly 150
members of the community participated.
Given the project’s commitment to provide affordable housing at the Very-Low income level and its
consistency with state housing accountability laws, local affordable housing advocates also
demonstrated interest in the project, including YIMBY Law, YIMBY Democrats and LISC.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 43 of 476
Figure 1 – Carlsbad Village Facebook page, 5,000 followers Figure 2 – Jonathan Frankle, Project Manager (5/14/24 Village Voices)
Key Themes and Responses
Topic Response
Loss of neighborhood
services (i.e. grocery)
In response to community feedback, the project has been designed to
include a neighborhood market. The necessary infrastructure to
accommodate a grocer (cart parking, truck loading, dedicated trash, etc.)
has been incorporated into the site plan.
Further, it was announced in May 2024 that Baron’s Market would be
coming to the Village. Barons is anticipated to open in late 2024 or early
2025, well before construction begins on this project. Combined with the
market planned for this project, the community will have access to
multiple grocery store options in the Village.
Parking We recognize the importance of parking, especially in coastal areas. It is
important to note that the project could choose to utilize state incentives
for transit-oriented development given its proximity to the Carlsbad
Village Train Station and provide no parking, however the project
proposes 340 stalls.
The parking structure not only helps address this community concern, it
also serves as noise attenuation and a buffer from the adjacent freeway, a
stated objective included in the Village and Bario Master Plan.
Traffic & Pedestrian
Safety
The project improves pedestrian safety along Carlsbad Village Drive by
widening the sidewalk through a property dedication, significant setbacks
to create patios and outdoor seating for the proposed retail uses,
enhanced landscaping and a new, covered bus stop. Finally, the project
proposes to close the second driveway on Carlsbad Village Drive which
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 44 of 476
will further support pedestrian walkability and safety along the project’s
street front.
Comprehensive analysis was completed on the project. Studies show
there will be a reduction of 4,800 trips to the site per day. Pursuant to
CEQA, the project was also analyzed for vehicle miles traveled (VMT). City
staff concluded the project was exempt from further review. No appeals
to this decision were received.
Community Character
(i.e. height/views,
design, aesthetics)
This project is an opportunity to revitalize this site and create a welcoming
gateway to the Village.
HEIGHT – The project aims to reduce massing along Carlsbad Village
Drive, where single-story buildings are proposed. The siting of the
residential buildings at the southern portion of the property (toward Oak
Avenue) takes advantage of the existing, downward-sloping topography,
resulting in a maximum building height that is only 6 feet higher than the
4-story Carlsbad Village Lofts project to the North. Concentrating parking
in a singular garage also prioritizes the pedestrian and creates a more
human-scaled environment.
AESTHETICS – Modern coastal architecture with a mix of colors, textures
and materials also helps to create visual interest. Although not applicable
to this project, the applicant has incorporated elements from the Village &
Barrio objective guidelines and taken inspiration from the Carlyle on
Grand which was identified positively throughout the process.
Inconsistency with
Village
After years of neglect and differed maintenance, loitering and vandalism,
the retail buildings that exist today are not viable in the future.
The property is located in the Freeway Commercial District of the Village
and Barrio Master Plan (VBMP). The VBMP envisions a mixed-use
environment with higher density residential with a mix of unit types for a
wide variety of households in this location to create a buffer from the
freeway (Village and Barrio Master Plan (Page 13-14)). The project is
consistent with this vision.
Although the project utilizes State Density Bonus, the applicant has
chosen not to propose the maximum density.
Lack of Awareness,
Inconspicuous
Application Signage
In addition to satisfying the enhanced stakeholder outreach
requirements, members of the project team participated in online and
social media discussions in which the project was discussed. Everything
from acknowledging the notice of application to linking to the CEQA
determination was shared on prominent social media pages, including
those managed by project opposition (Exhibit D). This grassroots
discussion was key to better understanding which elements of the project
to reinforce and highlight in our public presentations.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 45 of 476
Exhibit A – Project Milestones
- Dec. 2021 – Property acquisition
- Early 2022 – Outreach to tenants begins
- May 2023 – Application Submittal
- June 10, 2023 – Website & feedback portal established
- June 15, 2023 – 500 ft. Notice Letter to Public
- June 15, 2023 – Notice of project application posted to project site
- August 10, 2023 – Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach Report accepted
- September 14, 2023 – Application deemed complete
- Feb. 29, 2024 – CEQA Notice of Exemption Determination Posted
- Mar. 11, 2024 – Expiration of Appeal Period
o No appeals received
- April 3, 2024 – Carlsbad Chamber Government Affairs presentation
- May 14, 2024 – Village Voices presentation
- June 5, 2024 – Planning Commission (continued)
- June 17, 2024 – Planning Commission (continued)
- July 18, 2024 – Planning Commission (approved 5-2)
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 46 of 476
Exhibit B – Project Support/Endorsement Letters
- 5/16/24 – Bret Schanzenbach, Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce
- 5/29/24 – Matt Thorne
- 5/30/24 – Raj Chandani
- 5/31/24 – Nina Esber
- 6/5/24 – Christine Davis
- 6/5/24 – YIMBY Democrats
- 6/17/24 – YIMBY Law
- 6/18/24 – Paul Kartze
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 47 of 476
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
8
o
f
4
7
6
…
Hello Mayor Blackburn, Chairman Kamenjarin and members of the City Council and Planning
Commission,
I would have liked to attend the Planning Commission hearing on 6/5, but unfortunately, that is the
same day as 5th grade graduation. I hope these comments in support of the redevelopment of the
Carlsbad Village Plaza can be considered when you make your decision.
I’ve lived in Carlsbad for 10 years and have been generally supportive of the growth and
development that has taken place. The implementation of the Village and Barrio Master Plan has
resulted in new investment that has reinvigorated the Village. We’ve always loved the charm of the
local businesses, and how there’s even more to enjoy.
Today I’m writing specifically about the plans to redevelop the Village Plaza. With the increase in
services like Instacart and Amazon Fresh, how people get their groceries is evolving. However, I
was still concerned to hear that Smart n Final would be going away. To that end, I like that the
developer is making plans for a new market. I know this is big for the community too. I saw on
Facebook that Baron’s is also coming to the Village! With the approval of this project, that will
mean two quality options for residents.
As we’ve seen with other infill projects in the Village and Barrio, there is a good way to develop and
a bad way. This particular project looks pretty good to me.
Sincerely,
Raj Chandani
3051 Rancho Del Canon
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 49 of 476
From:Nina E.
To:planning@carlsbadca.gov; council@carlsbadca.gov
Cc:Jason.Goff@carlsbadca.gov; Eric.lardy@carlsbadca.gov
Subject:Public Comment - Support
Date:Friday, May 31, 2024 1:15:36 PM
External (nina.esber@gmail.com)
Report This Email FAQ GoDaddy Advanced Email Security, Powered by INKY
Hello,
Please add these comments to the record for the redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza.
I normally don’t get involved with things like this, but I’ve seen the chatter on social mediaand felt compelled to voice my support.
The housing market is not what it was 10, 20, or even 5 years ago. The cost of living is
through the roof which is pushing people to other states. I’d venture to guess that most of thepeople opposing this project have owned their homes for decades and don’t understand how
much harder it is now.
My boyfriend and I had to live with two other roommates off Paseo Del Norte for a year untilwe were recently lucky enough to find our own place off Lincoln Street. Even then, the rent is
still incredibly high. It’s that perspective I suspect you don’t hear a lot of. The people whohave time to sit in front of grocery store and collect signatures are typically not the people who
are going to benefit from affordable housing.
I appreciate that the developer is proposing quality housing for a variety of income levels.Please vote yes.
Nina Esber
3080 Lincoln St. Carlsbad, CA 92008
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 50 of 476
Re: SDP 2023-0014 (DEV2023-0078) CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
June 5, 2024
Dear Commissioners:
I am writing regarding the mixed-use development proposed for 945-1065 Carlsbad
Village Drive.
The Carlsbad Village Association (CVA) was pleased to have a representative from the Atlantis Group as our guest speaker at our May 14th Village Voices business and
resident networking meeting held at the new Village Arts theatre. Jonathan Frankel, the lead consultant, provided an in depth 20-minute power point presentation followed by 15 minutes of open Q&A. Mr. Frankel also had architectural renderings
available on easels and informational handouts. There were approximately 80 people in attendance, including many local residents.
We appreciated their transparency and willingness to share information and discuss
options. We were glad to hear that the owner and developer have a firm commitment to single story retail along Carlsbad Village Drive, with a goal of bringing in a community grocery store to service their residents and others in the Village. We also understand that current tenants will be given first access to the new retail space at market rate, and that they have been receiving subsidized rates and will continue to do so until the project commences.
We are pleased to hear that they are proposing widening the sidewalks and that community seating or informal gathering space is also being proposed in the area.
And it appears that they are committed to creating as much visual open space as
possible for the proper aesthetic for such an important piece of property.
We are hopeful they will be interested in assisting us in updating the Carlsbad Village
monument sign that welcomes people to the Village on Carlsbad Village Drive to
something more current and noteworthy than what is currently there.
CVA looks forward to providing more community outreach opportunities for the
Atlantis Group to help disseminate accurate information.
Sincerely,
Christine Davis Executive Director
Zachary Markham
Chairman
Heidi Willes
Vice Chair
Kenneth Reyes
Treasurer
Jenna Dotson
Secretary
Fumi Matsubara
Board Member
Samantha Dean Fauce
Board Member
Chanel Bennet
Board Member
Carrie Moore
Board Member
Anna Howard
Board Member
Rosemary Eshelman
Board Member
The Carlsbad Village
Association (CVA) is a
non-profit organization
whose core purpose is to
lead the continual
improvement of Carlsbad
Village by promoting and
enhancing its business,
cultural, and community
vitality, making it a premier
destination.
300 Carlsbad Village Dr.
Suite 108A #135
Carlsbad, CA 92008
www.carlsbad-village.com
info@carlsbad-village.com
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 51 of 476
June 5, 2024
Commissioner Bill Kamenjarin, Chair
City of Carlsbad
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: Item 1:SDP 2023-0014 (DEV2023-0078) CARLSBAD VILLAGE
MIXED USE - SUPPORT
Dear Chair Kamenjarin and Planning Commission Members:
On behalf of the YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County, please
accept this letter regarding our support for the proposed Carlsbad
Village Mixed Use project.
The YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County are dedicated to growing
sustainable housing opportunities in the communities where we live.
In addition to developing more affordable and market-rate housing to
increase the supply of housing, we believe in prioritizing infill
development near transit and employment centers with the goal of
increasing our housing supply, leveraging our urban environments,
protecting our natural resources and advancing economic inclusion
and opportunity for all. Further, we believe that sound public policy,
along with projects such as the Carlsbad Village Mixed Use project
will result in a healthier, more vibrant, and equitable community.
The entire San Diego region, including Carlsbad, is facing an
affordable housing crisis that requires bold action.The Carlsbad
Village Mixed Use project will build 218 apartments, 27 of which are
affordable to very-low income families, which would provide much
needed affordable housing to the community.
Located in an urbanized and transit-rich area, the project provides more
families access to critical community resources. Given that this project is
in the center of Carlsbad, within walking distance to a Coaster Station
and employment opportunities, this project will help achieve state and
regional climate goals by reducing vehicle miles traveled and lessening
the demand for greenfield development in far-flung areas of the state.
Additionally, this development not only utilizes new state density bonus
law, but also satisfies the inclusionary zoning requirements adopted by
the City.
Over the past three years, Carlsbad has only permitted 45 of the 1311
homes needed for very-low income families. The affordable homes
provided in this project are a perfect example of how newly adopted state
and local housing policies meet critical community needs.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 52 of 476
YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County
Page 2 of 2
The YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County believe that projects like this create a more equitable,
sustainable, and thriving city.We submit this letter to remind the Planning Commission of its obligation to abide by
all relevant state housing laws when evaluating this proposal.While no one project will solve the statewide
housing crisis, the proposed development is a step in the right direction and towards the region's housing
goals. We urge the Commission to approve the Carlsbad Village Mixed Use project and continue working
towards solutions that prioritize housing abundance, affordability, and inclusivity.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
YIMBY Democrats of San Diego County
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 53 of 476
YIMBY Law
2261 Market Street STE 10416
San Francisco, CA 94114
hello@yimbylaw.org
6/17/2024
Carlsbad Planning Commission
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
planning@carlsbadca.gov
eric.lardy@carlsbadca.gov
Via Email
Re: 945-1065 Carlsbad Village Dr
SDP 2023-0014
Dear Carlsbad Planning Commission,
YIMBY Law is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation, whose mission is to increase the accessibility
and a ordability of housing in California. YIMBY Law sues municipalities when they fail to
comply with state housing laws, including the Housing Accountability Act (HAA). As you know,
the Planning Commission has an obligation to abide by all relevant state housing laws when
evaluating the above captioned proposal, including the HAA. Should the City fail to follow the
law, YIMBY Law will not hesitate to file suit to ensure that the law is enforced.
The project at 945-1065 Carlsbad Village Dr is a sustainable mixed-use development with 218
for-rent residential units, 27 of which are a ordable to very low-income households. The
project meets the a ordability requirement for a Density Bonus under state law, entitling the
project to seek five concessions related to building height, ground floor square footage, and
vehicle access.
Planning Department sta have produced a thorough report stating that the project meets
objective design criteria, that “there is no preponderance of evidence that the project would
have a specific, adverse impact on public health and safety,” and recommending approval. The
Planning Commission is therefore required to approve the project on the basis of relevant state
statute. Under California state Density Bonus Law (see California Government Code §
65915(e)) the project is entitled to seek waivers as concessions so long as there are no specific,
adverse impacts, upon health, safety, or the physical environment, and there are no feasible
methods to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impacts.
As discussed in the sta report, the Commission is similarly bound by California Gov. Code
§65589.5(j)(1) of the Housing Crisis Act, which states that a city cannot disprove a project or
compel modifications to lower density as long as the project meets the relevant objective
general plan, zoning, and subdivision requirements in e ect at the time that the application
was deemed complete.
1
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 54 of 476
California Government Code § 65589.5, the Housing Accountability Act, also prohibits
localities from denying housing development projects that are compliant with the locality’s
zoning ordinance or general plan at the time the application was deemed complete, unless the
locality can make findings that the proposed housing development would be a threat to public
health and safety. § 65589.5 (j)(3) elaborates that the receipt of a density bonus does not
constitute a valid basis on which to find a proposed housing development project is
inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity, with an applicable plan, program,
policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision.
The above captioned proposal is zoning compliant and general plan compliant, therefore, your
local agency must approve the application, or else make findings based on a preponderance of
evidence to the e ect that the proposed project would have an adverse impact on public health
and safety, as described above. Should the City fail to comply with the law, YIMBY Law will not
hesitate to take legal action to ensure that the law is enforced.
I am signing this letter both in my capacity as an employee of YIMBY Law, and as a resident of
California who is a ected by the shortage of housing in our state and would be eligible to apply
for residency in the proposed housing development project.
Sincerely, Olivia Grimes
Olivia Grimes
Legal Associate Intern
YIMBY Law
2261 Market Street STE 10416, San Francisco, CA 94114
2 Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 55 of 476
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
5
6
o
f
4
7
6
Exhibit C – Existing Tenant Outreach
Summary of Landlord Lease Extensions and Outreach with Existing Tenants
1. Landlord Lease Extensions – 6 Tenants / 80% of Property Extended*
- December 7, 2022 – Specific tenant lease extended
- March 1, 2022 – Specific tenant lease extended
- April 7, 2022 – Specific tenant lease extended
- February 8, 2023 – Specific Tenant lease extended
- February 23, 2024 – New lease signed for vacant space
- June 30, 2023 – Specific Tenant lease extended
- August 4, 2023 – Specific Tenant lease extended
* All leases extended at significant discount to market rental rates
2. Landlord Outreach/Communication with Existing Tenants
A. Summary of Below Landlord / Tenant Communication re: Development **:
Landlord initiated Communication Dec ‘21 to Current 67 calls/emails
Tenant initiated Calls/responses to Landlord Dec ’21 to Current 4 calls/emails
** Excludes normal property management calls unrelated to proposed development
B. Detail of Landlord/Tenant Communication
- December 2021
Notice of acquisition of and introduction of new ownership
Sent by Landlord to all tenants
- January – March 2022
Introduction of new ownership and new property management
Sent by Landlord to All tenants
- June 2023
Initial email from landlord informing tenants of submission of development
application
Sent by Landlord to All tenants
Landlord response to tenant inquiry about timing of development Landlord
Response to all tenants that specifically reached out to landlord
Follow up calls to discuss development
Landlord response to all tenants that specifically reached out to landlord
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 57 of 476
- April 2024
Follow up correspondence from landlord
Landlord provided development update to ALL tenants
Calls to discuss development with specific tenants
Landlord initiated calls to 5 specific tenants to provide specific update on
development
Follow up correspondence with tenants with additional information from earlier
call.
Landlord initiated follow up correspondence to 3 specific tenants in
response to their specific questions
- May 2024
Follow up correspondence form Landlord with additional information from
earlier call
Landlord initiated calls to 3 specific tenants in response to their questions
Follow up calls to discuss development
Landlord initiated calls to 3 specific tenants to provide specific update on
development
- Currently Ongoing
Conversations with tenants to provide assistance identifying alternate location
Landlord initiated introduction calls with local area broker to assist in
relocation, in response to specific tenant inquiry
Broker tours of potential relocation properties
Landlord facilitated broker introduction has resulted in tours of potential
relocation space within Carlsbad Village, those tours and leasing
discussion are currently ongoing.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 58 of 476
Exhibit D – Community Acknowledgement of Project Milestones on Social Media
The dates of the following posts on prominent public and private social media pages in Carlsbad
align with pertinent project milestones (exhibit A) and demonstrate awareness to a wide audience.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 59 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 60 of 476
Exhibit 7
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 61 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 62 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 63 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 64 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 65 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 66 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 67 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 68 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 69 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 70 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 71 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 72 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 73 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 74 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 75 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 76 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 77 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 78 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 79 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 80 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 81 of 476
Jason Goff
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
RE: Carlsbad Village Plaza
Enough is enough.
Enchanted Seashells <enchantedseashells@gmail.com>
Thursday, May 2, 2024 5:37 PM
Jason Goff; Planning; Melanie Burkholder; Council Internet Email; Manager Internet
Email
STOP THE DESTRUCTION OF CARLSBAD VILLAGE PLAZA
I am vehemently opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed-use condominium complex. (Project Number SDP 2023-0014).
I've lived in Carlsbad since 1985.
This proposed development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad and the residents of Carlsbad Village.
It will destroy the only grocery store in the village, turning the village into a food desert. It wilJ destroy the only pharmacy in the village, which is important to seniors and residents with limited mobility.
The hardware store will go, as will the French bakery, the cleaners, the CRC resale store, the laundromat, and other local businesses -many of them family owned and operated. These stores will not return. The retail space will be reduced by 77% and the new space will be much more costly. These stores are an important resource for the village and must stay.
What's more, this development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to "serve as the historic heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and creating a strong sense of community" in a way that "encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and "provides for the daily needs of nearby residents."
You can't deny that the proposed development will significantly increase traffic in the area, making mobility more difficult for residents, especially cyclists.
I understand that progress is inevitable, but as usual for Carlsbad's elected officials, this is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly alter the character of the Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents wish to preserve.
Do not approve this project.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project.
Rosanne Bentley 619-200-7417
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content i
safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 82 of 476
Jason Goff
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Goff,
Melissa Furioli <melissa.furioli@gmail.com>
Thursday, May 2, 2024 7:59 PM
Jason Goff
Carolyn Luna; Council Internet Email; Manager Internet Email; Planning
Save the Carlsbad Village Plaza
I am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed-use condominium
complex. (Project Number SOP 2023-0014)
I was brought home from the hospital to my first home on La Portalada Dr., near the intersection of Tamarack and El
Camino. My family purchased that home in 1975 and we have all been here since. Certainly we've seen many changes to
the city in almost 50 years, but I strongly believe that this proposed development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad
and the residents of Carlsbad Village. It will destroy the only grocery store in the village, turning the village into a food
desert. It will destroy the only pharmacy in the village, which is important to seniors and residents with limited mobility.
The hardware store will go, as will the French bakery, the cleaners, the CRC resale store, the laundromat, and other local
businesses -many of them family owned and operated. These stores will not return. The retail space will be reduced by
77% and the new space will be much more costly. These stores are an important resource for the village and must stay.
What's more, this development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master
Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to "serve as the historic heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and
creating a strong sense of community" in a way that "encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and
"provides for the daily needs of nearby residents." Further, the proposed development will significantly increase traffic
in the area, making mobility more difficult for residents, especially cyclists.
I understand and appreciate that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly
alter the character of the Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents wish to preserve. I do not approve
this project. Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank you so much for your
time and attention in this matter!
Warmly,
Melissa Furioli
Homeowner in District 2
3704 Strata Drive
760-703-5973
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless ou recognize the sender and know the content i
safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 83 of 476
Jason Goff
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Goff,
Maria <mnovida@yahoo.com>
Thursday, May 2, 2024 9:17 PM
Jason Goff
Project Number SDP 2023-0014)
I am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed-use condominium
complex. (Project Number SDP 2023-0014)
My family and I moved to Carlsbad from Vista in 2009 for the reason of having a better school district and living in better
Carlsbad neighborhoods. We bought our home in the Hidden Ridge neighborhood off of El Camino Real across
Robertsons Ranch. We frequently go to the village to eat and shop. My college age daughter has worked in the village
the past years for summer jobs and will return again this summer to work. We love the village and we think this
proposed development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad and the residents of Carlsbad Village.
It will destroy the only grocery store in the village, turning the village into a food desert.
Just today, after buying a gift card from Blue Water Grill Restaurant, I stopped by Smart and Final to buy ingredients for
dinner and how wonderful it is for that grocery store to be there. As it is, the closest grocery store from us is the Vons
by Carlsbad Shoppes Mall. We need Smart and Final grocery store in this area.
Additionally, the proposed development will destroy the only pharmacy in the village, which is important to seniors and
residents with limited mobility. The hardware store will go, as will the French bakery, the cleaners, the CRC resale store,
the laundromat, and other local businesses-many of them family owned and operated. These stores will not return. The
retail space will be reduced by 77% and the new space will be much more costly. These stores are an important resource
for the village and must stay.
What's more, this development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master
Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to "serve as the historic heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and
creating a strong sense of community" in a way that "encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and
"provides for the daily needs of nearby residents:'
Further, the proposed development will significantly increase traffic in the area, making mobility more difficult for
residents, especially cyclists.
I understand that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly alter the
character of the Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents wish to preserve. Do not approve this
project.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Maria Leupold
2357 Summerwind Place,
Carlsbad, Ca 92008
(760) 500-1220
Sent from my iPhone
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 84 of 476
Jason Goff
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ladies and Gentlemen:
decroce@aol.com
Friday, May 3, 2024 6:48 PM
Planning; Eric Lardy; Scott Chadwick; Jason Goff; Melanie Burkholder; Keith Blackburn
CARLSBAD VILLAGE PLAZA
I am strongly against the destruction of the Carlsbad Village Plaza. The Village does not need another mixed-use condominium complex. (Project Number SDP 2023-0014). I have lived in Carlsbad since 1986 and have raised three children here. I live at 3 759 Grecourt Way which is considered part of the Village. I regularly play pickle ball at St. Mike's church with my husband and we regularly ride our bikes there. As much as I would like it to be, I know nothing stays the same forever. But our lovely, quaint community Village is being destroyed and dismantled street by street. Three story apartment and condo buildings have taken residence on too many of our streets ...... Grand Avenue, State Street, Madison Avenue and the largest eyesore of them all, the mixed-use apartment complex on Carlsbad Village Drive directly across from the Carlsbad Village Plaza. The Village is tapped out.
This proposed development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad and the residents of Carlsbad Village. It will destroy the only grocery store in the village, turning the village into a food desert. It will destroy the only pharmacy in the village, which is important to seniors and residents with limited mobility. The hardware store will go, as will the French bakery, the cleaners, the CRC resale store, the laundromat, and other local businesses -many of them family owned and operated. These stores will not return. The retail space will be reduced by 77% and the new space will be much more costly. These stores are an important resource for the village and must stay.
What's more, this development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to "serve as the historic heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and creating a strong sense of community" in a way that "encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and "provides for the daily needs of nearby residents."
Further, the proposed development will significantly increase traffic in the area, making mobility more difficult and dangerous for residents, especially cyclists.
I understand that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly alter the character of the Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents wish to preserve. Please listen to the citizen's you represent and do not approve this project.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Deborah Foley
3759 Grecourt Way Carlsbad, CA 92008 decroce@aol.com
760-415-8024
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 85 of 476
Jason Goff
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Goff,
Tracy Faris <tlfaris@yahoo.com>
Sunday, May 5, 2024 7:09 AM
Jason Goff
Planning; Council Internet Email; Manager Internet Email; Melanie Burkholder; Priya
Bhat-Patel; Carolyn Luna; Teresa Acosta; Keith Blackburn
Project Number SDP 2023-0014 -Save Carlsbad Village Plaza
l am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed
use condominium complex. (Project Number SDP 2023-0014)
I have lived in Carlsbad for 20 years and love the quaint feel of the village. We cannot let it turn
into the mess that Encinitas has. Its disgraceful and does not reflect the "Life's Rad in Carlsbad"
vibe that we all know and love.
This proposed development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad and the residents of Carlsbad
Village. It will destroy the only grocery store in the village, turning the village into a food desert. It
will destroy the only pharmacy in the village, which is important to seniors and residents with
limited mobility. The hardware store will go, as will the French bakery, the cleaners, the CRC resale
store, the laundromat, and other local businesses -many of them family owned and operated.
These stores will not return. The retail space will be reduced by 77% and the new space will be
much more costly. These stores are an important resource for the village and must stay.
What's_ more, this development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad Village
and Barrio Master Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to 11serve as the historic heart of
the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and creating a strong sense of community" in a way that
'1encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and 11provides for the daily needs of
nearby residents."
Further, the proposed development will significantly increase traffic in the area, making mobility
more difficult for residents, especially cyclists.
I understand that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will
irreversibly alter the character of the Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents
wish to preserve. Do not approve this project.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Tracy Faris
Carlsbad resident and homeowner
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless ou recognize the sender and know the content i
safe,
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 86 of 476
Jason Goff
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Goff,
Paul Miller <millerpa06@gmail.com>
Monday, May 6, 2024 5:40 PM
Jason Goff
Village Plaza
I'm totally and completely opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed-use
condominium complex. (Project Number SOP 2023-0014)
I've been a resident in this fine city for over 26 years and my family has frequented the businesses in the Plaza weekly
over the years. Both of my daughters were raised in Carlsbad and were properly educated at Jefferson and CHS.
This proposed development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad and the residents of Carlsbad Village. It will destroy
the only grocery store in the village, turning the village into a food desert. It will destroy the only pharmacy in the village,
which is important to seniors and residents with limited mobility. The Denault's Ace Hardware has been a staple in the
community, employing experienced seniors and creating a small town feel that you do not get at Lowe's or Home Depot.
I cannot count how many birthday cakes we've ordered from the French bakery. I have to add the Golden Tee, a classic
watering hole that many of us have spent evenings at. These stores will not return. The retail space will be reduced by
77% and the new space will be much more costly. These stores are an important resource for the village, does that not
mean anything to the City?
What's more, this development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master
Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to "serve as the historic heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and
creating a strong sense of community" in a way that "encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and
"provides for the daily needs of nearby residents."
I understand that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly alter the
character of the Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents wish to preserve. Do the right thing, and do
not approve this project.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Paul A. Miller
5133 El Arbo! Drive
760-271-4457
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content i
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 87 of 476
May 12, 2024
Jason Goff City Project Manager
Dear Mr. Goff,
From the moment I read the yellow notice on the Miso Restaurant building I knew myself and neighbors were going to be shocked and upset to learn of the entire shopping center was going to be torn down with a new center being built.
This one is very personal to all of us. But this isn't a personal issue, its a business arrangement. The two don't mix do they ... And we need the city's help to find a solution that keeps the valuable center in tact.
I understand that you have heard all the reasons this project of the Carlsbad Village Shopping Center rebuild should not be allowed but please hear me out.
1
If the city allows this to move forward the way it is right now, we will be putting our neighbor's stores and shops out of business. Did you know many of them are residents of Carlsbad? They have homes here, they pay taxes. Most importantly they are a vital part of our community. The center survived Covid, safely keeping their stores open to serve us and pay their own bills.
I suggest another environmental impact study to be done. I know that has been passed on as the center as it stands now has already had the study when it was built. But we need another impact study. How many more cars, producing emissions into the air, making CVD more difficult to drive because of too many cars on the road at once. Presently, travel in that area is very difficult at any time of the day.
One could say that this new center would provide a wonderful location for train travel to work, or pleasure. Maybe, in a perfect world .... that parking lot is already full from morning to night. Are the new residents going to walk to the station? Maybe a few but the reality is that most would drive to the station, making the streets and parking lots fuller than they are currently. Some new residents won't use the train regularly at all. Once again, more cars clogging CVD.
The point of train travel is to help save the environment by omitting cars on the road. That's a good thing but what about the folks that use the Smart and Final Center? If it's torn down for the new project, folks are going to have to drive a lot further to find similar shopping needs. This is a big deal for those of us who live close.
This is not the right area for such a huge area of buildings/condos to cram into the space. Maybe good for the development company but not for a single citizen who uses this center currently.
Most Sincerely,
Heather Sager
Carlsbad Village Resident
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 88 of 476
May 14, 2024
The Planning Commission
City of Carlsbad
Dear Planning Commissioners:
• --� CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE On behalf of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, I am writing in support of
the upcoming Carlsbad Village Mixed Use development in Carlsbad at the site where Smart &
Final currently resides (Carlsbad Village Shopping Center). Tooley Interests has a long history
of quality developments and they plan long-term ownership of this project. The proposed
development would bring fresh retail space to an aged property and much needed housing.
The project being proposed is consistent with Carlsbad's General Plan. The two retail concepts
it has will keep a market located on site, which is preferred due to the proximity of many local
residents, and it will add a restaurant or coffee shop.
The great value here is in the 218 rental units it will add. This supply will include 27 affordable
units for "Very Low" income levels, a product desperately needed in our community. The
planned amenities here are exceptional. The project parks itself fully. And the sidewalk
widening bring beautiful landscaping and increased walkability to our booming village.
For these reasons and more, we would like you to approve the Carlsbad Village Mixed Use
application as proposed.
Sincerely,
Bret Schanzenbach
President and CEO
5934 Priestly Drive I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760.931.8400 T I 760.931.9153 F www.carlsbad.org
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 89 of 476
Jason Goff
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Dear Jason Goff,
Stacie <staciebeal@gmail.com>
Wednesday, May 22, 2024 12:16 PM
Jason Goff
Fwd: Notice of Public Hearing for SDP 2023-0014 -Carlsbad Village Mixed-Use
SDP20230014Jg.Notice of Public Hearing.pdf
I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed housing development of 218 multiple
family residential apartment units within two five-story buildings, and a five-story above-grade parking
structure on a 4.12-acre property located at 945-1065 Carlsbad Village Drive. While I understand the
need for affordable housing in our city, this project would have a detrimental impact on our community.
Primarily, the proposed development is simply too large for our area. The increase in population density
would put a strain on our already overburdened infrastructure, leading to increased traffic congestion,
noise pollution, and strain on our public services. Additionally, the construction of this project would
result in significant environmental damage, destroying natural habitats and putting wildlife at risk.
Furthermore, the type of housing being proposed is simply not in keeping with the character of our
neighborhood. It would also drastically alter the aesthetic of our area, replacing the existing skyline and
open space with a monolithic, high-density housing complex.
Finally, I am deeply concerned about the impact this development would have on property values in the
surrounding area. The influx of high-density housing residents could result in a decline in property values,
making it difficult for current residents to sell their homes and move elsewhere.
In conclusion, I strongly urge you to reconsider this proposed housing development. While I recognize
the need for affordable housing, this project is simply not the right fit for our neighborhood. Thank you for
your attention to this matter.
Sincerely, Stacie Beal
Carlsbad Village Resident
----------Forwarded message ---------
From: Carla Flores <Carla.Flores@carlsbadca.gov>
Date: Wed, May 22, 2024 at 11 :51 AM
Subject: Notice of Public Hearing for SOP 2023-0014 -Carlsbad Village Mixed-Use
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 90 of 476
From: Darlene Gillis <darlenegillis@msn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 6:46 PM
To: Jason Goff <iason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>; Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Petition to Save Carlsbad Village Plaza
Please review my submittal and I expect immediate attention to this urgent
matter. Darlene Gillis 760-497-4224
Dear Mr. Goff,
I am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed-use highdensity residential complex. (Project Number SOP 2023-0014)
I have lived in Carlsbad for 40 years and shopped at the Plaza since the auto parts store and Big Bear grocery store were there. I shop there at least twice a week.
This proposed development is not good for the residents of Carlsbad Village.
By getting rid of Smart and Final, locals, tourists, restaurant owners, seniors and low income families in the barrio will have nowhere to shop for reasonably priced food.
The only pharmacy in the village will be gone. Rite Aid on Tamarack is due to close any day now. Residents including seniors and those with limited mobility will have to travel 3 miles to the nearest pharmacy.
The hardware store will be gone, we will have to drive 5 miles to a home depot just for a light bulb.
Even if smaller stores open after the construction, there will be a 2-3 year period with no grocery store, pharmacy or hardware store. And the new retail space rental will be prohibitively high, resulting in higher prices for their products.
This development does not fit with the concepts we've been fighting for with the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan, which feels like 40 years!! Keep the Village.
Traffic -Carlsbad Village Drive traffic will be a nightmare, even if an additional light is installed on CVD this will cause an unbelievable backup on 1-5! The placement of this complex is not conducive to the safety of the community.
Residents of the 218 residential units will use 2 lane Harding Street, which cannot handle additional traffic. The Harding Community Center and Senior Center are both on this street, as well as Chase Field where all the kiddos play baseball. Traffic is backed up as it is!! Any additional traffic will put children and . seniors lives in danger.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 91 of 476
Safety -All Carlsbad Fire Stations are located east of 1-5. Emergency Response Vehicle's only access to the Carlsbad Village and responding to Life Guard Beach Emergencies is down CVD. This complex will hinder that access.
Progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly alter the character of the Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents wish to preserve. Do not approve this project.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Darlene Gillis 3576 Highland Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 760-497-4224City Planner managing this application (Project Number SOP 2023-0014)
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 92 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 93 of 476
From: Planning
To: Cynthia Vloeland
Subject: FW: Carlsbad Village Plaza
Date: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 4:52:41 PM
From: Jeanne Herrick <jbks2590@sbcglobal.net>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 4:35 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>
Cc: Jason Goff <jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Carlsbad Village Plaza
From: Jeanne Herrick
Subject: Reject SOP 2023-0014 Carlsbad Village Mixed Use Project
Dear Carlsbad Planning Commission Members,
My name is Jeanne Herrick and I have lived in the Village, off of Jefferson Street, on Davis
Avenue, since 1983.
I am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large,
mixed-use high-density residential complex. (Project Number SOP 2023-0014)
As a longtime resident of Carlsbad, living just up the street from Carlsbad Village Plaza, I
frequently use my bicycle or walk to run errands. The proposed redevelopment would
significantly
increase my reliance on car travel, or force me to cycle further on larger, busier, more
dangerous streets.
This proposed development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad and the residents of
Carlsbad
Village. It will destroy the only grocery store in the village, (and don't say Baron's will be the
replacement grocery store,
as I know they provide higher priced gourmet options) forcing the residents into more
expensive and distant options. It will destroy the only pharmacy in the village, which is
important
to seniors and residents with limited mobility. The hardware store will go, as will the French
bakery, the cleaners, the CRC resale store (which benefits battered women), the
laundromat,
and other local businesses -many of them family owned and operated. These stores will
not
return. The retail space will be reduced by 77% and the new space will be more expensive.
These stores are an important resource for the village and must stay.
What's more, this development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad
Village and Barrio Master Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to "serve as the
historic
heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and creating a strong sense of community" in a
way
that "encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and "provides for the daily
needs of nearby residents."
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 94 of 476
I understand that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will
irreversibly alter the character of the Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many
residents wish to preserve.
In light of these points, I urge you to act in the community's best interest by rejecting the
proposed development of SOP 2023-0014. Please consider the long-term effects such a
project
would have on the fabric of our community and the daily lives of its residents.
Sincerely, Jeanne Herrick Carlsbad, CA
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 95 of 476
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Planning
Cynthia Vigeland
FW: Subject: Reject SDP 2023-0014 Carlsbad Village Mixed Use Project
Thursday, May 30, 2024 7:07:40 AM
From: Enchanted Seashells <enchantedseashells@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 5:52 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>; Jason Goff <jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>; Council Internet
Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>; Manager Internet Email <manager@carlsbadca.gov>; Melanie
Burkholder <melanie.burkholder@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Subject: Reject SDP 2023-0014 Carlsbad Village Mixed Use Project
Resending to include this request: Please include in public record.
TO: Carlsbad Planning Commission Members:
As are so many others who care about Carlsbad, I am vehemently opposed to the
proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed-use high
density residential complex. (Project Number SDP 2023-0014).
As a forty year resident of Carlsbad, I know --without a doubt --that this proposed
development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad and the residents of Carlsbad Village.
It will destroy the only AFFORDABLE grocery store in the village, forcing the residents
into more expensive and distant options.
It will destroy the only pharmacy in the village, which is important to seniors and
residents with limited mobility.
The hardware store will go, as will the French bakery, the cleaners, the CRC resale store
(which benefits battered women), the laundromat, and other local businesses -many of
them family owned and operated.
These stores will not return. The retail space will be reduced by 77% and the new space
will be more expensive. These stores are an important resource for the village and must
stay.
The traffic analysis submitted for this project is seriously flawed.
The project is more than 1 /2 mile away from the Carlsbad Village Station transit center.
Also, the Vehicle Miles Driven (VMT) is miscalculated. This project will not decrease VMT
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 96 of 476
by ~20,000. Rather, it will increase VMT by ~20,000. As a result, a full CEQA VMT analysis
should have been conducted.
This development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad Village and
Barrio Master Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to "serve as the historic
heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and creating a strong sense of community" in
a way that "encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and "provides
for the daily needs of nearby residents."
This is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly damage the character of the
Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents wish to preserve. Doesn't
anybody in the position of being a decision maker have any idea what it means to
embody coastal culture in design?
In light of these points, I urge you to act in the community's best interest by rejecting the
proposed development of SDP 2023-0014 and instead, consider the long-term effects
such a project would have on the fabric of our community and the daily lives of its
residents.
Sincerely,
Rosanne Bentley
Carlsbad, CA
CAUTION.i Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.I
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 97 of 476
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Planning
Cynthia Vigeland
FW: Support for Carlsbad Village Plaza redevelopment
Thursday, May 30, 2024 7:07:54 AM
From: Matthew Thorne <mthorne22@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 5:31 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>; Council Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>
Cc: Jason Goff <Jason.Goff@carlsbadca.gov>; Eric Lardy <Eric.lardy@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Support for Carlsbad Village Plaza redevelopment
To whom it may concern:
I just learned about the plans to redevelop the old Smart n Final center in the Village from a friend of mine. It's about time! I know there are some people who are concerned about too much change in the Village or in losing what basically amounts to a strip mall, but I'm choosing to see the opportunity here.
I've been going to the cleaners that are in the center for years and have seen the slow decline. There are often people loitering in the parl<ing lots or in the alley that goes out to Oak Ave that are clearly up to no good. I'd be curious how often the police get called out there. I believe that this new project will clean up the area. This is the first place people see when they exit the freeway so having a modern, upscale development that reflects the beauty of our city is key!
All in all, I support this project and I hope you will too.
Sincerely,
Matt Thorne 1795 Vada Place Carlsbad CA 92008
CAUTION. Do not o en attachments or click on links unless
know the content is safe.1
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 98 of 476
From: To: Cc: Subject: Date:
Planning
Cynthia Vigeland
Jason Goff FW: Opposition to the Carlsbad Village Plaza application.
Thursday, May 30, 2024 8:49:35 AM
From: donaldmackay3104@outlook.com <dona1dmackay3104@outlook.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 7:56 AM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Opposition to the Carlsbad Village Plaza application.
As a resident of 'old' Carlsbad for over 25 years, I am opposed to the Carlsbad Village
Plaza redevelopment application.
Don MacKay
macl<aydon@aol.com
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 99 of 476
5.Retail space will be reduced by 77%, and the cost of the new
retail spaces will be prohibitively high.
6.Increased vehicle miles traveled will result as residents are
forced to drive further to access similar retail establishments.
7.The project contradicts the objectives of the Carlsbad Villageand Barrio Master Plan, which emphasizes preservingneighborhood character and meeting the daily needs of
residents.
In light of these points, we urge you to act in the community's best interest by
rejecting the proposed development of SOP 2023-0014. Please consider the longterm effects such a project would have on the fabric of our community and the daily
lives of its residents.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.
CAUTION. Do not o en attachments or click on links unless
know the content is safe.i
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 100 of 476
From: To:
Subject:
Date:
Planning
Cynthia Vigeland
FW: Carlsbad Village Plaza OPPOSillON
Thursday, May 30, 2024 1:09:47 PM
From: Heather Hirschkoff <heathernhuffman@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 11:51 AM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>
Cc: Jason Goff <jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Carlsbad Village Plaza OPPOSITION
I would like to express my opinion as a long time resident of Carlsbad. I frequent nearly
every one of these businesses in this square and am devastated at the idea of losing them.
In addition, it is one of the quaint centers that make up the old village feel of our city! I
am absolutely opposed to tearing down and replacing with multi story residences even if
low income or whatever. Please STOP destroying our downtown Carlsbad Village
feeling!!!!
Sincerely,
Heather Hirschkoff
Get Outlook for iOS
ICAUTION.i Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe I
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 101 of 476
From: rchandani818@yahoo.com <rchandani818@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 301 2024 1:28 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>; Council Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.goJ!.>
Cc: Jason Goff <iason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>; Eric Lardy <eric.lardy@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Support for Carlsbad Village Plaza redevelopment
Hello City Council and Commissioners. Please see attached letter of support for the Carlsbad
Village Plaza redevelopment.
Hello Mayor Blacl<burn, Chairman Kamenjarin and members of the City Council and Planning
Commission,
I would have lil<ed to attend the Planning Commission hearing on 6/5, but unfortunately, that is the
same day as 5th grade graduation. I hope these comments in support of the redevelopment of the
Carlsbad Village Plaza can be considered when you mal<e your decision.
I've lived in Carlsbad for 1 0 years and have been generally supportive of the growth and
development that has tal<en place. The implementation of the Village and Barrio Master Plan has
resulted in new investment that has reinvigorated the Village. We've always loved the charm of the
local businesses, and how there's even more to enjoy.
Today I'm writing specifically about the plans to redevelop the Village Plaza. With the increase in
services lil<e lnstacart and Amazon Fresh, how people get their groceries is evolving. However, I
was still concerned to hear that Smart n Final would be going away. To that end, 1 lil<e that the
developer is mal<ing plans for a new marl<et. I l<now this is big for the community too. I saw on
Facebool< that Baron's is also coming to the Village! With the approval of this project, that will
mean two quality options for residents.
As we've seen with other infill projects in the Village and Barrio, there is a good way to develop and
a bad way. This particular project lool<s pretty good to me.
Sincerely,
Raj Chandani
3051 Rancho Del Canon
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 102 of 476
From: Planning
To: Cynthia Vigeland
Subject: FW: Carlsbad Village Plaza
Date: Thursday, May 30, 2024 3:30:08 PM
From: George Groza <georgegroza@yahoo.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 2:10 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>; Jason Goff <jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Carlsbad Village Plaza
Good afternoon,
I will be unable to make it to the meeting next week, but I would like to register my opposition to closing down and re-developing Carlsbad Village Plaza. There are multiple small businesses that make their
home there such as the sushi restaurant that was not able to re-open after the fire. Respectfully,
George Groza Carlsbad Homeowner since 2012
CAUTION. Do not o en attachments or click on links unless
know the content is safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 103 of 476
From: To:
Subject:
Date:
Planning
Cynthia Vigeland
FW: Opposition to the Carlsbad Village Plaza redevelopment plan (Project Number SDP 2023-0014)
Thursday, May 30, 2024 3:30:24 PM
From: Keith Hunter <keith@selectormedia.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 2:55 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>; Council Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>
Cc: Jason Goff <jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Opposition to the Carlsbad Village Plaza redevelopment plan (Project Number SDP 2023-
0014)
Dear Carlsbad Planning Commission Members, Mayor and City Council Members,
I am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large,
mixed-use high-density residential complex. (Project Number SOP 2023-0014)
I moved my family to Carlsbad about 8 years ago. A big part of why we moved here is the
small town feel of the Village's city center and the historic neighborhoods that surround it. I've watched with dismay as this small town feel is quickly dwindling. Properties sold to
speculative out of town developers are being transformed at an alarming pace into spaces that displace long-time local businesses and don't support the essential services the community actually needs.
These developers typically use loopholes under the Trojan Horse of "affordable housing" to
maximize density; flout traffic and parking standards; and build monolithic multi-story
buildings that are over the height limit and extend right up to the edge of the lot lines. It's
clear that they simply do not care about actually providing affordable housing, contributing
to the local community or preserving the character of the village. They are simply
maximizing their ROI and getting away with as much as they can with a seemingly compliant planning commission and complicit city leadership.
The fealty of these developers is to their boards and shareholders, not to the citizens of
Carlsbad. Their motivation is driven by fiduciary responsibility to company stakeholders
rather than to the people who actually live and work here. Those who benefit from these
new structures primarily seem to be real estate investors, the independently wealthy and
large retail conglomerations. They are the only ones who actually have the means to meet the exorbitant price tag to purchase or rent space in these new properties, further displacing mom and pop businesses, teachers, seniors, veterans and generations born and raised here that now find themselves now priced out of where they grew up.
While it might be compelling to see the additional revenue flowing into the city's tax base,
ultimately Carlsbad may fall victim to its own short-term success and become a desert of empty short-term rentals and abandoned storefronts. Who can actually sustain forking out $4,000 per month for a studio apartment and justify purchasing $30 sandwiches for lunch
on a regular basis? What is the urban planning logic behind requiring Village residents to
drive outside city limits to find a hardware store or laundromat?
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 104 of 476
This proposed development is not in the best interest of Carlsbad and the residents of
Carlsbad Village. It will destroy the only grocery store in the village, forcing the residents
into more expensive and distant options. It will destroy the only pharmacy in the village,
which is important to seniors and residents with limited mobility. The hardware store will go,
as will the French bakery, the cleaners, the CRC resale store (which benefits battered women), the laundromat, and other local businesses -many of them family owned and operated. These stores will not return. The retail space will be reduced by 77% and the new space will be much more costly. These stores are an important resource for the village and
must stay.
Further, the traffic analysis submitted for this project is seriously flawed. The project is more
than 1/2 mile away from the Carlsbad Village Station transit center. Also, the Vehicle Miles
Driven (VMT) is miscalculated. This project will not decrease VMT by ~20,000. Rather, it
will increase VMT by ~20,000. As a result, a full CEQA VMT analysis should have been
conducted.
What's more, this development is inconsistent with the vision documented in the Carlsbad
Village and Barrio Master Plan. Specifically, this plan calls for the village to "serve as the
historic heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad's past and creating a strong sense of
community" in a way that "encourages preservation of each neighborhood's character" and
"provides for the daily needs of nearby residents."
This project will irreversibly alter the character of the Carlsbad Village, increase car traffic
and congestion in an already impacted area and eliminate long-time local businesses that
serve Carlsbad citizens.
I urge you to act in the community's best interest by rejecting the proposed development of
SOP 2023-0014. Please consider the long-term effects such a project would have on the
fabric of our community and the daily lives of its residents.
I would like to also remind you that the community votes. We have a voice and we're
paying attention to decisions being made, supposedly on our behalf. If these decisions are
not in the best interest of the actual citizens of this city, then you can be sure there will be
motivation to make significant changes to its leadership and the departments under its
jurisdiction.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project.
Also, please include this letter as part of the public record for this subject (Project Number
SOP 2023-0014) and the associated Planning Commission meeting set for next week.
Thank you,
Sincerely,
Keith A Hunter 949-244-3943
'@
1CAUTION.i Do not open attachments or click on links unless you reco nize the sender and
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 105 of 476
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Planning
Cynthia Vigeland; � FW: Carlsbad Village Plaza
Friday, May 31, 2024 7:38:48 AM ___ ., ______________________
From: leh2 <1eh2@aol.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 10:08 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Carlsbad Village Plaza
I am strongly opposed to any development that would cause Carlsbad Pharmacy to
move. My daughter needs special meds that other pharmacies can't fill. Thank you,
Anne Lehmunn
Sent from AOL on Android
CAUTION. Do not o en attachments or click on finks unless you rec ';fnfze the sender and
know the content is safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 106 of 476
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject: Date:
Planning
Cynthia Vigeland
Jason Goff
FW: project on CB Village and 15
Friday, May 31, 2024 7:38:23 AM
From: George Alves Jr <galve405@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 9:17 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: project on CB Village and iS
Yes, I/ we support this project. We feel it is the progress for the neighborhood and surrounding communities. Yes is our vote.
George Alves Jr.
760-805-5663
1 Af.!TION.i Do not o1 en attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.!
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 107 of 476
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Planning
Cynthia Vigeland
FW: Redevelopment of Carlsbad Plaza Friday, May 31, 2024 7:39:10 AM
From: Joni Landfield <readtolove@hotmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2024 11:04 PM
To: Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>; Jason Goff <jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Fw: Redevelopment of Carlsbad Plaza
Dear Jason and Members of the Carlsbad Planning Commission,
I would like this email below to be entered in the public record regarding
proposed project SDP 2023-0014.
Thank you.
Joni
From: Joni Landfield <readtolove@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 29, 2024 1:08 PM
To: planning@carlsbadca.gov <planning@carlsbadca.gov>; iason.goff(a)carlsbadca.gov
<iason .goff@ca rlsbadca .gQY>
Subject: Redevelopment of Carlsbad Plaza
Dear Jason and Members of the Carlsbad Planning Commission,
I would like to request your no vote on the project SDP 2023-0014. This is
regarding the development of the property near the 5 freeway and Carlsbad
Village Drive. Why am I suggesting a no vote on this? Carlsbad may in fact need
more housing, This particular location would not seem like the best option for
that. This shopping plaza has been serving Carlsbad residents for years. Not
only local residents, (including seniors,) but other cities as well. Businesses
such as the grocery store, bakery, laundry mat, hardware store etc, are an
integral part of the community and many residents depend on them. There are
people who don't want to or can't get to a large box type hardware store (such
as Home Depot or Lowes.) This is one of the few smaller hardware stores in the
area. Local residents rely on the laundry mat. These small or independently
owned businesses may not survive an indefinite closure, and there is no
guaranteeing they will return ... (despite whatever assurances developers give.)
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 108 of 476
I ask that you vote no on this project to respect the community, Carlsbad
residents, and their needs. Development may be inevitable. Tearing down
businesses that are assisting Carlsbad residents to have a better way of life is
not the way to go about it.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Joni Landfield
!CAUTION.] Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.I
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 109 of 476
From: EJ SHIRING <ejshiring@aol.com>
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2024 11:36 AM
To: Jason Goff <jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov>; Planning <planning@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Carlsbad Village Plaza Plan
I will not be able to attend the planning meeting for the proposed high density business/residential development planned for the smart and final store location currently
on Carlsbad Village Drive. I am a long time resident of Carlsbad at 2730 Chestnut
Avenue and am very opposed to this project. I think it would continue to destroy the
small town village feel of downtown Carlsbad making it look more and more like something out of LA/OC. Please reconsider this signficant overbuilding of that site that
would bring extraordinary traffic so close to the freeway and ruin the small town beach
town feel that we are desperately trying to hold on to!
Regards,
Eric Shiring
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 110 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 111 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 112 of 476
From: To: Subject: Date:
Katherine Smith-Brooks
Eric Lardy; Jason Goff URGENT: Development of Smart And Final area/parcel
Friday, May 31, 2024 6:53:40 PM
For introduction at June 5, 2024 CofC Planning meeting!
Dear Mr. Lardy and Goff,
I am writing regarding the development of the area bounded by CVD and Oak Ave in Carlsbad, the Carlsbad Village
Plaza. I moved to Carlsbad in 1969 following the death ofmy husband a Major USM C in Vietnam for the excellent
schools and community environment. Obviously, there have been many changes, some of them good, some of them
not so good.
The plan to obliterate the area with the Smmi and Final and other convenient shops is beyond my comprehension. Although I live East ofI-5, I shop at this center on a regular basis in and out ofmy trips to "downtown" Carlsbad.
This will not be a Live Well delopment!
Please consider locating elsewhere and building up the businesses already in this parcel ofland!
Thank you for a reply!
Katherine Smith-Brooks MA 3585 Catalina Dr
Carlsbad, CA 92010
The Brooks 619 991-2942 K
858 451-5787 H-RB
Ncami@msn.com
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 113 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 114 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 115 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 116 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 117 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 118 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 119 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 120 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 121 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 122 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 123 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 124 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 125 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 126 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 127 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 128 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 129 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 130 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 131 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 132 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 133 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 134 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 135 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 136 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 137 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 138 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 139 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 140 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 141 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 142 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 143 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 144 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 145 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 146 of 476
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
4
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
4
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
4
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
5
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
6
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
7
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
8
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
1
9
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
0
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
0
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
0
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
0
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
0
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
0
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
0
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
2
0
7
o
f
4
7
6
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 208 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 209 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 210 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 211 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 212 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 213 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 214 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 215 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 216 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 217 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 218 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 219 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 220 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 221 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 222 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 223 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 224 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 225 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 226 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 227 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 228 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 229 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 230 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 231 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 232 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 233 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 234 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 235 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 236 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 237 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 238 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 239 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 240 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 241 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 242 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 243 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 244 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 245 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 246 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 247 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 248 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 249 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 250 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 251 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 252 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 253 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 254 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 255 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 256 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 257 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 258 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 259 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 260 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 261 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 262 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 263 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 264 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 265 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 266 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 267 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 268 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 269 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 270 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 271 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 272 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 273 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 274 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 275 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 276 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 277 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 278 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 279 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 280 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 281 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 282 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 283 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 284 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 285 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 286 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 287 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 288 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 289 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 290 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 291 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 292 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 293 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 294 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 295 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 296 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 297 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 298 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 299 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 300 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 301 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 302 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 303 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 304 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 305 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 306 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 307 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 308 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 309 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 310 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 311 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 312 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 313 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 314 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 315 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 316 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 317 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 318 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 319 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 320 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 321 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 322 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 323 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 324 of 476
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
3
2
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
3
2
6
o
f
4
7
6
·.. ···'· ... · ... -.·.· ..... · ......... -��-���==�==� ·--· �---.. ··-· ·•--·-···-··-�---·-··---------····-------.···• .. ··•"·---=· ·=··=•··=· -=�- �~���� =��========�==·· ,, .... _._. •... ···· .. ··
Carlsbad Village Mixed Use Carlsbad Village Drive AMENDED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
proposed .d.e..v.e.k2p.I11..e.nt_,..,,.,.�---/"-�.;�:,��.-.�:<'full median as Village entry statement ) July 2024 -"'-""-"-�NO PUBLIC LEFT TURN LANE SOUTH THROUGH THE MEDIAN 7 1-·-···:;:.::_-··--;:::__ --- ,,--._ ONKY 17.. �OL�VE'3!_0R ��RGENCY VEHl�LES ONLY5ft phys1ca1------.. r-barrief� '•. /" '
page 3of5
338
�=��� CWJ, �K'9,· i'4-''I
parking...___/� I trash-r , enclosure1
I iJ service1s delivery·! parkinglJ for apts ,,_
�CCESSTO 'ARKING LEVEL
� I I' � I \�I__;__;:: rf1
gas ··,\ J isl�l....._ \'b\ bike locke�s '\ \ \ '/ overhead \ "' \ trellis__, \ \ I \ \ \ ,,. ·m,.\
I,. ..• &.,: ..... <;;.,:; ••••• ,,s::: ..• <J i \ affl \
7-11
Cl::ik-i:=:trP.P.t
Il / BACKSIDE OF AJPARTMENTS '1_1 FACADES �EGMENTED& NO OPENINGS ! '
j Imagine
6ckers Carlsba.d w/bverh I ead north ll:" ff\� /trellis f7T'7
EL /' ,jII /
w
\ / SITE PLAN
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
3
2
7
o
f
4
7
6
150FT +/-OFF CVD
tall st trees 10 scft!:n bldg heights physical barrier _____§IJ2p_1___ l Shop 2 � Restaurant l Facade A I Facade B L 4 stones 3 stories 11§.!LL
CVD EDGE -WEST -MIXED USE BLDG a rich mixture of bldg facades with Village character
Imagine Carlsbad July 2024
Shop3 FacadeC 116ft
CVD EDGE -EAST -MIXED USE BLDG co,.,.,1111u.I,.I;on J,0,202, a rich mixture of bldg facades with Village character
Rec deck behind roof edges accessed from 4th floor AMENDED APARTMENT BUILDING
·-d���-':.\LL:c::-:-:::,oa�eroa��'I'.�@N · ... ��-�:pw 3&4 sToR1�9 ___ -··-•,"""""-"'"'"" ·--·--··-···'--------·---·•· •---� -•-----�-·
l Shop 2 l Restaurant
•Facade A ' Facade B �� 4 stories 3 stories j 118ft l..-CVD EDGE -WEST - MIXED USE BLDG a rich mixture of bldg facades with Village character
page 4of5
339
SITE ACCESS
FROM CVD RIGHT IN / OUT ONLY
. l Shop 3 l Shop 4 +--·-�Caf�---·--
1 Facade C •Facade D Facade E I 116ft
CVD EDGE -EAST -MIXED USE BLDG Concept illustration June2024 a rich mixture of bldg facades with Village character
(Carlsbad Village Mixed Use) amended plan for buildings
VIEWS FROM CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
3
2
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
3
2
9
o
f
4
7
6
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 330 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 331 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 332 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 333 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 334 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 335 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 336 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 337 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 338 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 339 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 340 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 341 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 342 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 343 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 344 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 345 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 346 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 347 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 348 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 349 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 350 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 351 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 352 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 353 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 354 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 355 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 356 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 357 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 358 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 359 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 360 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 361 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 362 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 363 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 364 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 365 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 366 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 367 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 368 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 369 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 370 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 371 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 372 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 373 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 374 of 476
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Jason QzjeJ
.eJ.annlag Eric Lardy
Please reject SDP 2023-0014 (DEV2023-0078) -CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
Wednesday, July 17, 2024 12:28:21 PM
Dear Planning Commission,
Thank you for continuing this issue to the meeting tonight. As a 21-year homeowner and resident in Olde Carlsbad, I am urging you to DENY the proposed development that will eliminate Smart & Final, Denault's Ace Hardware and many other cherished local businesses. This project is so far out of scope for the downtown area and will be detriment to the quality of life for the residents of the area.
Rather than rehash all of the points that others have expressed, I URGE you to READ all of the comments to determine how the citizens you serve feel. The overwhelming sentiment is that this is the wrong location for a project of this scale.
Please do the right thing and DO NOT move this project forward. The people have spoken. LISTEN TO THEM!
Regards, Jason Oziel Tamarack Ave Resident
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.
384
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 375 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 376 of 476
July 16, 2024
Carlsbad Village Mixed Use
SDP-2023-0014
RE: COMMENTS AND CLARIFICATION REQUEST FOR SEVERAL STAFF FINDINGS IN THEIR REPORT
Honorable Planning Chairman and Commissioners,
Ther some items I am requesting clarification or additional scope of work or specific Conditions of Approval be
added to the Project and completed before the Planning Commission approves this information. This is too
important of a decision to not have supporting accurate data or scientific facts. This project affects all Carlsbad
Residents accessing the "Village" restaurants and shopping from Carlsbad Village Drive and mostly the small
business owners.
I am a Carlsbad resident who was asked by some local family friends to review the information about the subject
Project. I shop at Smart & Final and Ace Hardware to support local businesses.
This research is provided for them and explaining this in non-Engineering or Planning terms for their understanding.
I apologize for the late comments, however; their frustration over the explanations was voiced to me. I am not
being compensated or retained for my time.
I am genuinely concerned about the impact of this Project at the entry to the Village area. The lack of parking for
the Project is a real problem regardless of Overlay Zone allowances.
Negative Dec. issued by City Staff:
My planning experience is limited and most of my public speaking and input are about Construction procedures,
however; the power consumption seems to be overlooked in the analysis which is a component of CEQA. The
current power load for 12 individual businesses is approximately 3,000 amps at 240/120v conversion is 720kw. The
proposed development is 218 DU meters x 1 00a = 21,800a at 120v conversion to 2,616kw excluding power for
Market and Restaurant. The new Project will require 7X more power than the existing center. The power from
SDG&E is not from a 100% renewable source, this means the power affects natural resources and may not be
subject to Neg Dec. It is also unclear whether the Development will utilize natural gas service or completely
electric.
Energy
Would the project
Less Than Potentially Significant Less-Than Significant With Mitigation Significant No Item Impact Description lmoact lncorporatad Impact Impact
A Result In potentially No significant environmental Impact impact due to wasteful, Inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, durlng project construction or operation?
B Conflict with or obstruct a No state or local plan for Impact renewable energy or energv elliclencv?
I was unable to determine from the City Staff file if there is any Solar Panel or Battery Backup System to at
least cover parking area lighting, common area lighting or parking garage to reduce consumption as much
feasible and reduce load on SDG&E Power Grid. Did the Developer provide a power analysis and was a Will
Serve letter from SDG&E secured? Additionally, the power upgrade delineated may not reflect the size and
intensity of the power needed as larger overhead utility lines to feed the project.
386
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 377 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 378 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 379 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 380 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 381 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 382 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 383 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 384 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 385 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 386 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 387 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 388 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 389 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 390 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 391 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 392 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 393 of 476
�ugust 15, 2023
Carlsbad City Planning Commission
City Hall -Council Chamber
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive
Carlsbad, California 92008
RE: Carlsbad Village Plaza proposed development
Ladies & Gentlemen:
City of Carlsbad
AUG 16 ·2023 .
Community Development
Department
I am writing in regardto the proposed development for the property of Carlsbad
Village Plaza justwest of Interstate 5. I am vehemently opposed to this plan!!
I am a lifetime resident of Carlsbad and in general have found our growth to be
well done and planned.
Unfortunately in the last fevv)r�ars 11'.lore and more of our quaint, "hometown style"
downtown are� has been taken over by overly large (particularly tall) new
buildings. These have obscured the once welcoming area and made it appear more
and more like a big city is overtaking my hometown. This proposal not only
eliminates the one remaining small hardware store that everyone (including me)
relies on for many items, but also the only remaining ''grocery" store in the area.
The idea of a five story building as you get off the freeway is repugnant and should not be allowed. Calling this "transit oriented" is just another way of saying
. the developer wants to use every loophok possible to cram more units into a small
space.
I urge you to reject this plan and look at something more in line with our small town image that has been in place since the incorporation of Carlsbad.
Yours truly, a atiJI; �
Rebecca A. Doty-Rogers
2292 Bryant Drive Carlsbad, CA 92,008
29
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 394 of 476
From:Allegra Frost
To:Cynthia Vigeland
Cc:Eric Lardy
Subject:FW: Regarding Carlsbad Village Plaza
Date:Monday, August 26, 2024 5:03:51 PM
CV Mixed Use Project – public input
From: Michelle Adams <michelle.adams.atgti@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 1:09:38 PM
To: Keith Blackburn <keith.blackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; Melanie Burkholder
<melanie.burkholder@carlsbadca.gov>; Carolyn Luna <carolyn.luna@carlsbadca.gov>; Priya Bhat-
Patel <priya.bhat-patel@carlsbadca.gov>; Teresa Acosta <teresa.acosta@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Regarding Carlsbad Village Plaza
Dear Carlsbad Planning Commision Members / Mayor / City Council Members,
I am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large,
mixed-use high-density residential complex. (Project Number SDP 2023-0014)
I have lived in Leucadia and Carlsbad for 50 years.
I frequent the thrift shops, the Ace Hardware, Smart and Final, the French pastry shop
about 2-3 times a month--especially Ace because Home Depot and Lowes swallow up the
little mom and pop shops--and okay, twice in my life, have been to the Golden Tee. Andyou just have to have a legit dive bar! :)
I am SO upset and disappointed that our City’s planning process does not give its citizens
adequate time to identify issues and register an appeal against key decisions, even if those
decisions are based on significantly flawed information.
I understand that state housing laws restrict your ability to deny this project. However, you
still have the ability to make changes to it. I ask you to PLEASE consider these impacts--
we're becoming a generic area that is losing it's charm...it's called the village for a reason:
Irreversible loss of essential services.
The Plaza includes an affordable grocery store, a hardware store, a pharmacy,
multiple restaurants/cafes, a cleaners, discount stores, and other businesses. Once
these are gone, they won’t be coming back.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 395 of 476
Creates hardship for vulnerable residents.
The demolition of the Plaza will create hardship for nearby residents, including the
estimated 3,500 seniors and other fixed-income residents in the Village/Barrio area.
Many do not drive and rely on local shopping. The removal of the grocery store will
create
a food desert: “an urban area in which it is difficult to buy affordable or good-quality
fresh food.”
More traffic congestion on Carlsbad Village Drive and side streets.
The project will lead to a huge increase in “vehicle miles traveled” (VMT) for two
reasons: 1) current shopping center customers will need to drive further for the same
services and 2) the project will add 218 new residences in a highly concentrated
space.
This additional traffic will further clog area streets and add to greenhouse gas
emissions, creating negative environmental impacts.
Inadequate notification.
Public outreach was minimal, and many of the City’s own requirements were not met
(e.g., disclosure of square footage, maximum height, the review/approval process,
and timelines). Despite these deficiencies, city staff approved the outreach, and now
thousands
of people who were not made aware of the project have signed petitions, submitted
public comment letters, and overflowed the council chambers at three consecutive
Planning Commission meetings. Clearly the outreach failed.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 396 of 476
No time for the public to react.
The public is given only a 10 day appeal period for many of the key decisions related
to this project. Due to the heavy handed state housing laws, the public has no legal
recourse if an appeal is not lodged within this ridiculously short appeal period.
Loss of decision-making authority.
By the time projects like this reach the decision-making bodies (Planning Commission
or City Council), city staff have waived public outreach, exempted environment
impact reporting requirements, and made all of the key decisions related to approval.
Will you please consider the following??
Send the project back for additional public review.
Do a proper public outreach that gives all affected residents an opportunity
to learn more about the project and provide feedback.
Send the traffic study (aka VMT Analysis) back for rework.
Demand that the study includes a realistic assessment of the added mileage created
by Plaza customers who will have to drive further for similar services. The faulty
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 397 of 476
assessment is a key reason why a full environmental impact report was not required.
Eliminate the need for a 5-story height waiver.
The site has plenty of room to accommodate the apartment buildings without
exceeding the City’s 4-story height limit. Options include residential over retail and
underground parking. Don’t pollute our skyline!
Be consistent with transit-oriented development.
This project was approved in part because it’s considered transit-oriented. Reduce or
eliminate the massive parking garage. Encourage alternative modes of
transportation, such as car-sharing and free transit passes to the residents. Eliminate
exclusive parking
for residents.
Combine the site into one parcel.
The site application proposes dividing the lot into two parcels, one for the residential
units and one for the commercial retail. However, there is nothing stopping the
developer from turning the commercial parcel into more residential units once the
original
project is approved. The Planning Department will issue a Notice of Restriction to
prevent this from happening, but this restriction can be easily waived later. This is not
good enough - combine the parcels now!
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 398 of 476
Remove the CEQA exemption power of the City Planner.
This is what got us into this mess in the first place. For large, complex projects of this
type, the decision to exempt CEQA requirements should be made by the Planning
Commission at a public hearing.
Update VMT Analysis Guidelines.
The current guidelines are ambiguous and incomplete, allowing blatantly incorrect
calculations to be approved.
No bait and switch.
Scrutinize the policy that allows staff to approve up to 100% project changes after
approval.
This is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly alter the character of the
Carlsbad Village, the character that I and so many residents wish to preserve. Consider the
long-term effects such a project will have on the daily lives of our residents, especially the
undue hardship to the many seniors trying to age in place with dignity as well as those with
limited mobility.
In light of these points, I urge you to act in your constituents best interest regarding this
proposed development.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 399 of 476
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Michelle Adams
2846 Castilla Place
Carlsbad, CA 92009760-585-8286
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 400 of 476
Jason Goff
From:
To:
Subject:
Get Outlook for iOS
Jason.Goff@carlsbadca.gov
Jason Goff
FW: Save the Carlsbad Village Plaza
From: Dr Yvonne K Scarlett <drykscarlett@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2024 5:19:45 PM
To: Keith Blackburn <keith.blackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; Melanie Burkholder <melanie.burkholder@carlsbadca.gov>;
Carolyn Luna <carolyn.luna@carlsbadca.gov>; Priya Bhat-Patel <priya.bhat-patel@carlsbadca.gov>; Teresa Acosta
<teresa.acosta@carlsbadca.gov>; Drykscarlett@gmail.com <Drykscarlett@gmail.com>
Subject: Save the Carlsbad Village Plaza
Dear Carlsbad Planning Commision Members / Mayor / City Council Members,
I am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed-use high
density residential complex. (Project Number SOP 2023-0014)
I am a Carlsbad resident of 8 years and a business owner for approximately 11years.
I am upset and disappointed that our City's planning process does not give its citizens adequate time to
identify issues and register an appeal against key decisions, even if those decisions are based on
significantly flawed information.
I understand that state housing laws restrict your ability to deny this project. However, you still have the
ability to make changes to it. I ask you to consider:
1. the irreversible loss of essential services. The Plaza includes an affordable grocery store, a hardware
store, a pharmacy, multiple restaurants/cafes, a cleaners, discount stores, and other businesses. Once
these are gone, they won't be coming back.
This would create hardship for vulnerable residents. The demolition of the Plaza will create hardship for
nearby residents, including the estimated 3,500 seniors and other fixed-income residents in the
Village/Barrio area. Many do not drive and rely on local shopping. The removal of the grocery store will
create a food desert: "an urban area in which it is difficult to buy affordable or good-quality fresh food."
2.More traffic congestion on Carlsbad Village Drive and side streets. The project will lead to a huge
increase in "vehicle miles traveled" (VMT) for two reasons: 1) current shopping center customers will
need to drive further for the same services and 2) the project will add 218 new residences in a highly
concentrated space. This additional traffic will further clog area streets and add to greenhouse gas
emissions, creating negative environmental impacts.
3.Inadequate notification. Public outreach was minimal, and many of the City's own requirements
were not met (e.g., disclosure of square footage, maximum height, the review/approval process, and
timelines). Despite these deficiencies, city staff approved the outreach, and now thousands of people
who were not made aware of the project have signed petitions, submitted public comment letters, and
1 Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 401 of 476
overflowed the council chambers at three consecutive Planning Commission meetings. Clearly the
outreach failed.
No time for the public to react. The public is given only a 1 Oday appeal period for many of the key
decisions related to this project. Due to the heavy handed state housing laws, the public has no legal
recourse if an appeal is not lodged within this ridiculously short appeal period.
This process is inherently unfair. I ask the City Council members to join our fight.
Would you please send the project back for additional public review. Do a proper public outreach that
gives all affected residents an opportunity to learn more about the project and provide feedback.
Send the traffic study (aka VMT Analysis) back for rework. Would you demand that the study includes a
realistic assessment of the added mileage created by Plaza customers who will have to drive further for
similar services. The faulty assessment is a key reason why a full environmental impact report was not
required.
Please, pleasec eliminate the need for a 5-story height waiver. The site has plenty of room to
accommodate the apartment buildings without exceeding the City's 4-story height limit. Options include
residential over retail and underground parking. Please don't pollute our skyline!
Can we be consistent with transit-oriented development. This project was approved in part because it's
considered transit-oriented. Please, please, reduce or eliminate the massive parking garage, and
encourage alternative modes of transportation, such as car-sharing and free transit passes to the
residents. Eliminate exclusive parking for residents.
Combine the site into one parcel. The site application proposes dividing the lot into two parcels, one for
the residential units and one for the commercial retail. However, there is nothing stopping the developer
from turning the commercial parcel into more residential units once the original project is approved. The
Planning Department will issue a Notice of Restriction to prevent this from happening, but this restriction
can be easily waived later. This is not good enough - Please combine the parcels now!
Remove the CEQA exemption power of the City Planner. This is what got us into this mess in the first
place. For large, complex projects of this type, the decision to exempt CEQA requirements should be
made by the Planning Commission at a public hearing.
Update VMT Analysis Guidelines. The current guidelines are ambiguous and incomplete, allowing
blatantly incorrect calculations to be approved.
No bait and switch. Scrutinize the policy that allows staff to approve up to 100% project changes after
approval.
I understand that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will irreversibly
alter the character of the Carlsbad Village, which is why I chose to live here, the character that I and so
many residents wish to preserve. Consider the long-term effects such a project will have on the daily
lives of our residents, especially the undue hardship to the many seniors trying to age in place with
dignity as well as those with limited mobility.
In light of these points, I urge you to act in your constituents best interest regarding this proposed
development..
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank you.
2 Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 402 of 476
Sincerely,
Dr. Yvonne I< Scarlett
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless ou recognize the sender and know the content i
safe.
3 Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 403 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 404 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 405 of 476
From: Priya Bhat-Patel <Priya.Bhat-Patel@carlsbadca.gov>
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 4:57 PM
To: City Clerk <Clerk@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Fwd: Please Save Carlsbad Village Plaza
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Andrea Ryon <aryon58@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 3:28:25 PM
To: Keith Blackburn <keith.blackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; Carolyn Luna
<carolyn.luna@carlsbadca.gov>; Priya Bhat-Patel <priya.bhat-patel@carlsbadca.gov>; Melanie
Burkholder <melanie.burkholder@carlsbadca.gov>; Teresa Acosta
<teresa.acosta@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Please Save Carlsbad Village Plaza
Dear Mayor Keith Blackburn and Carlsbad City Council members:
My husband and I are strongly opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village
Plaza into a large, mixed-use high-density residential complex. We have lived in Carlsbad
(92008) for nearly 40 years, moving here from the east coast in 1985. We saw it as "paradise"
to say the least! Though we understand growth and change is inevitable, the proposed
redevelopment of Carlsbad Village Plaza seems drastically out of place for our city.
The existing Carlsbad Village Plaza is so important to our daily life in this city! We shop and use
services there every single week! Having the True Value 2 -3 minutes away from our home has
been a lifesaver so many times as we needed just one nail or screw or whatever to finish a
project. The next closest hardware store is Home Depot, 12 - 15 minutes away. And having a
cleaners, full grocery store, thrift store, discount store, bakery, etc. etc. all in one place is so
convenient for us and all of the nearby residents, including many seniors and low income
families west of I-5.
In addition, we believe traffic congestion will be much worse with high density housing on both
sides of Carlsbad Village Drive.
We strongly urge you to please do all that you can to oppose or at least limit this development.
In our opinion, it is not what Carlsbad citizens want for their city!
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Roger and Andrea Ryon
1686 Brady Circle
Carlsbad 92008
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 406 of 476
From:Council Internet Email
To:Eric Lardy
Subject:FW: Carlsbad Village Plaza - Project Number SDP2023-0014
Date:Tuesday, September 10, 2024 9:01:05 AM
From: Karen Hackett <karen@tirageart.com>
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 4:49 PM
To: Council Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>; Keith Blackburn
<keith.blackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; Priya Bhat-Patel <priya.bhat-patel@carlsbadca.gov>; Melanie
Burkholder <melanie.burkholder@carlsbadca.gov>; Carolyn Luna <carolyn.luna@carlsbadca.gov>;
Teresa Acosta <teresa.acosta@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Carlsbad Village Plaza - Project Number SDP2023-0014
Dear City Council Members / Planning Commission
This letter is written in opposition to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village
Plaza into a large, mixed-use high-density residential complex. (Project Number SDP 2023-
0014)
I moved to Carlsbad in 2017 from the Pasadena area to live close to family, who have been
Carlsbad residents for more than twenty years. We were drawn to the charming village
beach life, which we have seen evolve into the urban problems which currently plague Los
Angeles and other California cities such as increased traffic, homelessness, and crimeassociated with selected government sanctioned housing developments such as Windsor
Pointe.
Although, I concur that the Carlsbad Village Plaza could use a facelift, the current proposed
development would drastically alter the character of the Village in several areas:1. Loss of essential services: grocery store, hardware store, bakery and more which
would probably never be replaced due to higher rents.2. More traffic congestion on Carlsbad Village Drive and side streets. The project will
lead to a huge increase in “vehicle miles traveled” (VMT) for two reasons: 1) currentshopping center customers will need to drive further for the same services and 2) the
project will add 218 new residences in a highly concentrated space. This additional trafficwill further clog area streets and add to greenhouse gas emissions, creating negative
environmental impacts.3. Inadequate notification. Public outreach was minimal, and many of the City’s own
requirements were not met (e.g., disclosure of square footage, maximum height, thereview/approval process, and timelines). Despite these deficiencies, city staff approved the
outreach, and now thousands of people who were not made aware of the project havesigned petitions, submitted public comment letters, and overflowed the council chambers at
three consecutive Planning Commission meetings. Clearly the outreach failed.
I understand that state housing laws restrict your ability to deny this project. However, you
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 407 of 476
From: Scott Chadwick <Scott.Chadwick@carlsbadca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 1:24 PM
To: Sheila Cobian <Sheila.Cobian@carlsbadca.gov>; Jeff Murphy <Jeff.Murphy@carlsbadca.gov>; Cindie
McMahon <Cindie.McMahon@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Fwd: CVMU and related PowerPoint and discussion/questions
Providing this ex parte communication related to the sept 24 city council mgr.
Scott Chadwick
City Manager
City of Carlsbad
(Sent from my iPhone)
From: Teresa Acosta <Teresa.Acosta@carlsbadca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 11:47:18 AM
To: Scott Chadwick <Scott.Chadwick@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Fwd: CVMU and related PowerPoint and discussion/questions
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Teresa Acosta <Teresa.Acosta@carlsbadca.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, September 11, 2024 11:42:37 AM
To: Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: CVMU and related PowerPoint and discussion/questions
Received. Thank you very much!
Teresa
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Steve Linke <splinke@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 5:50:55 PM
To: Teresa Acosta <teresa.acosta@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: CVMU and related PowerPoint and discussion/questions
Hi Teresa,
The PowerPoint for this morning's ex parte meeting is attached. It leads to a number of
questions that can be asked of staff and/or the City Attorney, which I have included below.
Sorry, it is difficult to write concise questions without providing background/rationale, so
this is mostly just a reflection of the PowerPoint (not just questions). I hope you can read
through all of this and pick out the things you want to ask.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 408 of 476
Enhanced stakeholder outreach deficiencies (Council Policy 84)
Who makes the final determination that a developer has complied with Council Policy 84--
staff or the decision-makers (City Council/Planning Commission)? If staff decides, which
staff member(s)? When during the development review process is this decision made? Can
this decision be reversed by the decision-makers with a requirement for further public
review, or is this a unilateral and non-appealable staff decision that is already final before
any public meetings are held?
Council Policy 84 requires that Mailed Notices include the square footages and maximum
heights of buildings. Where in the CVMU Mailed Notice were these required components
included for the residential and parking garage buildings?
Council Policy 84 requires that Public Outreach Information/Materials describe the
"review/approval process" and the "expected timeframe of project construction"? The only
evident public outreach information produced for CVMU was a website with the URL snail
mailed to property owners within 600 feet of the project site. Where on that website were
these required components included?
Council Policy 84 also requires that staff disclose projects subject to Enhanced
Stakeholder Outreach and the contact information of the applicant, which they typically do
by highlighting them (bold italics) on the monthly online Planning Pending Applications
report. Where on the reports is the CVMU project highlighted and developer contact
information included?
Council Policy 84 requires that the developer submit an Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach
Report demonstrating engagement with the public (not just informing) and commitments
or follow-up actions to be taken arising from the engagement. On 2/20/2024, the planner
on the project, Mr. Goff, wrote an email to City Planner Lardy expressing concern that the
developer had done nothing beyond publishing a web site with no follow-up. After that,
there were apparently two undocumented meetings with business associations not
broadly advertised with residents--one with the Carlsbad Village Association and one with
the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce (held on weekdays during work hours with no list of
invitees/participants or reports of feedback received/actions taken). In staff's opinion, did
the CVMU public outreach and the submitted Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach Report
meet the "letter" of all of the requirements of Council Policy 84, including engaging and
reporting on commitments in response to public input? Did the report meet the "spirit" of
Council Policy 84?
Policy 84 states: “Within two years of the initial effective date of this policy, the City
Planner shall review and report to the City Council as to its effectiveness, and provide a
recommendation whether to continue the policy in its current or modified form.” The policy
was adopted in 2017. Have any follow-up reviews occurred? Regardless, we would like a
fresh review of the policy to be placed on a future council agenda.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 409 of 476
Mixed-use lot configuration and requirement to co-develop residential and
commercial
Carlsbad's Density Bonus Law Informational Bulletin states on Page 6 of 7: “The developer
must provide sufficient documentation justifying why the city’s established development
standard(s) or design regulation(s) physically preclude construction of the project and why
the waiver(s) is necessary. Sufficient documentation may include a written explanation of
the physical constraints accompanied with an exhibit showing the site and developable
envelope.” The applicant is apparently claiming that the physical constraints of the project
site require the height-based development waiver to build five residential stories. However,
the project is currently split between a commercial lot and a residential lot, and the
acreages of both lots were included in the density bonus calculation, even though all of the
residential units are only on the residential lot. Why do we have to allow developers to
include separate non-residential lots (with lot lines of their choosing) in their residential
density bonus calculations? If the applicant insists on having two separate lots, shouldn't
the density bonus only apply to the residential lot, as it does in other cities like Menlo Park?
Where is the documentation described in the bulletin showing the developable envelope
and physical constraints, requiring the development waiver to five stories?
If, for some reason, it is not possible to restrict the density bonus to the acreage of only the
residential lot--given the fact that the applicant has presented this project as an integrated
mixed-use development, can council require consolidation of the lots into a single lot,
which was done for Hope Apartments across the street? This will help ensure that the
commercial component is never converted to residential, which has happened with other
developments (albeit not related to a density bonus)?
Also, can council add a "condition of approval" that the commercial component must be
developed before or concurrent with the residential component (Jeff Murphy said that the
City Attorney is exploring this possibility)?
CVMU Condition of Approval #12 is a "Notice of Restriction" and Jeff Murphy mentioned a
"dedication," which have been suggested as things that will tie the lots together to
preclude future conversion of the commercial lot to residential. However, the City Planner
appears to have unilateral authority to waive the restriction--apparently as well as any
other conditions of approval. Can council modify Condition of Approval #12 to remove the
City Planner's unilateral authority to waive restrictions/conditions without further
public/decision-maker input?
Can/should Carlsbad's Density Bonus Ordinance be amended to clarify that it only applies
to the residential lots within mixed-use developments?
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 410 of 476
Public health exception to CEQA exemption
CEQA § 65589.5 states: "Exemptions should not be granted if the project would have an
adverse impact on public health or safety based on a preponderance of evidence." Some
public health concerns have been raised about the project by the public. One concern is
that the demolition of the grocery store and pharmacy will contribute to a "food desert" and
"pharmacy desert" in the Village area, where there is a high concentration of seniors on
fixed incomes--many without the ability to drive to distant stores. Another concern is "sick
building syndrome," in that the proximity to I-5 and Carlsbad Village Drive is more suitable
for commercial development and will require that the windows of at least some of the
residential units be kept closed to achieve minimum noise, and possibly air quality,
standards, necessitating artificial air conditioning equipment and the related noise and
GHG impacts. Do any of these concerns meet the "preponderance of evidence" standard
(not a super-high standard) under CEQA § 65589.5, such that a full CEQA analysis should
be required--rather than the exemption granted by the City Planner?
Inappropriate VMT screen-out and CEQA exemption
Both OPR and Carlsbad VMT analysis guidelines (and OPR staff) emphasize that usage of
the efficiency metric-based VMT maps are the strongly preferred method. The project site
is in a "95% of city average" zone, which would have required mitigation down to the "85%
of city average" CEQA threshold adopted by council. Why was the developer allowed to
switch to a "net VMT change" method instead to avoid the significant environmental
impact?
Why are developers who benefit from the VMT map method allowed to use that, while
other developers are allowed to use customized methods that avoid that method? Without
consistency within and between projects, VMT is meaningless.
Both OPR and Carlsbad VMT analysis guidelines (and OPR staff) emphasize that, when the
"net VMT change" method is used, the "areawide" impacts of a project must be assessed,
including diversion of trips, to account for total environmental impacts. Why was the
developer allowed to subtract all of the mileage going to the existing shopping center from
its new residential mileage, even though those trips are only be diverted elsewhere?
Staff has claimed that, after demolition of the shopping center, all of the substitute stores
will become responsible for the diverted mileage. As more and more residential
developments replace retail, how can the city make all of the remaining retail stores
responsible for the diverted mileage?
The VMT analysis guidelines also state that the "proximity to transit" screen-out does not
apply if a project includes "high levels of parking" (defeats the purpose of transit-oriented
development), which is defined, at a minimum, as the regular city minimum requirement.
CVMU's five-story parking garage for residential and surface lot for commercial parking
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 411 of 476
both include more spaces than required, so why was the developer allowed to claim the
transit screen when the "high levels of parking" exception should have been applied?
Why is the developer being allowed to use their alleged proximity to transit to avoid CEQA,
but then also being allowed to build a five-story parking garage (they should not get both
benefits)?
We think it is important to hire a new consultant/staff that will interpret the guidelines
using common sense and in an environmentally conscious way--not just work to help
developers avoid mitigation. We also think it is important to revisit the VMT analysis
guidelines to make things more clear, and to eliminate the ability of developers/staff to
cherry-pick methods that artificially reduce the observed impacts. These topics should be
placed on a future council agenda.
Other CEQA determination questions - cumulative impact
CEQA § 15065(a)(3) states that, even if a project will not individually have a significant
effect on the environment, cumulative impacts may be considerable when "...viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.” No detailed cumulative impact analysis seems to
have been done that includes other specific projects. Instead, the staff report simply
claims that the project will pay impact fees and comply with all laws, regulations, and
guidelines as "proof" that there will be no cumulative impact. Where is the cumulative
impact study?
Should the city's development review process require more stringent study of cumulative
impacts?
Other CEQA determination questions - process
The current municipal code authorizes the City Planner to unilaterally grant CEQA
exemptions--even to this type of large, complex project. The CVMU exemption included
548 pages of technical CEQA-related information. Anybody who wants to challenge that
decision apparently has to continuously monitor the city website where the decisions are
posted, and then hire a CEQA attorney and experts and file a written appeal within 10 days
that includes all of topics of appeal, as well as all of the underlying evidence to be
considered, plus a $900 fee. The City Attorney said she would get back to me on this topic,
but I am still waiting to hear whether the above interpretation is accurate, and how it can
considered reasonable, let alone even feasible.
Martin Danner wrote emails during the 10-day appeal period, which were largely dismissed
by staff. Now that the 10-day appeal period has passed, case law suggests that third
parties cannot appeal to the courts. Can council remand the City Planner's decision back
for additional review with a requirement for further public review, or is this a unilateral and
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 412 of 476
non-appealable staff decision?
We feel that the code that allows this power of the City Planner and the associated appeal
process needs to be amended and are requesting that it be placed on a future council
agenda.
Ability of the city to impose Conditions of Approval
While state laws now significantly restrict jurisdictions from denying or reducing unit
numbers on residential projects, HCD guidance states: "...[The Housing Accountability
Act] does not prohibit a local government from exercising its authority to condition the
approval of a project, but rather provides limitations and conditions for the application of
certain conditions. Specifically, the HAA limits the application of conditions that lower the
residential density of the project, and...conditions that would have a substantial adverse
impact on the viability or affordability of providing those units..." So, can't council impose
conditions of approval, as long as they do not reduce the number of units or make the
project physically or financially infeasible?
Design changes
Is there any restriction on council asking the applicant to voluntarily make design
changes?
HCD guidance goes on to state: "[Design change-related conditions of approval] should be
analyzed for their effect on density and project feasibility (for affordable projects)..." Given
that the guidance actually contemplates design changes, doesn't that mean that at least
some design changes could be mandated by council, as long as analysis shows that they
do not reduce the unit number or affect feasibility?
Although there is some case law that prevents jurisdictions from mandating certain design
changes that would eliminate the need for development waivers, does that mean that no
such design changes can be mandated? For example, one appellate case concluded that a
city could not require removal of an amenity like a courtyard, in order to build a shorter
building. However, if a proposed design change did remove the proposed CVMU
courtyards but eliminated the need to build five stories, could that be allowable? Show the
case law that removes all ability to impose design changes.
Sample design changes
• Increase commercial square footage to allow larger grocery store to help avoid food
desert
• Build residential over retail ("vertical" mixed-use)
• Underground parking (apparently physically and financially feasible for Hope
Apartments across the street)
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 413 of 476
• Reduce or eliminate the 5-story parking garage (consistent with the transit-based
VMT screen)
Sample conditions of approval
Hilltop Group, Inc. v. County of San Diego (Fourth Appellate District opinion published
2/16/2024): A project was granted a CEQA categorical exemption by County planning staff,
but the approval “...included 65 conditions of approval in its decision to ensure that
the…Project’s environmental impacts remained less than significant.” In other words, even
acknowledging staff's CEQA exemption of CVMU, including the VMT screen out, the city
should be allowed to impose conditions of approval that ensure environmental impacts
remain less than significant. Examples:
• Unbundled parking/reduce parking
• Provide car-sharing/alternative modes of travel
• Free or subsidized transit passes to residents
• Other vehicle ownership/usage reducers
• Parking garage parking restricted only to residents
Best regards,
Steve
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 414 of 476
still have the ability to make changes to it, such as:
1. Send the project back for additional public review. Do a proper public outreach that
gives all affected residents an opportunity to learn more about the project and provide
feedback.2. Eliminate the need for a 5-story height waiver. The site has plenty of room to
accommodate the apartment buildings without exceeding the City’s 4-story height limit.Options include residential over retail and underground parking. Don’t turn into Santa
Monica and keep the Village, a Village.3. No bait and switch. Scrutinize the policy that allows staff to approve up to 100% project
changes after approval.
I understand that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will
have a negative and irreversible impact on the character of the Carlsbad Village. Consider
the long-term effects such a project will have on the daily lives of our residents, especially
the undue hardship to the many seniors trying to age in place with dignity as well as those
with limited mobility.
In light of these points, I urge you to act in the best interest of the community and oppose or
at least limit this proposed development.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank
you.
Sincerely,
Karen Hackett
3311 James DriveCarlsbad, CA 92008
818.331.0389
--
https://www.tirageartwarehouse.com
626.405.1020
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and
know the content is safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 415 of 476
From:Council Internet Email
Cc:Eric Lardy
Subject:FW: Save the Plaza
Date:Tuesday, September 10, 2024 9:00:22 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Penny Johnson <pennyofcbad@icloud.com>
Sent: Monday, September 9, 2024 6:08 PM
To: Council Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Save the Plaza
Mayor Blackburn and Carlsbad City Council members , I am writing to you all again because many of us ,over the
years, have felt a disconnect between those we have elected and the citizens of Carlsbad.
It seems the promises and platitudes that are given to us are lost when developers and big business come to town.
Do you not see the disconnect between what our vision formula for the “ charming village by the sea” is and what
Carlsbad has become and continues to do so? Do you really think it is anything more than money the developers
come for?
What a sorry “charming “ village Carlsbad has become…..and all for the almighty dollar. Not because it gives your
citizens a better living environment…..it is all about the that flows into the city coffers …..and that includes city
council coffers.
Bringing in tourists is a goal for Carlsbad ….but the throngs of tourists are a detriment to the citizens because it
denies us the quality of life we came for and have contributed to and worked towards.
The Carlsbadth Plaza is just another example of losing our lifestyle and future lifestyle.
We need a hardware store, pharmacy ,thrift store and large market that offers the things we have to have so wedo
not have to get on the freeway . Indeed, some of can walk or ride a bike to the Plaza. For us senior citizens it is a
welcome opportunity to stay in the village.
You are denying the Barrio and its’ population an easy access, for many do not have a car.
I keep seeing the barrio getting pushed out of the area they settled and were a contributing factor to “our” Carlsbad
and the lifestyle we were lucky enough to help build and be a part of……and have been proud of !! It has being
replaced by 4 story buildings ( another scam by city council slipped in when no one was looking) And here comes
another one……taking away away the plaza and replacing it with too many people ,cars ,more congestion, no
parking, more emissions pollution. Nothing that contributes to the “ charming “ village environment BUT detracts
from it as soon as drive by CVD on the freeway!
All I can say is, “ What the hell are you thinking”!??????
Penny Johnson
Old Carlsbad 92008
760 917 8920
Sent from my iPad
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 416 of 476
From: pskirk1234@gmail.com <pskirk1234@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2024 2:39:31 PM
To: Keith Blackburn <keith.blackburn@carlsbadca.gov>; Council Internet Email
<council@carlsbadca.gov>; Priya Bhat-Patel <priya.bhat-patel@carlsbadca.gov>; Melanie
Burkholder <melanie.burkholder@carlsbadca.gov>; Carolyn Luna
<carolyn.luna@carlsbadca.gov>; Teresa Acosta <teresa.acosta@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Village Plaza
Dear Councilmembers,
I am strongly opposed to the redevelopment of the Village Plaza, replacing it with mostly residential
units and very limited retail. The current Plaza has the only pharmacy, full grocery store, hardware
store and cleaners that I am aware of in Carlsbad village, not mention the French Bakery. The only
option for any of these requires a three mile drive. I live in the Carlsbad by the Sea retirement facility
on Carlsbad Blvd, and many of the 200+ residents use these facilities on a regular basis. There are
many new high rise condominium complexes either new or being built in the village already, so
traffic and congestion will only get worse, plus the need for existing residents drive further to access
replacement facilities. The village is a unique part of Carlsbad, that’s why I and many others chose
to live here. Don’t spoil it for a few extra tax dollars.
Phil Kirk
2855 Carlsbad Blvd Apt N318
858 922 8705
CAUTION: Do not open attachments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the
content is safe.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 417 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 418 of 476
Mayor Keith Blackburn
Council Members Melanie Burkholder, Carolyn Luna, Teresa Acosta and Priya Bhat-Patel
Re: Carlsbad Village Mixed Use SOP 2023-0014
I ask that you vote NO on this site development, the first time we take a stand against the State of
California mandates forcing the developer to negotiate or sue for five important reasons:
1-This project is 5 stories, exceeding unnecessarily, our Village and Barrio Master Plan limitations
only by not using underground parking as "the Lofts" and "Hope Apartments" have recently done.
This is a permanent waste of land under the project that is badly needed for parking for this project
and the village overall. Cutting costs is not an acceptable excuse for this.
All of Carlsbad would be permanently scared if this economic excuse is accepted for this and
future projects. It is cheapest for surface parking, next garage parking and then underground
parking. If approved, I would anticipate the Hope Apartments coming back with an additional 5th
story. As we grow near transit and accommodate affordable housing and walkable housing, we
cannot waste the underground of those larger lots that can accommodate parking. The Village and
Barrio Master Plan would allow a subsidy, if needed for parking but none was requested
State mandates anticipated smaller size units in the same exterior envelope by increasing density
yet what we are seeing is larger, luxury units not meeting the intent of the mandates
2-The Commercial frontage units are out of character with the Village and Barrio Master Plan as
they are a suburban strip center design, wasting the space above which should be residential
similar the "the Lofts" across the street. This design is for easier financing and sale but could easily
comply with the Village and Barrio Master Plan which assist with removing the 5th story.
3-Carlsbad Village Drive cannot handle the additional traffic exiting directly onto Carlsbad Village
Drive. Exits should be on Oak Avenue. Carlsbad Village Drive should be widened with one additional
lane from Harding to Pio Pico and the Overpass widened by Caltrans as they are doing on Chestnut
Avenue. With a bike lane, minimum 8 foot sidewalks and a right turn lane needed in the future, a 1 O
foot dedication is woefully short. All properties on this side of Carlsbad Village Drive will be
redeveloped in the near future and we can't afford to handcuff ourselves with this one.
4-The exterior design style meets none of the criteria of any sketches in any of the Master Plans
adopted since the 1980's. Carlsbad Village must be an attractive, pedestrian oriented place and
that means interesting architectural styles with variety, deep commercial spaces with business
doors close together as State Street between Carlsbad Village Drive and Grand Avenue. Carlsbad
has never before had developers not want to do quality development.
5-Affordable "for Sale" units is what our area is lacking. We are awash in luxury apartments. All
units should be mapped as condominiums so our teachers, firefighters, etc. may have the
opportunity to invest locally. They can all be rented by the developer initially but Carlsbad and
California need this requirement and there is plenty of demand for the product. Affordable starter
condominiums.
Gary Nessim September 16, 2024
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 419 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 420 of 476
Mayor Keith Blackburn
Council Members Melanie Burkholder, Carolyn Luna, Teresa Acosta and Priya Bhat-Patel
Re: Carlsbad Village Mixed Use SOP 2023-0014
I ask that you vote NO on this site development, the first time we take a stand against the State of
California mandates forcing the developer to negotiate or sue for five important reasons:
1-This project is 5 stories, exceeding unnecessarily, our Village and Barrio Master Plan limitations
only by not using underground parking as "the Lofts" and "Hope Apartments" have recently done.
This is a permanent waste of land under the project that is badly needed for parking for this project
and the village overall. Cutting costs is not an acceptable excuse for this.
All of Carlsbad would be permanently scared if this economic excuse is accepted for this and
future projects. It is cheapest for surface parking, next garage parking and then underground
parking. If approved, I would anticipate the Hope Apartments coming back with an additional 5th
story. As we grow near transit and accommodate affordable housing and walkable housing, we
cannot waste the underground of those larger lots that can accommodate parking. The Village and
Barrio Master Plan would allow a subsidy, if needed for parking but none was requested
State mandates anticipated smaller size units in the same exterior envelope by increasing density
yet what we are seeing is larger, luxury units not meeting the intent of the mandates
2-The Commercial frontage units are out of character with the Village and Barrio Master Plan as
they are a suburban strip center design, wasting the space above which should be residential
similar the "the Lofts" across the street. This design is for easier financing and sale but could easily
comply with the Village and Barrio Master Plan which assist with removing the 5th story.
3-Carlsbad Village Drive cannot handle the additional traffic exiting directly onto Carlsbad Village
Drive. Exits should be on Oak Avenue. Carlsbad Village Drive should be widened with one additional
lane from Harding to Pio Pico and the Overpass widened by Caltrans as they are doing on Chestnut
Avenue. With a bike lane, minimum 8 foot sidewalks and a right turn lane needed in the future, a 1 O
foot dedication is woefully short. All properties on this side of Carlsbad Village Drive will be
redeveloped in the near future and we can't afford to handcuff ourselves with this one.
4-The exterior design style meets none of the criteria of any sketches in any of the Master Plans
adopted since the 1980's. Carlsbad Village must be an attractive, pedestrian oriented place and
that means interesting architectural styles with variety, deep commercial spaces with business
doors close together as State Street between Carlsbad Village Drive and Grand Avenue. Carlsbad
has never before had developers not want to do quality development.
5-Affordable "for Sale" units is what our area is lacking. We are awash in luxury apartments. All
units should be mapped as condominiums so our teachers, firefighters, etc. may have the
opportunity to invest locally. They can all be rented by the developer initially but Carlsbad and
California need this requirement and there is plenty of demand for the product. Affordable starter
condominiums.
Gary Nessim September 16, 2024
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 421 of 476
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 422 of 476
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
2
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
2
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
2
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
2
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
2
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
2
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
2
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
3
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
4
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
3
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
4
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
5
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
6
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
7
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
8
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
5
9
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
6
0
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
6
1
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
6
2
o
f
4
7
6
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
6
3
o
f
4
7
6
From: rgraz3333@aol.com <rgraz3333@aol.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 17, 2024 12:35 PM
To: Council Internet Email <council@carlsbadca.gov>
Subject: Save Carlsbad Village Plaza
Save the Carlsbad Village Plaza
Dear Carlsbad Planning Commission Members / Mayor / City Council Members, I am opposed to the proposed redevelopment of the Carlsbad Village Plaza into a large, mixed-use high-density residential complex. (Project Number SDP 2023-0014) My family has lived in Carlsbad since 1972. I am a retired RN and use Carlsbad Village Pharmacy, True Value, French Bakery, Cleaners, and Smart and Final.
I am upset and disappointed that our City’s planning process does not give its citizens adequate time to identify issues and register an appeal against key decisions, even if those decisions are based on significantly flawed information. I understand that state housing laws restrict your ability to deny this project. However, you still have the ability to make changes to it. I ask you to join me in opposing this project for the following reasons.
• Irreversible loss of essential services. The Plaza includes an affordable grocery store,
a hardware store, a pharmacy, multiple restaurants/cafes, a cleaners, discount stores, and other businesses. Once these are gone, they won’t be coming back.
• Creates hardship for vulnerable residents. The demolition of the Plaza will create
hardship for nearby residents, including the estimated 3,500 seniors and other fixed-income residents in the Village/Barrio area. Many do not drive and rely on local shopping. The removal of the grocery store will create a food desert: “an urban area in which it is difficult to buy affordable or good-quality fresh food.”
• More traffic congestion on Carlsbad Village Drive and side streets. The project will lead to a huge increase in “vehicle miles traveled” (VMT) for two reasons: 1) current shopping center customers will need to drive further for the same services and 2) the project will add 218 new residences in a highly concentrated space. This additional traffic will further clog area streets and add to greenhouse gas emissions, creating negative environmental impacts.
• Inadequate notification. Public outreach was minimal, and many of the City’s own
requirements were not met (e.g., disclosure of square footage, maximum height, the review/approval process, and timelines). Despite these deficiencies, city staff approved the outreach, and now thousands of people who were not made aware of the project
have signed petitions, submitted public comment letters, and overflowed the council chambers at three consecutive Planning Commission meetings. Clearly the outreach failed.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 464 of 476
• No time for the public to react. The public is given only a 10 day appeal period for many of the key decisions related to this project. Due to the heavy handed state housing
laws, the public has no legal recourse if an appeal is not lodged within this ridiculously short appeal period.
• Loss of decision-making authority. By the time projects like this reach the decision-
making bodies (Planning Commission or City Council), city staff have waived public outreach, exempted environment impact reporting requirements, and made all of the key decisions related to approval.
• Send the project back for additional public review. Do a proper public outreach that gives all affected residents an opportunity to learn more about the project and provide
feedback.
• Send the traffic study (aka VMT Analysis) back for rework. Demand that the study includes a realistic assessment of the added mileage created by Plaza customers who
will have to drive further for similar services. The faulty assessment is a key reason why a full environmental impact report was not required.
• Eliminate the need for a 5-story height waiver. The site has plenty of room to
accommodate the apartment buildings without exceeding the City’s 4-story height limit. Options include residential over retail and underground parking. Don’t pollute our skyline!
• Be consistent with transit-oriented development. This project was approved in part because it’s considered transit-oriented. Reduce or eliminate the massive parking garage. Encourage alternative modes of transportation, such as car-sharing and free transit passes to the residents. Eliminate exclusive parking for residents.
• Combine the site into one parcel. The site application proposes dividing the lot into
two parcels, one for the residential units and one for the commercial retail. However, there is nothing stopping the developer from turning the commercial parcel into more residential units once the original project is approved. The Planning Department will issue a Notice of Restriction to prevent this from happening, but this restriction can be easily waived later. This is not good enough - combine the parcels now!
• Remove the CEQA exemption power of the City Planner. This is what got us into this
mess in the first place. For large, complex projects of this type, the decision to exempt CEQA requirements should be made by the Planning Commission at a public hearing.
• Update VMT Analysis Guidelines. The current guidelines are ambiguous and incomplete, allowing blatantly incorrect calculations to be approved.
• No bait and switch. Scrutinize the policy that allows staff to approve up to 100% project changes after approval.
I understand that progress is inevitable, but this is the wrong project for this location. It will have a negative and irreversible impact on the character of the Carlsbad Village. Consider the long-
term effects such a project will have on the daily lives of our residents, especially the undue
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 465 of 476
hardship to the many seniors trying to age in place with dignity as well as those with limited mobility.
In light of these points, I urge you to act in the best interest of the community and oppose or at least limit this proposed development.
Please notify me when any public hearings are scheduled regarding this project. Thank you. Sincerely,
Sue Graziano, R.N. 1107 Buena Vista Way
Carlsbad, Ca. 760-434-1278
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 466 of 476
Page 1 of 5
Council Policy Statement
Category:
Specific Subject: Development Project Public Involvement Policy
PURPOSE
To help ensure applicants proposing certain development projects are aware of and have
considered input from interested and affected stakeholders prior to project consideration by
city decision makers. The policy is intended to supplement and not replace or conflict with legal
noticing requirements or any other required public involvement for development applications.
BACKGROUND
This policy provides a framework for project applicants to identify potentially interested and
affected members of the public; provide additional opportunities for input; and report public
input and how it was considered to city staff, stakeholders and city decision makers during the
public hearing process.
A.EARLY PUBLIC NOTICE
The following requirements apply to all applications that require approval by the Planning
Commission or City Council.
Mailed Notice
Applicants are required to send a public notice within 30 days of submittal of development
applications. The early public notice shall be sent via first class U.S. Postal Service and include:
A brief description of the proposed project, such as:
o Project name
o Address and nearest cross streets
o The proposed use, number of dwelling units, project features, etc.
o Building square footage(s)
o Maximum height
The applicant name, contact person, telephone number and email address.
8-1/2” x 11” site plan and building elevations.
How the public can provide input.
Policy No. 84
Date Issued: 12/5/2017
Effective Date: 3/5/2018
Resolution No. 2017-228
Cancellation Date:
Supersedes No.
Exhibit 8
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 467 of 476
Policy No. 84
Page 2 of 5
Noticing Area
The applicant shall send the early public notice to:
Property owners within a 600 foot radius of the subject property according to the latest
equalized assessment rolls current as of the date of the application. If the 600 foot
radius yields fewer than 20 properties, the project applicant shall extend the radius until
20 or more properties are reached.
The homeowners association of which the subject property is a part (if any). Notice shall
be mailed to both the property management company and HOA board of directors.
Occupants within a 100 foot radius of the subject property in the Coastal Zone.
Project Sign
The project applicant shall post a project notice sign on the project site within 30 days of the
application date. The project sign shall:
Utilize a template provided by the City of Carlsbad.
Be posted in the most publicly visible location on the subject property.
The project applicant shall sign and submit an affidavit that the notice was prepared and mailed
and that the project notice sign has been posted in accordance with this policy.
B. ENHANCED STAKEHOLDER OUTREACH
Significant development applications require additional stakeholder outreach as described
below.
1. Applicability
In addition to what is described in Section A, applicants shall complete enhanced stakeholder
outreach for private or public entity development applications that require a discretionary
permit approval by the Planning Commission or City Council and include any of the following:
Residential development consisting of 50 or more residential lots or residential units
Non-residential or mixed-use development project (residential and non-residential uses
in the same building or on the same site) for a total of 50,000 square feet or more of
habitable space
A Conditional use permit (excludes Minor Conditional Use Permit)
A development project that requires a variance (excludes minor variance)
A development project that requires a General Plan amendment, zone change, a master
plan or specific plan
A development project that requires a major amendment to a master plan or a specific
plan. (excludes minor amendment)
A development project that requires an amendment to the Habitat Management Plan
The provisions of this policy shall not apply to permit applications for streamlined approval
pursuant to SB35 (Gov. Code 65913.4).
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 468 of 476
Policy No. 84
Page 3 of 5
2. Procedure
Notification: The applicant shall, at a minimum, mail to the same parties listed in Section
A, an invitation to participate in one or more outreach activities as described in Section
B-3 below. The city encourages additional forms of notification (electronic, door-to-
door, etc.) and notification to additional interested and affected parties. The invitation
may be combined with the notice described in Section A at the applicant’s discretion.
Stakeholder List: In addition to those parties required to be notified in Section A of this
policy, the project applicant shall maintain a contact list of all other parties who have
requested to be notified about the project status and future opportunities for input.
Notification requests may be made directly to the project applicant and/or to the city
Planning Division, in which case such requests will be forwarded to the applicant for
purposes of complying with this policy.
Timing: The project applicant is required to follow the procedures of this policy
following project application submittal. The application will be deemed incomplete until
the requirements of this policy have been met. The applicant may choose to begin
soliciting public input prior to the application submittal, however outreach conducted
prior to submittal does not satisfy the requirements of this policy.
Documentation: The project applicant shall document the public involvement that
occurred, including information such as:
o Copies of all noticing and informational materials provided to the public, noting
the method and date of distribution.
o Sign in sheets listing names of participants in outreach meetings, workshops or
other events.
o Stakeholder database.
o Copies of comment cards, survey results, emails, letters and other comments
submitted to the applicant.
o A summary of the input received and the responses to those who participated in
the public involvement, if any.
Completion: Compliance with policy is fulfilled when noticing and outreach activities
are concluded, and a written outreach report is filed with the city and accepted as
complete by the City Planner. The development application will be deemed incomplete
until the requirements of this policy are met.
3. Methods
The project applicant shall choose one or more methods that will give interested and affected
members of the public a meaningful opportunity to provide input. A minimum 10 day notice in
advance of an outreach event shall be given to stakeholders to ensure they have a reasonable
opportunity to participate. Additionally, a minimum 10 days shall be given following an
outreach event, such as a meeting, for stakeholders to provide comments and for comments to
be collected by the applicant. The applicant may choose from among the methods below to
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 469 of 476
Policy No. 84
Page 4 of 5
solicit public input with the goal of enabling the greatest number of stakeholders to provide
meaningful input.
A public meeting or open house held at a time and location accessible to most
stakeholders.
A project website that enables the public to learn about the project and understand
how to provide input.
An onsite meeting or information booth at or near the project site.
A mailed informational packet with postage-paid mail-back comment form or survey.
Face-to-face meetings and open houses on or near the project site at times most likely to
maximize participation (such as evenings and weekends) are encouraged. Other techniques
may be acceptable, but the applicant should consult with the City Planner first before
undertaking any activities not listed.
Regardless of method(s) used, at minimum, the applicant must provide:
A project description (with graphics) sufficiently detailed but easy for a layperson to
understand.
An explanation of what permits are being sought.
The expected timeframe and/or phasing of project construction.
A description of the review/approval process.
Project contact name and information.
A description of how the public can provide input directly to the project applicant.
The city project ID and city project planner and contact information.
4. Report
The project applicant shall submit an outreach report to the city’s project planner assigned to
the project documenting:
The outreach that was conducted.
Who was invited to participate and who did participate. This shall include at a minimum
the notification of parties described in Section A, and stakeholders who requested to be
on the stakeholder list. A typewritten list of all names and addresses of these parties
and stakeholders shall accompany the report for city use for public hearing notification.
A summary of issues discussed and what resulted from the discussion. Redundant or
similar comments received multiple times may be summarized.
• What commitments were made or follow-up actions would be taken, if any.
The project applicant’s written outreach report shall be kept as part of the city’s project file.
The project applicant shall provide a copy of the report (in print or electronic form) to any
stakeholder that requests a copy of it. In addition, a copy of the report may be obtained from
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 470 of 476
Policy No. 84
Page 5 of 5
the city, once accepted as complete. City staff shall include in the staff report to the Planning
Commission or City Council a brief synopsis of the project applicant’s outreach activities and
results as documented in the outreach report, and may include the outreach report as an
attachment.
5. Notes on Stakeholders and Noticing
Stakeholders who become aware of a project application after the project applicant has
conducted early stakeholder outreach may still request to be notified regarding the project
from city staff. However, the outreach report is not required to be updated once it has been
accepted as complete by the city. It is at the project applicant’s discretion whether to engage in
additional stakeholder outreach once the requirements of this policy have been met.
Regular noticing by the city for public hearings is not a part of this process and would
commence when the application is deemed complete and is scheduled for public hearings by
city staff. Additionally, public notice and review requirements under other local ordinance,
state or federal law are independent of and not fulfilled by the outreach requirements of this
policy. This would include, but is not limited to requirements under Carlsbad Municipal Code,
the California Coastal Act, the California Environmental Quality Act, or the National
Environmental Policy Act.
6. Administration
The City Planner shall be responsible for administering this policy. The City Planner is authorized
to create and modify forms, hand-outs and guidelines as he or she deems appropriate to
effectively administer this policy.
The Planning Division shall maintain a list of applications subject to this policy and keep records
of individuals and organizations who request to be notified of such applications, and shall
furnish such records to project applicants for purposes of complying with this policy.
Within two years of the initial effective date of this policy, the City Planner shall review and
report to the City Council as to its effectiveness, and provide a recommendation whether to
continue the policy in its current or modified form. This policy shall remain in effect until
modified or rescinded by the City Council.
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 471 of 476
Streamlining in Transit Areas
OPR Webinar -Implementing SB 743: What You Need to Know
(�) Governor's Office of Planning and Research
�-877 subscribers
2,490 views Streamed live on Apr 20, 2020
Subscribe
I
(,l
� IS min Headway
High-Quality Transit Corridor (CEQA Section 21155)
means a comdor with�ed route bus service with service Intervals no longer than 15 minutes during peak commute hours.
� Major Transit Stop (CEQA Section 21064.3)
� means a site containing an existing rail transit station. a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit se<Vlce. or the Intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency or
serv,ce interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute pe11ods.
_;:;> Share -1, Download � Clip [::] Save
Ex
h
i
b
i
t
9
Se
p
t
.
2
4
,
2
0
2
4
It
e
m
#
7
P
a
g
e
4
7
2
o
f
4
7
6
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT 2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500 Sacramento, CA 95833 (916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453www.hcd.ca.gov
November 17, 2023
Adam Atamian, Community Development Director City of San Clemente
910 Calle Negocio, Suite 100
San Clemente, CA 92672
Dear Adam Atamian:
RE: AB 2097 Transit Distance Criteria – Letter of Technical Assistance
This letter provides technical assistance regarding the application of Assembly Bill (AB) 2097 (Chapter 459, Statues of 2022). The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) received a technical assistance request from Kristine Michaels
(Applicant), seeking clarification on how to measure the one-half mile distance to a major
transit stop required under AB 2097. The letter is provided for the benefit of both the City of San Clemente (City) and the Applicant.
Summary of Request
HCD understands the Applicant submitted an application to the City for an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) conversion project at 240 W. Mariposa Avenue. The project proposes to convert an existing carport into an approximately 668.5 square-foot ADU. The City has approved a conceptual plan verifying that the project meets local zoning regulations and
does not require additional off-street parking to be provided to serve the ADU. However,
because the project is located in the Coastal Zone and the City does not have a fully certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) at this time, the project also requires a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) from the California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission). HCD understands that the Applicant has submitted its CDP application,
including the approved conceptual plan from the City, to the Coastal Commission for
review. It appears that the Coastal Commission is exploring potential parking mitigation measures for the project including the removal of red curbed areas to create more on-street parking and/or an annual in lieu parking mitigation fee. However, the applicant desires to utilize the reduced minimum parking requirements under AB 2097 for
residential development within one-half mile of a major transit stop.
AB 2097 is codified at Government Code Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4, Article 2, Section 65863.2 and became effective January 1, 2023. This law limits the ability of a
Exhibit 10
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 473 of 476
Adam Atamian, Community Development Director
Page 2
commercial, or other qualifying development projects within one-half mile of a major public transit stop. HCD has authority to enforce AB 2097 pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (j)(12).
The sole question posed by the requestor relates to the method of measurement used to determine whether a project site is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, thus becoming eligible for the benefits of AB 2097. Specifically, the requester asks
whether the one-half mile distance should be measured in a straight line from parcel
edge to the transit stop or based on the walking distance from parcel edge to the transit stop. This letter provides technical assistance clarifying how to measure the one-half mile distance to a major transit stop for the purposes of AB 2097.
AB 2097 Transit Distance Criteria
Under AB 2097, “A public agency shall not impose or enforce any minimum automobile parking requirement on a residential, commercial, or other development project if the project is located within one-half mile of public transit.” (Gov. Code, § 65863.2, subd.
(a).) Additionally, Government Code section 65863.2, subdivision (e)(5), defines “public
transit” to mean a major transit stop as defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.
Major Transit Stop Definition in the Public Resources Code
Section 21155, subdivision (b), of the Public Resources Code states, “A major transit stop is as defined in Section 21064.3, except that, for purposes of this section, it also includes major transit stops that are included in the applicable regional transportation plan.” Section 21064.3 defines a major transit stop as a site containing any of the
following:
(a)An existing rail or bus rapid transit station.(b)A ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service.(c)The intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service
interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak
commute periods.
Based on the above, the San Clemente Pier Station Train Stop would qualify as a major transit stop under Public Resources Code, Section 21064.3, subdivision (a), because it
is an existing rail transit station served by the Metrolink rail system.
AB 2097 Path of Measurement
For the purposes of AB 2097, the one-half mile distance to a major transit stop should
be measured in a straight, direct line from the nearest edge of the parcel containing the
public agency to impose minimum automobile parking requirements for residential,
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 474 of 476
Adam Atamian, Community Development Director
Page 3
transit stop is located. Generally, measurements are to be taken in a straight, direct line from parcel edge to parcel edge unless otherwise specified in statute. This is in keeping with the “ordinary meaning” of how required distances are typically measured in state housing laws absent specific statutory instructions to the contrary. AB 2097 does not
contain any language that indicates that the one-half mile distance should be measured
based on walking distance. Additionally, the definitions of a major stop in Section 21155 and Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code do not reference walking distance. Had the Legislature intended for the one-half mile distance in AB 2097 to be based on walking distance, it could have included language to that effect as seen in other state
housing laws such as ADU Law (Gov. Code, § 65852.2, subds. (c) and (d)) and Senate
Bill 9 (Gov. Code, § 65852.21, subd. (c)(1)(A)1).
This determination is consistent with other one-half mile distances to public transit employed elsewhere in state statutes that do not specify walking distance, such as AB 2162 (Gov.
Code, § 656542) and SB 35 (Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd. (e)(1)(A)3). This determination also most closely aligns with AB 2097’s intent as outlined in Government Code section, 65863.2, subdivision (i), which states that “the imposition of mandatory parking minimums can increase the cost of housing, limit the number of available units, lead to an oversupply of parking spaces, and increased greenhouse gas emissions. Therefore, this section shall
be interpreted in favor of the prohibition of the imposition of mandatory parking minimums as outlined in this section.”
1 “A height of 18 feet for a detached accessory dwelling unit on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit that is within one-half of one mile
walking distance of a major transit stop or a high-quality transit corridor, as those terms
are defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.” (Gov. Code, § 65852.2, subd. (c)(2)(D)(ii).)
“Where the accessory dwelling unit is located within one-half mile walking distance of
“The parcel is located within one-half mile walking distance of either a high-quality transit corridor, as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, or a major transit stop, as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code.” (Gov. Code, § 65852.21, subd. (c)(1)(A).)
2 “If the supportive housing development is located within one-half mile of a public transit stop, the local government shall not impose any minimum parking requirements for the units occupied by supportive housing residents.” (Gov. Code § 65654.)
3 “The development is located within one-half mile of public transit.” (Gov. Code §
65913.4, subd. (e)(1)(A).)
project site to any point on the parcel(s) that make up the property upon which a major
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 475 of 476
Adam Atamian, Community Development Director
Page 4
Conclusion
For the purposes of AB 2097, the one-half mile distance to a major transit stop should be measured in a straight line from the nearest edge of the parcel containing the proposed
project to any point on the parcel(s) that make up the property upon which a major transit
stop is located. Using this method of measurement, the ADU conversion project proposed at 240 W. Mariposa Avenue is less than one-half mile from the San Clemente Pier Train Station and therefore meets this criterion under AB 2097. This technical assistance provides a consistent methodology for measuring distance and is more
inclusive than other alternatives, thereby maximizing the housing production potential of
AB 2097.
If you have questions or need additional information, please contact Deepeaka Dhaliwal, of our staff, at Deepeaka.Dhaliwal@hcd.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
Shannan West
Housing Accountability Unit Chief
public transit.” (Gov. Code, § 65852.2, subd. (d)(1)(A).)
Sept. 24, 2024 Item #7 Page 476 of 476
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 5 p.m. on Tuesday, September 24, 2024, to consider approving a Site Development Permit,
to demolish five existing commercial structures and consolidate four parcels of land into two parcels; and
construct a mixed-use development consisting of 13,800 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial
within two one-story buildings, 218 multiple-family residential apartment units within two five-story
buildings, and a five-story above grade parking structure on a 4.12-acre property located at 945-1065
Carlsbad Village Drive in the northwest quadrant of the City, the Village & Barrio Master Plan, and Local
Facilities Management Zone 1, and more particularly described as:
Parcels A through Das shown on "City of Carlsbad MS 2018-0014", in the
City of San Diego, County of San Diego, State of California, according to
parcel map thereof no. 21699 filed in the Office of the County Recorder of
San Diego County, July 16, 2019
Whereas, on July 17, 2024, the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 5/2 (Lafferty, Kamenjarin -
No) to recommend approval of a Site Development Permit to demolish five existing commercial structures
and consolidate four parcels of land into two parcels; and construct a mixed-use development consisting
of 13,800 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial within two one-story buildings, 218 multiple-
family residential apartment units within two five-story buildings, and a five-story above grade parking
structure on a 4.12-acre property located at 945-1065 Carlsbad Village Drive.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies
of the staff report will be available on and after Friday, Sept. 20, 2024. If you have any questions, please
contact Jason Goff in the Planning Division at (442) 339-2643 or jason.goff@carlsbadca.gov. The meeting
can be viewed online at https://www.carlsbadca.gov/city-hall/meetings-agendas or on the city's cable
channel. In addition, written comments may be submitted to the City Council at or prior to the hearing via
U.S. Mail to the attention of Office of the City Clerk, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, or
via email to clerk@carlsbadca.gov.
If you challenge the Site Development Permit in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you
or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008,
at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE:
CASE NAME:
PUBLISH:
SDP 2023-0014
CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED-USE
FRIDAY, SEPT. 13, 2024
CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
PROCEDURES
1.Staff Presentation
2.City Council questions on staff
presentation
3.Applicant presentation (10 Min.)
4.City Council opportunity to ask
questions of applicant
5.Open public testimony
6.Close public testimony
7.Staff and Applicant response (if
necessary)
8.City Council discussion
9.City Council vote
1
{city of
Carlsbad
CARLSBAD VILLAGE
MIXED USE PROJECT
Eric Lardy, City Planner
Cliff Jones, Principal Planner
Jason Goff, Senior Planner
September 24, 2024
2 22
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
3
TONIGHT’S PRESENTATION
•State housing laws
•Project overview
•Public comments and responses
3
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
4
STATE HOUSING LAWS
•Cities have traditionally had control over land
use and zoning
•In recent years, not enough housing has been
built to meet the demand
•State has intervened with new laws
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
5
STATE HOUSING LAWS
Four significant state laws affect this project
•Housing Accountability Act
•Housing Crisis Act
•Density Bonus Law
•California Environmental Quality Act
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Stated purpose – to significantly increase new
housing by curbing a local government's ability
to deny or effectively deny housing projects
•Must be interpreted and implemented in favor
of approving housing projects
•Encourages infill developments
HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
6
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Cities may only require objective design
standards
•Community character is subjective
•Cannot deny a housing development project or
impose conditions that results in lower density
“Unless the project would have a specific,
adverse impact on public health or safety”
HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
7
HOUSING ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
8
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING ANO COfllMUNITY DEVELOf>MENT DMIIIOHOf'IIOUSINGPOUCYDEVELOPMENT ""°W.bC-.._..._,..
(11")_,.,,,, .. (I,.)_,.,.,
MEMORANDUM FOR: Pla"""'!I Oiredin and lnletested Parties
M*nKrteby,OeputyOinl<;tor
Dtv~:icyDevelopmeot
H~slna AccoiOilty Act T.ct>nlc•I Anltt•nce
Advisory (Gowmment Code Section 65589.5)
TheHousingAccountabiityAcl(HMJ,Govemmeo\Codesection65589.5,establishes limi!ationstoalocalgoverrvMnt'•abilitytodeny,reducethedensityof,0<mal<e
lnl8asib4ehousingdevelopmeotprojeds,emergencyshettere,Offamlwofllerhwsing thatareconsistentwithobjectiw,localdevelopmentstanllartlsanda,ntrbuteto
meetng housing need. The Legie.lature fn tenected the HA.A In 1982 and recently amendedtheHMtoexpandandstr..,gthenitsprovisionsasparloftheoveral recognition of the cnUcaly low vounes of housing stock In Cailomia. In amending the
HM theleg'51aturemadere-pealedfindingsthatthelackofhousinQandthelad<.ol affordablehousing,isa,;riticalpn:,blemlhlltthreaien. andsociajqualityoflifelnCalifomia.ThisTedlnical A
guk:lanoe on implementation of the HAA, lfldlJdjng the Hou.Ing Acc:ounlabllity Act Oec:lslon Matrt•
Housing Accountability Act Decision Matrix Chffrutr36B StaunnQ{20JZC5tootoBil1671 Chffr ~·Strengthens the HM by lncreas andthestandardolproolre,quir&dforawx:alagencyt
to-moderal6--fflCOfllel'louaingdevelopmentprojects,a, fnt1clS1O,0000<fflOfeperunitonlocal-nciesthal rejactionofanaffoRlablehousingdevelopmentp,ojec
This decisioo tree gellerally describes the components of the HM. Both affordable and market-rate developments are protected by
components of the HAA. The statute contains detailed requi-ements that affect the applicability of the HM to a specific housing
project based on its characteris~cs.
Cbi!Plff'3ZII S111hlll!JQ{20U(AwrnhlyBl!15]5\ sUlndardilorde!ennlningconlormanoewithlocalland
CbaoW243$1aJdeso{2QJH{AsWllblYR!l3194)-E ainsis1encylllindudeprojedsthatareoons'5tentwill notzoningdes.ig"8tiononasiteWthatzoneislnconst
CbaPlm:654 S111hMJQ{20J9/S,,nateB'l330\·Def, sochasotljedivestandardsllildC()ll\?lllteapptication prcjectsthatuseanewpre-applicationprocess.Most
JarMJary1,2025,uriesse)dondedbylhelegislature1
Uyouhaveenyqueslions,Ofwo,Jk:llilceadditional lnlc ptea5'1oonladlhe0MsionofHousingPolicyDevelo!l
A) Does the project meet the definition of a housing development?
Does one of the following findings apply?
(1) Housing element Is in compliance, RH NA has been
met (permitted)orexceeded for all income categories proposed for project.
~~bii~~l~8ir8,!~f~crl;t:;:;si~~;~~i~ !°ihoo
tomitigateoravoldlmpact.
(3) Denial is required to comply with specific state or federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply.
(4) The project Is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or inadequate water or sewer.
(5) The project is inconsistent withJl21!! zoning and general plan land usedesignaUon,andtheprojectisnot
proposed on a site ideolified in the housing element, and
there are sufficient sites to aecorrmodate the RHNA or zoning for emergency shelters.
v .. Make finding and Project cannot be denied
move to C . w_lo P?tential HM
Housing Accountability Act T1dmlc1I Anlstanc, Advisory
lsthereaspecific,adverse impact upon the public healthorsafety?and
Is there no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact?
YES
CanrT1c1ke
written findingsto
deny project
or condition approval at lower-density.
N The pr
cannot be deniedw/o potenlialHM
vlotatlon.
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
PUBLIC HEALTH/SAFETY FINDING
Significant, quantifiable, direct and unavoidable
impact based on objective, identified written public
health or safety standards as they existed on the date
the application was deemed complete.
9
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
PUBLIC HEALTH/SAFETY FINDING
The Legislature anticipated that the conditions
creating a specific, adverse impact would arise
infrequently.
10
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
HOUSING CRISIS ACT (SB 330)
•Codes and fees in place when application was
first filed apply
•Shot clock for application review
•No more than 5 meetings, including required
community meetings
•No net-loss of housing
•Prohibits housing caps and moratoriums
11
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
DENSITY BONUS LAW
•Legal right to increase density
•May achieve a 50% increase with as few as 15%
units affordable
•An additional 50% increase with additional
moderate-income units
•Allows reductions in development standards
12
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
13
DENSITY BONUS
I II I II I I
I I II I II I I
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
14
DENSITY BONUS
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
33 Categorical Exemptions –“been determined not to have a
significant effect on the environment” (CEQA Guidelines)
CEQA In-Fill Exemption (Class 32)
No larger than five acres and surrounded by urban uses
No sensitive habitat
Consistent with General Plan and zoning regulations
All required utilities and public services accessible
Would not result in any significant effects relating to
traffic, noise, air quality or water quality
15
CEQA
15
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
The City Planner shall determine whether a private
or public project is a ministerial project and, if not,
whether it is exempted from the requirements of
this chapter. (CMC §19.04.060) 2001
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE
1616
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Exemption process is subject to 10-day appeal
•Notice of Determination of Exemption Posted
on Feb. 29, 2024
•No appeal was filed
17
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE
17
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Courts supporting use of exemptions
•Effective Jan. 2024, developers can challenge an
agency's determination that a project is
ineligible for a CEQA exemption.
CEQA
1818
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Project submitted to the city May 17, 2023
•Project deemed complete with planning issues
raised in letters Sep. 17, 2023, and Dec. 14, 2023
• City Planner was required to:
•Decide if the project was exempt under Carlsbad
Law
•Take action on the CEQA under the Permit
Streamlining Act
•Comply with the Housing Accountability Act for In-
Fill Exemptions
CEQA
1919
MORE INFORMATION
20
State Housing Laws
Density Bonus
1'lliil b<lllllll CIUtli'I~" tN dwillQ:llllltftl aao-nc,as
prowlldund«G°"".CAM~~V ...r.t'Tadto,nnau-dltnslrybonusLlw.Tllllbi;Aatln.l!.
oru(lnlllfllleclto-.S1t1lhllkflfllll"°"llb!Sof
SB-330 Housing Crisis Act
CA senate Biil 330(Sl!i-l30) amended a ni.wnberof
statutory provklonsand added GoY. C.ocle§66JOO.
tonvnonty ref,mf.'d to as the ttou!.lngOl!Js Act of
2019 (HCA), whim became effect"1e on Jan. l,
2020. Thislnfo-eutletlnprOY!desanCNerriewof
how th!!' HCA afferts tlle City's rl!'.liew and app,OY.a.l
of eligible,, housing developmerW.. Thf, bulletlftft.ils
beenupdaledmnsistentwithSB•S[effeallleJa.n.
1.2022t.
BACKGROUND
The HCA.ilb.H.edonlhe Ide.ii that needed housing
naslar~alreadybeenplannedfOfbylocal
Jurtsdlctlons.Accordirrgtoa2019tepo,1prepared
by UClA I.J!!wlS C.l!ntl!!r fot R@g!Onal Paliey Studio!!S,
c1tiesandcoun1ieslnthesutehavec:ollect1vely
app,oved zoning fOf rouglvy Z.8 mlllon new
ho!Alngt.nlU.HOWevet",lhehousi"CiSnotgeltA'lg
built.
Tlle ~en1 community conulbutK the lack
of hooslng prodlJClion to grow!nl regulatory
requirements. permk proce~ del.iys, and
exas.s1ve1111~andserlllel!fHS.U'latgiM1mpos;ed
on new de-.,elopme111 and growth.
In r~io!!, HCAUl.'ateda number o/Mw
proceduresM1dleg!Uat1¥eNmltationl.oo
muRlclpalltlesw1ththegoalofure.amlinlrethe
entlllernent process bysl.ashln1 the Ume illnd com
It takes llUl!CLlfl! pll!fmll5 for hot61n& thillt mHIJ.
thelOClllllovemment'selllsti .. ,IAes.
lnfo,m.tlol\al Bull~n
18-132
1>6eurMntl ~l!rl!nted
TheHouslng:OlslsAct;~
GovernmeMCOde~
Govemmenteodl!!a!Z!
Govemrne,nt Codi! §655BlQI and ft,\
GovernmentCOde~
Government COde~
Cio-YernmentCodl!~
Gcwl!rnmentCod,~
GovernmentCOcle~
Prellm HouMI Development (SB·l30) Pre-
Applkat>On; £:B
StateDensltyBonus uw,IB-112
Dl!nslty Bonus ~ml!ntal ChKkHst;LJ!!:!l
lnfo,rnalPt'l!ilmiinaryRl!W!WR@QUMIFortn:f:l!l
MasterFeeSChedule
CMCTJ:lell Definlllons:.lll.D!t
CillllstlilldGrowtti ManilJl!ffil!l'II f>Uon~
The folb,o,llll sections provide lnfo,m,11tJon on
someofthemot'l!lmportantpr~oftheHCA.
It should~ nofed rnat t/'l,e HCA I! w,rmtiy
ll'lret'Md to opp/'f to houslngde..efopmeflu p,oJ«ts
Wftictih-subm.lt'tPdoptPlimilD')'app/itDtion
t,e/oreJDlt. J,103Q.OlldthtHCA,asawll(ff,
sUMetsonJon.J.2aJ4.
PROJECT EUGIBIUTY
Projectsthat;welocatedout51cteofcallforn!ill
DepartmentofForesuyandfireProtectlon's
jCALFIRElm,11pped'"Very-HipFresever1ty"zones
(Gov. COcle ill!Z!I and tMel the fol.lowing:
deflnllionsoftk>Uslna;De\>ekJpmentitl"eetlgiblefor
benefits ;1fforded under the HCA (Gov. c.ooe
§65589.S,(hHl)).
• Rei.ldenll;1lunllpro;Kl5consil.tingoftwoor
moreunlts(lndudlng•sl .. le•fitl"l'litvresldence
andAU.l!HOryl>welingUrtll):or,
• Milied<-i.JSI! oe\lelopmenl consl5l1nl of
resldent1.il;1ndnonresldl!fltialuseswltl'lat
leau two-thirds oft lie ~r, footate of 1:1'111!
Pro;ectdes.llnall!dforreslclenuaiuse;o,,
CllfflfflUnityO~Oepal"trMm I1usrara:1-,A..._ I c.rhbad,CA9200I I www.carlsb..:la.giw
City of
Carlsbad
lnlcnnMk)nal lkllletln
1B-112
Carlsbad Village Drive
Oak Avenue
21
22
2004
23
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•City Council has approved various plans for
the Village and Barrio since the 1990s
•Most recent Plan approved in 2019
•Extensive public outreach
•Strong desire to maintain community
character
24
CARLSBAD VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT
(city of
Carlsbad
2525
1
3
2
Gas Station/7-11
Not Included
Carlsbad Village Drive
Oak Avenue
Ho
p
e
A
v
e
n
u
e
A
l
l
e
y
Parking
Garage
Residential
Bldg “D”
Bldg “A”
8,000 SF
Bldg “B”
5,800 SF
ResidentialBldg “C”
•Two parcels
•4.12 acres
•13,800 SF retail
•218 apartments
27 affordable
•50% density bonus
53 dwelling/acre
•340 parking spaces
Retail Retail
MIXED USE
PROPOSAL
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
25
•
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
26
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
27
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
27
•50% density bonus increase (218 units total)
•27 total very-low income units
•Five requested waivers:
•Allow five stories
•Deviation in architectural features
•Increase height for roof structures
•Waive maximum floor space
•Waive alley access requirement
28
DENSITY BONUS
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
1111111
•June 5th hearing: Continued
•June 19th hearing: Continued
•July 17th hearing: Held
•Staff presented the project
•Public comments (4 “yes”/ 39 “no”)
•Recommended approval
29
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
1111111
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Public outreach/notification
•Traffic
•Commercial space
•Future project changes
•Loss of retail uses (grocery, hardware, bakery, pharmacy)
•Project scale, design, neighborhood character
•Uses adjacent to the I-5
30
COMMUNITY CONCERNS
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Public outreach/notification
•Traffic
•Commercial space
•Project scale, design, neighborhood character
31
COMMUNITY CONCERNS AT PLANNING
COMMISSION HEARING
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Consistency with Policy 84
•Content of early public notice
•Website for public engagement
32
PUBLIC OUTREACH/NOTIFICATION
(city of
Carlsbad
33
COUNCIL POLICY
STATEMENT NO. 84
City of
Carlsbad
Council Policy Statement
Category:
Poticy No.
D·a.te Issued:
Effective Date:
Resollution No.
CancBllation, Date:
Supersedes No.
S4
ll/S/2017
3/5/1018
2017-128.
Specific Subject Development Project Public Involvement Polley
PURPOSE
To hellp ensure applfcants proposing certain development projects are aware of and have
considered In put from Interested a,nd affected stakeholders prior to project conslde ration l:ly
city decision mak.ers. The policy Is Intended to supplement and not replace or con met with legal
noticing re.i1ulrnments or any othe
BACKGROUND
Thi~ policy provides a framewo k
affected members of the public; p
Input and how it wa.s considered t
pu l:ll lc hearing process.
Appllcantsare required to send a
applfcat lon,s. The earl'( public notl
• A l:lrl@f description of the p
o Project name
o Address and neare
o The proposed U!aQ,
o Building square foo
o Ma)( mum height
1Ma1i led INl,oti•C:e
Appllicants are required to send a pubUc notice witlhin 30 days of submittal! of devellop1ment
appllications .. Tlhe earrlly publlic notice slhallll be sent • ss U.S. Postall Service and incllude:
• A brief description of the proposed prroj
o ProJect naime
o Address and nearest cross streets
o Tlhe proposed use, number of dwelllling units, project features, etc.
o BuHding square footage(s)
o Maxi1mu1m lheiglht
Page 1 ofS
APPLICANT PROJECT NOTICE
34
NOTICE OF PROJECT APPLICATIO
GR.T CARLSBAD\ IU..AGE LLC
June 13, 2023
Dear Neighbors and Interested Stakeholders:
Per City Council Policy No. 84, this is to infoan yo
submitted the following development application to
PROJECT NUMBER: SDP2023-0014
PROJECT NAME: Carlsbad Village Mi
PROJECT ADDRESS: 945-1065 Carlsbad
ASSESSOR PARCEL NO: 203-320-53, -54, -5
DATE OF APPLICATION: May 17, 2023
PROJECT DESCRlPTION: Site Development
construct a 218-unit mi:<ed use project with 13,800
4.12-acre site. The project will include 22 very-low
PROJECT DES CRIPTIO Site Development Plan to redevelop an existing shopping center and
construct a 218-unit mixed-use project with 13 ,800 square feet of neighborhood enring retail on a
4.12-acre site. The project will include 22 very-lo,~r-incon1e affordable units. The retail component
will be contained in t\NO one-sto buildings and the residential component in o fi ve-story
buildings. The project will include approximately 350 parking spaces at-grade and in a parking
sttucture as ~rell as open sp ace and landscaped area s. See attached site plan and elevations.
v.~ll be contained in twoone-storybuildings andthe----------.------. --------------------------------------
buildings. The project will include approximately 350 parking spaces at-grade and in a parking
struchue, as well as open space and landscaped areas. See attached site !an and elevations.
APPLICANT CONTACT: Jonathan Franke
Atlantis Group
2488 Historic. D
CITY PROJECT PLANNER: Jason Goff, Seni
Jason.Goff! car
If you would like more infonnation or would like
to contact me at the email address above. The pro
input is welcome. Yon can also provide your fee
If =· ou \1\ oufild mike mnore infionn~tciton or l~lou]d mike io pro . ide mput on the :project pm.ease do not l11tesitate
to con tact me at the eniail address above. rrhe project ii . ctmentl r undler re • iew by the Ci!Y.:?nd your
mput i ·. ,velconie_ You cm also, pro,. ide your feedback b vi itm g r\VlVlv.ca1·lsbad,illa·gemiixecl use.com_
A decision to approve or den) this a_pphcation \1vifil be made b} Uie City at a :ffiuture public hearing ,m d
you ·wiii be notified of the hearing in ad . ance.
A decision to approve or deny this application --------------~ -----------------------------------
you will be notified of the hearing in advance.
Sincerely,
Jonathan Franh."e!
Atlantis Grnup
Attachment: Site Plan and Building Bevations
A ttac m1ent: Site P an an Builaing E levations
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Applicant required to select at least one method
to solicit community input
•Public meeting; or
•Project website; or
•Mailed informational packet
35
PUBLIC OUTREACH/ NOTIFICATION
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Different ways to measure traffic
•Vehicle Miles Traveled = distance of travel
•Level of Service = traffic volume and delay
36
TRAFFIC
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Governor’s Office of Planning & Research
Guidelines
•Screening criteria that exempts projects
•Projects located ½ mile from transit exempted
•Measurement taken in straight line not path of
travel
37
Major Transit Center
Project Site
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Needed to determine General Plan compliance
•Carlsbad Village Dr. designated “identity street”
•Not subject to LOS standards
•New project expected to reduce traffic trips
38
LEVEL OF SERVICE
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Loss of existing commercial businesses
•Ensuring the new commercial gets built
•Concerns the commercial parcel will be
developed with more residential
39
COMMERCIAL SPACE
(city of
Carlsbad
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
•Building height
•Bulk and scale of the structures
•Character of the downtown
40
SCALE, DESIGN & CHARACTER
(city of
Carlsbad
RECOMMENDED ACTION
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
Adopt the resolution, exhibit 1, approving the
site development plan as described in the
staff report.
41
(city of
Carlsbad
FINDINGS FOR DENIAL/DENSITY REDUCTION
ITEM 7 - CARLSBAD VILLAGE MIXED USE
42
1)The housing development project would have a specific, adverse
impact* upon public health or safety unless disapproved or
approved at a lower density; and
2)There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the
adverse impact.
*“Specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and
unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety
standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was
deemed complete.
CARLSBAD VILLAGE
MIXED USE PROJECT
Eric Lardy, City Planner
Cliff Jones, Principal Planner
Jason Goff, Senior Planner
September 24, 2024
434343
(city of
Carlsbad
Carlsbad Village Mixed Use (CVMU)
City Council
September 24, 2024
1
30+ Years of Building Mixed Use Communities
2
Abbot Lofts (Mixed Use)
The Lucky (Mixed Use)
Whole Foods (Retail)
Pacific Coast Highway (Mixed Use)
Decades of Deferred Maintenance and Neglect
33
Current Gateway to the Village…
4
Village and Barrio Master Plan
What is Master Plan’s vision for this site in the future?
Village and Barrio Master Plan, Charette Summary Report (Page 13-14)
I terstat
5
Project Milestones
Property
Acquired
Outreach
Begins
Application
Submittal
Coordination
with City +
Technical
Review
Continued
Outreach
December 2021 May 2023 2023 - 2024 20242022
Local Investor Acquires Carlsbad Village Plaza
Grocery-Anchored Shopping Center Sells for $23.5 Million
By Adrian Robles
costar Research
January 31, 2022 111:41 AM
THE COAST NEWS GROUP
THE COAST N EWS I THE INLAND EDITION
cmES v NEWS v COLUMNS v EVENT CALENDAR LEGAL NOTICES v SPECIAL SECTIONS v PO
Carlsbad Village Plaza
Legal Notices a.rchieve
How to Place Legal Ads
Carlsbad Village Plaza eyed for mixed-use
development
0June 21, 2023 OJ a ®4708
CARLSBAD - A new mixed-use development of commercial
buildings and more than 200 residential units could signal the end
of Carlsbad Village Plaza. The 4-acre ...
~ Carlsbad Village is at New Village Arts Theatre. \J May13-Carlsbad-0
•• Tomorrow! Village Voices meeting, Tues. May 14, 8-9:30 AM at the Dea Huston New Village
Arts Center.
Learn about the Carlsbad Village Plaza redevelopment project and upcoming CVA summer events.
Plus, enjoy complimentary coffee and snacks. :::, .. See more
Community Concerns - What We Heard
6
1.Need for Affordable Housing
2.Loss of Market and Retail
3.Building Height
4.Parking and Security
5.Walkability / Pedestrian Safety
6.Traffic
MARKET
77
Multi-Building
Approach
Walkability +
Pedestrian Safety
Community Concerns - How We Responded
Secured Parking
+ Noise Buffer
1 2
3 4
Single-Story
Retail
Sight Lines Building Height
□ ,□
RESIDENTIAL
I I ..,.._..._,._.,___, ,_.,...
PARK NG
r I , , I
\ J
\ _J
Lr
/)
8
Aligns with the Village and Barrio Master Plan
and complies with State Law.
Provides new affordable housing for very low-
income families and working professionals
Includes updated retail to support small
businesses and provide a full-service market
Creates a vibrant new community consistent
with Carlsbad’s established reputation for
thoughtful master planning.
Conclusion
9
Thank Y ou
Predominant CVMU concerns
•Deficient public outreach (approved by staff)
•Separate retail and residential lots for mixed-use
–Will retail portion get timely developed?
•Inappropriate staff exemption from detailed CEQA
(environmental) study
–Flawed traffic analysis: Inappropriately screened-out
–Deficient cumulative impact analysis
–Public health exception (food/pharmacy desert; air quality; noise)
1
Summary of requested actions by City Council
•Send project back for public outreach
•Require consolidation of site into single lot or re-calculate density bonus only on residential lot
•Require retail to be developed at same time as apartments
•Remove City Planner’s authority to waive restrictions/conditions
•Send project back for additional CEQA review (VMT, cumulative impact, and/or public health)
•Request voluntary design changes or impose mandatory design changes
•Impose additional conditions of approval to improve project/reduce impact
2
CARLSBAD VILLAGE PLAZA MIXED
USE
Carlsbad City Council Meeting
Sept. 24, 2024
Kris Wright District 1 Carlsbad
CARLSBAD VILLAGE PLAZA
ESTABLISHED IN 1964
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
SIA.TE OE C&IEORNIA-BUSINESS CONSUMER SERVICES AND l:IOUSING AGENC .. ..._ _______ ___,GAYIN NEWSOM G~
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500
Sacramento, CA 95833
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453 www hcd ca gQV
MEMORANDUM FOR:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
September 15, 2020
Planning Directors and Interested Parties
Housing Accou ility Act Technical Assistance
Advisory (Government Code Section 65589.5)
The Housing Accountability Act (HAA), Government Code section 65589.5, establishes
limitations to a local government's ability to deny, reduce the density of, or make
infeasible housing development projects, emergency shelters, or farmworker housing
that are consistent with objective local development standards and contribute to
meeting housing need. The Legislature first enacted the HAA in 1982 and recently
amended the HAA to expand and strengthen its provisions as part of the overall
recognition of the critically low volumes of housing stock in California. In amending the
HAA, the Legislature made repeated findings that the lack of housing and the lack of
affordable housing, is a critical problem that threatens the economic, environmental,
and social quality of life in California. This Technical Assistance Advisory provides
guidance on implementation of the HAA, including the following amendments.
Chapter 368 Statutes of 2011 <Senate Bill 167\ Chapter 373 Statutes of 2011
(Assembly Bill 678) -Strengthens the HAA by increasing the documentation necessary
and the standard of proof required for a local agency to legally defend its denial of low-
to-moderate-income housing development projects, and requiring courts to impose a
fine of $10,000 or more per unit on local agencies that fail to legally defend their
rejection of an affordable housing development project.
Chapter 378 Statutes of 2017 (Assembly Bill 1515) -Establishes a reasonable person
standard for determining conformance with local land use requirements.
Chapter 243 Statutes of 2018 (Assembly Bill 3194) -Expands the meaning of zoning
consistency to include projects that are consistent with general plan designations but
not zoning designation on a site if that zone is inconsistent with the general plan.
Chapter 654 Statutes of 2019 (Senate Bill 330) -Defined previously undefined terms
such as objective standards and complete application and set forth vesting rights for
projects that use a new pre-application process. Most of these provisions sunset on
January 1, 2025, unless extended by the Legislature and Governor.
If you have any questions, or would like additional information or technical assistance,
please contact the Division of Housing Policy Development at (916) 263-2911 .
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
Government Code 65589.5
"The HAA does not prohibit a local government from exercising its authority to disapprove a housing
development project, but rather provides limitations and conditions for exercising that authority."
"If the local government fails to provide the written documentation with the required timeframe, the
housing development project is deemed ... compliant.
Government Code 65589.5 (j)(l)
When a proposed housing development complies with applicable objective general plan, zoning and
subdivision standards and criteria including design review standards but the local agency proposes to
disprove the project ... the local agency shall base its decision regarding the proposed housing
development upon written findings supported by a preponderance of evidence on the record that both
of the following conditions exist:
1. The housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or
safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed
at a lower density.
2. There is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact other than the
disapproval of the housing development project or approval of the project upon the condition that it be
developed at a lower density.
Definitions:
Preponderance of the evidence in the record establishes that the standard is necessary to mitigate or
avoid specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety and there is no feasible alternative
method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the adverse impact.
'5 pecific adverse impact means a significant, quantifiable, direct and unavoidable impact based on
objective, Identified writte n public health or safety standards, policies or conditions as they existed on
the date the application was deemed complete. This definition to the written findings that a local
agency must make when it disapproves or imposes conditions on a housing development project ....
Government Code 65589.5 (d)(2), (j)(l)(A).
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
1. Approx 3500 Seniors are located in the Village and Barrio (2020 US Census).
2. 11.4% of Seniors 65y+ live below the Federal Poverty level. (Live Well,
County of San Diego 2018-2022)
3. There are 6 Senior affordable Apartment complexes in the Village and Barrio that
house Seniors 55+ consisting of approximately 230 units. One, Tyler Court
Senior Affordable apartments is owned by the City of Carlsbad.
4. The Seniors were here before the application was submitted and completed.
5. Our Seniors are a vulnerable part of our population, and a Health and Safety issue of
high magnitude will occur if this project is passed.
6. To document the Senior population living in these affordable complexes, a scientific
study was done to officially document some of these seniors.
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
NAME(PRI
TESTIMONIAL
CARLSBAD VlllAGE PLAZA
rum:
u tTit:. ________ _
L ARE YOU A RESIDENT OF AN AFR>RDABU: SENIOR APARTMENT OOMPl.EX IN THE VllLAGE./BARR.10?
(YftU_ ____ _ WHJa-t ONE? ________________ _
2. HOW LONG HAVE YOU LIVED IN THIS AFJCORDABLE SENIOR APARTMENT? _________ YRS _____ MO.
3,. 00 YOU REGUlARLY SHOP AT THE CARL58AD VILlAGE PLAZA (Y/N )? ___ AT SMART & FlNAL (Y/N)? ___ _
4. I.F NOT, HOW DO YOU GET YOUR GROCERl:ES, PRESCRlPTIONS AND HARDWARE EEDS?
.S. 00 YOU OWN A CAR (Y/N)? ______ _
6. 00 YOU OWN A COMPUTER WITH INTERNET (Y/N)? _______ _
7, HAVE 'IOU EVER ORDERED ONLINE FOR YOUR GROCERIES TO BE DEUVERED (Y/N)? _____________ _
S. HOW OFTEN OOYOUORDERO LINE(IFYOUAN.SWEREOYESTOQUESTION 7)? PER MONTH
9, 00 YOU BELONG TO AN ORGANIZED FOOD PROGRAM (SUCH AS FOOD STAMPS OR RECEIVE GROCERJES FROM A
FOOO PROGRAM SUCH AS OCEANSolDE KITCHEN ODUABORATIVE) ON A REGUl.AR BASIS? (Y/N)?
PLEASE CIRCU ABOVE AS TO WHICH ONES APPLY.
10, Will YOU FACE A HARDSHIP llJ:.; NO TRANSPORTATION HIGHER COSTS TO PURCHASE ELSEWHERE. DELIVERY FEES
OR ANY OTHER EFFECTS) IF THE VlllAGE PLAZA GOES Y/N)?
PL.EA.SE EXPlAJ • -----------------------------------------
WITNESS SIGNATURE
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
J•ffor on H'ouse
II
Affoo-da'bla, Apt• "..,-
(55+t 57 nit•,
/
Carl 'bad by Cl o Sea
Ret ,ement Communl,ty
Jafi ar-aon IHoua:a I
Affo,rd -bl• A_,.ts
j,55•J, 48 unite■
Tyl•r Ct Affor,dalola
Apt:. (55•t, 7'5 un ta
Ca lsbad Ci@!'isbad
v· lage P 'laza
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
RESULTS TYLER COURT SENIOR APARTMENTS
Testimonials: Tyler Court
# Resident Yrs/mo Shop at Plaza Smart n Final? car? computer with internet ever ordered groceries online organized food program hardship Notes
ly 7/0 y y y y n n y Higher cost, thinking of selling my car, safer to walk to plaza than over the freeway to vons
2y 11/0 y y n n n y y Delivery fees, higher costs, no transportation. This person uses a wheeled cart and walks to plaza
3y 14/6 y y y n n n y harder to drive being handicapped
4y 18/2 y y n n n y y No car can't get o ano her pharmacy or grocery store, Vons on Tamarack is too far/crossing freeway is scary.
She uses a walker with a seat to walk to plaza lx per week, stopping many times to rest.
Sy 0{7 y y y y n y y Increased cost of living & decreased quality of life, financial, physical, psychological b/c on fixed income
6y 2/0 y y y y n n y increased food costs & possible delivery fee. Fears his driving skills will decline as he ages.
Relies on other shops such as pharmacy & cleaners
7 y 8/0 y y y y n y y Will have to drive further (Winco, grocery outlet) spend more on gas
By 2/6 y y y y n y y Always uses this shopping center/concerned about driving further
9y 0/8 y y y n n y y Gas costs increase. Time and energy will increase
10 y 0/8 y y y n n y y driving further, convenience
11 y 2/3 y y y y n n y Increased costs in food & gas, longer time spent to get to other places
12 y 1/9 y y y y n n y Higher costs, gas mileage
By 4/0 y y n y• smart phone n y y Bus ride would take hours, walks to Plaza
14 y 18/6 y y n n n ? y
15 y 16/0 y y n y y lxpermo y y!! Doesn't have affordable options
16 y 20/0 y y n n n n y No transportation
17 y 20/1 y y y y n y y
18 y 8/0 y y y y n y y "there are a lot of people here that do not own a car. I walk to Smart n Final & plaza"
There are 75 units in he City owned Tyler Court Apartments. Senior affordable apartm!nts 55Y+ wi h many seniors in heir 801. Most live alone, abou 7 out of 75 have two people per uni . I
Results: All participan s shop a he Plaza and said hey will experience a hardship if he Plaza goes away. Many expressed fear of having to drive or walk across he freeway o Vons Tamarack. 12/18 own a car but one is hinking of selling.
11/17 (one was unclear) are on a food stamp or other reduced food program. 11/18 have a computer or phone with internet. All but one in this survey have never ordered groceries online.
All fear increased cos s as all are on a fixed income.
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
JEFFERSON HOUSE 1 & 2, TAVURUA AFFORDABLE APARTMENTS
Jefferson House 1
rs/mo Shop a Plaza Smart n Final? car? compu er wi h in erne ever ordered groceries online organized food progra m hardship No es
1 y 6/0 y y y y y 1x per mo y y Concerns abou driving further for Rx and food
es imonials from Jefferson House 2
1 y 19/0 y y y n n y y Higher costs, delivery fees, cancers abou driving further
2 y 17/0 y y y y n n y higher cos s if purchase elsewhere
3 y 20/2 y y n n n n y No car so walks o grocery, drugs ore, cleaners & hrift s ore
4y 3/5 y y n y y 2x per mon h y y No car, low income concerns abou higher costs elsewhere
5 y 'sto y y y n n n y higher cost, driving on busy roads o o hers ores
6y 7/0 y y y y n y y higher costs for gas o drive further.
7y 2/4 y y y y n y y Concerned abou cos of gas (so walks o grocery/plaza)
By '310 y y y n n n y Driving further (gas) and needs he pharmacy
es imonials from Tavarua Senior Ap s
1 y 2/1 y y y y y lx per mon h n y cost of gas, says if she has car issues, she can walk o he plaza
2 y 10/3 dna y y n n n y can walk for needed i ems
3 y 12/0 y y n n 1x in whole life y y!!! Doesn' have a car and walks o ge services
5 y 10/0 y y y y n y y walks every day o plaza. Concerned abou higher costs.
6y '310 y y y n n n y
All residen sin all 3 senior affordable apartmen s say hey will suffer a hardship if he Plaza goes away. All are concerned abou higher costs. 11/14 have a car, 7 /14 have a compu er wi h in erne . 10/14 have never
ordered groceries online. 7 /14 belong o an organized food program such as EBT (foods amps). All are concerned abou ei her driving or walking further, and higher costs.
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
COMPARISON OF FOOD MARKETS BARONS, VALLEY FARMS AND SMART &
FINAL (MAY 2024)
II Smart & Final Carlsbad (5/17/24) Valley Farm La Jolla (5/17/24) Barons Market Pt Loma (5/31/24)
Item Brand Price UOM Brand Price UOM Difference Brand Price UOM Difference
Apples Gala $1.49 lb Gala $2.49 lb 67.11 % Gala $2.49 lb 67.11 %
Apples Granny Smith $1.49 lb Granny Smith $1.99 lb 33.56% Granny Smith $1.99 lb 33.56%
Bananas $0.69 lb $1 .25 lb 81.16% $0.69 lb 0.00%
Butter 1st Street 4 sticks $4.49 1Ib Alta Dena 4 Sticks $6.99 lb 55.68% Alta Dena 4 sticks $4.99 lb 11.14%
Chicken, Whole, Cooked In house $8.99 ea In-house $10.99 ea 22.25% In house $7.99 ea -11.12%
Chicken, Whole, Fresh In-house $1.59 lb In-house $5.99 lb 276.73% In-house $2.79 lb 75.47%
Coffee, Ground Peets $10.99 lb Wipeout Coffee $23.99 lb 118.26% Four Sisters $7.99 lb -27.30%
Eggs, Cage Free 1st Street CF $4.99 dozen Eben Haezer CF $3.99 dozen -20.04% Veg-A-Fed CF $3.99 dozen -20.04%
Eggs, Organic Sun Harvest Organic $5.99 dozen Happy Hen Organiz $9.99 dozen 66.78% Cadia Organic Free Range $5.99 dozen 0.00%
Fish, Fresh Salmon Atlantic Prev Frozen $14.99 lb Salmon, Wild $19.90 lb 32.76% Salmon Sockeye Prev Frozen $16.99 lb 13.34%
Ground Beef, Fresh 83% lean $4.99 lb 80% lean $7.99 lb 60.12% 80/20 $6.99 lb 40.08%
Lettuce $2.49 ea Iceberg $1 .99 ea -20.08% Iceberg $3.99 ea 60.24%
Milk Alta Dena whole $4.99 gal Alta Dena Whole $8.99 gal 80.16% Swiss whole $4.69 gal -6.01 %
Onion, Yellow $1.49 lb $1 .99 lb 33.56% $1.50 lb 0.67%
Peanut Butter Jif 40oz $0.20 oz Jif 40Oz $0.27 oz 37.55% Crazy Richards 16 Oz $0.25 oz 24.84%
Potato, Russet $0.99 lb $1 .49 lb 50.51 % $0.50 lb -49.70%
Tomato, Beefsteak $1.99 lb $1 .99 lb 0.00% $3.99 lb 100.50%
Water La Croix 12 oz can $0.50 ea La Croix 12Oz Can $1.49 ea 198.00% La Croix 12 oz can $0.66 ea 32.25%
White Bread Dave's $5.99 loaf Dave's $8.99 ea 50.08% Sourdough Store Brand $4.49 ea -25.04%
Yogurt Mount High Organic $3.99 32 oz Stauss Organic $9.49 32oz 137.84% ? Organic $6.49 32oz 62.66%
Average Difference Baseline 68.10% 19.13%
I
REQUEST TO DENY THE PROJECT
CONCLUSIONS
1. ALL SENIORS WHO TOOK THE SURVEY SAID THEY WOULD FACE A HARDSHIP IF THE VILLAGE PLAZA AND ITS STORES WERE REMOVED
2. ALL SENIORS SHOPPED AT THE VILLAGE PLAZA AND SMART & FINAL
3. ALL SENIORS SAID THEY WOULD BE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED AND FACE A HARDSHIP IF THIS DEVELOPMENT PASSES
4. 14 SENIORS SAID THEY DO NOT HAVE A COMPUTER WITH INTERNED TO ORDER GROCERIES
5. WE HAVE 9 SENIORS WHO DO NOT HAVE A CAR/TRANSPORTATION AND WILL BE NEGATIVELY AFFECTED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT (MANY HAVE HEALTH ISSUES)
6. VARIOUS COMMENTS FROM SENIORS INDICATED THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT HIGHTER COSTS AND HAD NO AFFORDABLE OPTIONS
7. 18 SENIORS SAID THEY BELONGED TO AN ORGANIZED FOOD PROBRAM SUCH AS EBT/FOOD STAMPS
8. TESTIMONIALS ARE MEANT TO BE LEGAL DOCUMENTS WITH A WITNESS SIGNATURE
9. MOST OF THE SENIORS AT TYLER COURT (75 UNITS) LIVE ALONE AND ARE AFRAID OF LOSING THEIR DRIVING SKILLS AS THEY AGE AND ARE AFRAID OF CROSSING OVER THE I-5 TO GET TO VONS 10. PLEASE CONSIDER YOUR CONSTITUENTS AS THEY ARE ON A FIXED INCOME AND CANNOT AFFORD TO BUY AT A HIGHER PRICED MARKET
Carlsbad Village Mixed Use (CVMU)
project concerns
September 24, 2024 City Council
Steve Linke
CEQA/Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)
•Housing laws co-exist with CEQA
environmental laws
•High VMT correlates with higher GHGs and
can be associated with congestion
VMT common sense
•Local-serving retail is VMT-reducing
•Project eliminates ~80% of Plaza’s local-serving retail
–Customers must travel farther, on average
•Project adds 218 new apartments + 5-story parking garage
•Common sense: Project will lead to a net VMT increase
–Staff wrongly exempted the project from CEQA
–Regardless, changes possible if number of units not decreased and project remains feasible
3
VMT guidance/experience
•VMT analysis guidance
–State: Office of Policy and Research (OPR)
–Carlsbad: VMT Analysis Guidelines
•13 years experience (4 years on traffic commission)
•Met with OPR professionals
•Professional opinion from former Carlsbad CTE
Appropriate VMT analysis
•Residential and retail components of mixed-
use projects should be analyzed
independently.
•Residential component should be analyzed
using VMT/capita map.
VMT/capita map
method
•218 new apartments
•CEQA threshold:
85% of city average
VMT/capita
Traffic Analysis Zone 818
95% of city average VMT/capita
Train station
CVMU site
Inappropriate methods allowed
•“Net VMT change” calculation
•Combined retail and residential parts
•Not appropriate with VMT-reducing local-
serving retail
•Allowed to subtract existing retail mileage
Flawed and inappropriate “net VMT change”
method/calculation
8
Type
P'rroj1ect
Displaced
Existing
( to be removed~
Foot11otes:
Land -•e
Res.identi.-il
Mairiket --
Qtu'llity Restaurant
Reta.i] / Strip Commercia]
Subtotal P troi1ed
In tern.ii C aptm·,e b
Prnj-ed External T!lips
TABLE2
REJO,EVELOIPIMENT VM T
Quantit_r
218, DU
5.8, KSF ---
6 KSF --
2 KSF
-
-
-
Hardwaire Store displaced) 9 KSF
Grocery Store (displaced) 19 KSF
Tofal Project+ Di')pla,r,e<l -
Shopping Center 58.7 KSF
Net Cha112e in VMT
a_ Average trip lengths from StieetLi~ht Dar plat:furm.. See Attadmie.nt B.
D111ily Volumes (ADU ATL 11•
Total
Vl\·IT R111te Volume
6 /D 1,308, 10.5 13,734
150 /KSF 870 6.5 5 655 - --
100 /KSF 600 6.5 3~900 - --
40 /KSF 8,0 6.5 520
-2 .. 858 -23.8091
-6;16 -:1 31,
-2.,242 -18,6;77
60 /KSF 540 4.0 2 160
120 /KSF 2.,280 2.0 4,5 60
- - -25.397
LO /KSF 7 044 6.5 45,786
-20,389
b. linternal c--llptur,e e-.. timated using CHRP' 8:..5 1 Intema] Trip Capture Estimation Tool VMT reduction calculated. by m:nLtiiplying capttn;ed
ADT by ,veighted m,•e,rage, trip length ofunadjusted Project trips.
Net change method: OPR guidance
“[E]stimating the change in total VMT with and without the project can evaluate
whether a project is likely to divert existing trips, and what effect those diversions
will be on total VMT. This method answers the question, 'What is the net effect of
the project on area VMT?'…The analysis should address the full area over which
the project affects travel behavior, even if the effect on travel behavior crosses
political boundaries.”
Net change method: Carlsbad VMT
Analysis Guidelines
“There may be circumstances where a project meets one of the screening
criteria, but evidence suggests that the project may increase areawide VMT.”
“[An] example is redevelopment of core services (basic grocery shopping,
general needs stores/services, etc.) that the existing population relies on.
Removing these core services, without replacing them, may cause VMT to
increase as existing residents travel farther to access these services.”
STAFF SLIDE X
Redevelopment Projects
Wh re a project repl c,es existing VMT-gen,e ,ating land uses, if the repla ement leads t o a net overall
decr,ease in VMT, the project ould lead to a less-than-significant t ransportation impact . If t he project
leads to a net overall increase iin VMT, then t he t hresholds described above should apply.
Req ui res Addressing the ,Q,uestions:
• Hlow does VMT going to/from1 this site change w it lh tlhe project
action?
• What is tlhe net change in VMT to/from tlhis site?
Evaluating Total VM T Generated by a Proj ect:
• All veh icle trips are traced to/from1 the project site. Trips ar,e
not t runcated at c ity or regional boundaries. The trip lengths
from all t rips to/from the proj ect site are summ1ed up to
produce total proj ect VMT fo r the site.
• The calculation considers the existingVMT to/from the site,
and the future VMT to/from the site.
…
f ro1m: Eric La rdy <Eric. La rd y1@ca rl s bad ca . gov>
Sent:: !F riday, Sept ember 1, 2023 1:39 PM
T10 : Jason Goff <Jaso n.Goff1@carlsbadca.gov>
Cc : M ilke S11:rong <M ike.S r o ng1@car lsba dca .gov>
Subje1ct RE: 2.ND CYCLE REVIEW 1. CARLS BAD VI ULAGE MIIXED US E -SDP2D2.3 -0D14
VMl > emo: . ot cl ea r hy t hey aren1't highhghting 6 in t his table, t hey are stat ing that
it .· as n't eva luated. Ho •. ca n removi ng a loca lly serv ing r e am be a ne reduction of
VMl • it hout evaluating it? For Criteria 3, he net decrease in reta i'I is a ou · • 0,000, I
think that one should be removed entirely and focus o n screen ing it out based on
proximity to trans it The OPR leclhnical Advisory does st at e t hat proje ts • it hin a ½
mile t rans it stat ion shou ld be presumed to hav e a less tha n significant im pact. . one of
he except io ns to his appear to apply. {Page 16') Rev ise,• Proposal on Updat es to t he
CEQA. Guide lines on Eva luating Transportation Impacts in CEOA (ca.gov) I t hink t he
st rongest argument i~ to document the proximity to transit \.·hy the exoept ions don't
apply/. and bac it up • ith CA PCOA standards hat i is mixed us e and incl ud es
a'· ·ordable hous i·ng. That . ·ay .-e don't have to make t he cl aim that it is loca lly serving
ret ail or redu ing V • •. •• T.
“Transit-oriented” project exceptions
•The presumption of non-significance would not
apply if:
–“Project-specific or location-specific information
indicates that the project will still generate significant
levels of VMT.”
–“[The project includes] more parking for use by
residents, customers, or employees of the project than required by the jurisdiction…”
Project parking
•State law says zero parking spaces must be accepted 14
TABILIE ID -PARIK!I NG ST ANDA.RDS
Typ1e NoI. of CoIm miercial V'BM P Re1quir1ed 1CMIC 21.,86 1Req11U11ired Pro piosed oif Us e IRe s,.U its,
Studi,o 15 1 spaIce per unit 0.5, space per unit -(15 spa ces)1 (8 spaces)
1-Bdrm 87 1 spaIce per unit 0.5, space per unit 284 spaoes -(87 spa ces)1 1[44 spaoes) (13 spaces 1~5 spaces per unit 0.5, space per unit 2,-Bdrm 90 -per unit) 1(135 spa1ces)1 1[45 spaoes)
3-Bdrm .26, 1~5 spaces per unit 0.5, space per unit -f 3,9 SIP aces l1 U3 su acesl
I Resiident:i a1III T1ota Is:: 276 spacie<S 110 spaces 284 sp,a,ces I
R,etai ~ '9 8·00 5-F 1 space per 415, SF ---, I , . ,, , ' (.24 spa ces)1 56 sp aces 1 space per 170 SF Restaurant --4,000 SF (.24 spa ces}1 -
I Com me l'icia1ll l 1otals:: 48 sp,a1ces -516 sp,aces I
OweraH T1otals:: 1--[ __ ,3_:24_· _s-=--p_ac_. 1e_,s_-______________ 3_41_,0_s.....:.p_,a_c_e_s_.
STAFF SLIDE XTransit Screening Assessment:
Other Criteria: Including More Parking Than Required
Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact Near Tronsit Stat.ions
Proposed CECA Guideline Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1), states t hat lead agencies generally should
presume that certain projects [including ra iclential, retail, and office projects, as. we ll as projects that
are a mix of tlhese uses) propos.ed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop1!l or an existing stop
20 Pub. Resources C.ode, § 21064 .. 3 r •MaJor transit stop' means a site oontainlng an existing rail trans.It
station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or ra il transit service, or the intersection of two· or more
major bus routes with a frequency of se1Vice interval of 15 minutes or less duning tile morning. and
afternoon peak commu~e pe riods.').
Bl Page
December 2018
along a high qua 11 ty transit oorrl do r21 will have a less-t ha -sig riifi cant Im pact o ri VMT. This pres um pt lo n
would not app: y, l,owe11er, if projec:t-specific or location-specific information indicates that the project
will still genera,te significant le11els of VMT. For e)(ample, the pres umption might not be appropriate if
the projiect:
• Has a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of less than 0.75
• Ind de5 more p;a rki for use bv ~eside11ts, customers, or employees ol the proj ect tha11
required by the Jurls.d ic~ion (if the Jurisdiction r•equires the project to supply parking)
• Is inconsistent with the applicable Sustainable Communities Strategy {as determined by tile lead
age11cy, with input from the Metropolitan Plarmin8 Organization,)
• Replaces affofdable residential u lts vith a smaller numbef of moderate-o.r hlgh-ilricome
residential unrts
Parking Supply
General Residential
Accessible Res idential
EV Charging Res idential
General Commercial
Accessible Commercial
EV Charging Commercial
TOTA L All Spaces
iTOTAL General Spaces Provided
Parking Required (VBMP)
Res idential
Com1merci al
TOTAL Spaces Required
Number of
Spaces Provided
261
8
15
50
3
3
340
311
Number of
Spaces Provided
276
48
324
Planned CVD Rincon (50 apts in 5 stories/72 ft)
16
Lot configurations
17
Carlsbad Village Inn
Single-family home
2 single-family homes
Carl’s Jr.
CVMU Hope Apartments
'
Design changes/conditions
•Conditions of approval
–Unbundle parking costs from rent to incentivize less vehicle ownership
–Require a car-sharing program and provision of alternative modes of travel
–Require free or subsidized transit passes to residents
–Parking structure can only be used by residents
•Design changes that would allow more space for retail and/or allow space to be repurposed for apartments with lower building heights)
–Reduce or eliminate parking garage consistent with transit-oriented development
–Move some or all parking underground
–Build residential over retail ("vertical" mixed-use)
–Increase commercial square footage to allow a larger grocery store to help avoid a food desert and reduce the amount of lost local-serving retail
18