HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-01-19; Planning Commission; ; EIR 93-02|GPA 93-01|MP 92-01|LCPA 93-06|LFMP 87-23|CT 92-08|HDP 92-15|SUP 92-05 - GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLANDATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
l.
APPUCATfO.OMPLETE DATE:
MARCH 12 1993
STAFF PLANNER: CHRISTER WESTMAN
STAFF REPORT @)
JANUARY 19, 1994
PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01/MP 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 87-23/CT 92-08/HDP
92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN -A request for certification of
an Environmental Impact Report and recommendation of approval of a General Plan
Amendment, Master Plan, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Local Facilities
Management Plan, and approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development
Permit ;md Special Use Permit to allow for the future development of a 600,000
square foot commercial retail center and 400 attached multi-family dwelling units
on property generally located on 281 acres at the southwest comer of El Camino
Real and La Costa Avenue in Local Facilities Management Zone 23.
RECOMMENDATlON
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3598
recommending CERTIFICATION of the Environmental Impact Report EIR 93-02 and ADOPT
Planning Commission Resolution No's. 3599, 3600, 3601, 3602, 3603, 3604 and 3605
recommending APPROVAL of GPA 93-01/MP 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP Zone 23 and
APPROVlNG CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05, based on the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein.
n. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The project is a Master Plan as required by the Planned Community Zone and East
Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt Properties segment of the Local Coastal Program. The Master Plan
is divided into four subareas and will serve as the zoning for a 281 acre parcel of land
southwest of the intersection of El Camino Real and La Costa Avenue. As stated in the
Master Plan text " It is the intent of the Master Plan to serve as the development and
preservation policy and design guideline for the Green Valley property. A Master Plan is
an instrument under which development occurs in an orderly and positive manner without
creating significant impacts to the existing and projected infrastructure and setting. A
Master Plan document establishes land uses, delineates development areas, assigns density,
considers differing land use interrelationships, delineates specific design criteria, outlines
phasing, and provides implementation methodology. It is also the basis for future, more
detailed, project reviews, such as individual tentative maps, and Precise Development
Plans."
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-0l/rv-2-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 8-/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 2
The project site can be characterized by three different land forms. The western portion
is vegetated upland hillside with slopes generally greater than 15%, the central portion is
vacant gently sloping land previously used for agriculture and the eastern portion is a
densely vegetated riparian corridor. Near the comer of El Camino Real and La Costa
Avenue is the Red Barn which has been used by both Hillman Properties and The
Fieldstone Company as a sales office for their respective residential communities. It is
currently being used by San Diego Cellular as an administrative servicing center. No other
commercial or residential uses exist on the property.
Associated with the Master Plan and necessary for the creation of the Master Plan are:
III.
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
LAND USE
Certification of an Environmental Impact Report addressing all of the
potential impacts to the environment created by the implementation of the
Master Plan;
A General Plan Amendment which will change the existing General Plan Land
Use designations of Community Commercial/Office/Residential Medi um-High
to Extensive Regional Retail/Open Space/Residential Medium-High;
A Local Coastal Program Amendment to the East Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt
Properties segment land use designations for consistency with the General
Plan;
A Tentative Map which will subdivide the property into 11 parcels;
A Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 23 which assesses and identifies
all of the infrastructural needs associated with development within the zone;
A Hillside Development Permit required by Title 21 because the subject
property has an overall slop~ greater than 15 feet in height; and
A Special Use Permit which evaluates the effect of alteration to land form
within a floodplain.
ANALYSIS
General Plan/Zoning
The existing General Plan designation for the property is a mixed use district of Community
Commercial/Office/Residential Medium High (C/O/RMH) and the current zoning is
EIR .93-02/GPA 93-01.P 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE.-23/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 3
-Planned Community (PC). Uses allowed under those land use designations are commercial
operations which cater to the local community, office, and residential development with
a density of 8-15 dwelling units per acre and a growth control point of 11.5 units per acre.
The proposed land uses are Extensive Regional Retail (RRE), Open Space (OS) and
Residential Medium High (RMH). Uses allowed under RRE are commercial operations
which cater to a regional co~munity. Open Space uses include passive and active
recreation/open space and RMH allows a residential density of 8-15 dwelling units per acre
and a growth control point of 11.5. Note that the applicant is proposing the area around
the Red Barn . be designated for neighborhood commercial uses, however, staff is
recommending against this and a fuH explanation follows later in this report.
Distribution and intensity of land use within the Master Plan were in part determined by
the property constraints and in part on the General Plan Land Use assumption that the
developable portion of the property should be divided into equal thirds. The land use split
would therefore be 2/3 for Community Commercial and Office and 1/3 for Residential
Medium High. As seen in Table I, the assumed net acreage within the Master Plan for
residential development is 34.8 acres.
I
TABLE I I
LAND USE GROSS ACREAGE CONSTRAINED NET
ACREAGE DEVELOPMENT
ACREAGE
Neighborhood 3.6 2.5 1.1
Commercial
Extensive Regional 76.6 0.0 76.6
Retail
Residential 35.4 0.6 34.8
Medium High
Open Space 166.5
I TOTAL I
282.1 I 3.1 I 112.5 I
At 11.5 units per acre, a total of 400.2 units may be achieved. With the intention of
setting as much open space aside within the Master Plan as is feasible, the area of
disturbance for the residential Planning Area was reduced to a little more than half of the
identified 34.8 acres, or 17.9 acres. However, the maximum number of units remain the
same.
E[R 93-02/GPA 93-01/M.2-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 8 .. /
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 4
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment relates to the definitions of
Community Commercial and Extensive Regional Retail. The existing General Plan would
allow, as determined by the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 23, approximately
1 million square feet of Community Commercial and Office combined (this projection is
derived from a net developable commercial acreage of 76.6 as seen in Table [, and an
assumed retail floor area yield of 30%). Assuming that half of that could be Community
Commercial, a totql of 500,504 square feet would be allowed. However, by definition the
GeneralPlan limits the collection of commercial uses to 300,000 square feet if it is to be
classified as Community Commercial. Anything over that amount is classified as regional.
The project proposes 600,000 square feet of commercial and must therefore be classified
as Extensive Regional Retail.
However, the overall development intensity of the proposed project is less than what the
General Plan would allow, considering 1.001 million square feet of commercial/office
development. The project is also proposed with significant natural buffers between the
project and existing residential and commercial development. The reduction in
development intensity which reduces impacts to the City's Growth Management
Performance Standards and the specific development guidelines proposed through the
Master Plan are supporting factors for the General Plan Amendment.
The existing zoning is Planned Community (PC). The proposal is consistent with this
designation through the submittal of a Master Plan. Properties of more than 100 acres
within the PC zone are required to be processed by Master Plan. Land uses within the
Master Plan are determined by the underlying General Plan designations.
Local Coastal Program: East Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt Properties segment
The existing land uses designated for this portion of the Local Coastal Program (LCP)
segment were identified as those which are " ... pursuant to a Master Plan which is
consistent with the uses allowed by the Carlsbad General Plan adopted as of March
1, 1988." Those uses are Community Commercial, Office, and Residential Medium High
(C/O/RMH).
The project includes a proposed General Plan Amendment from C/O/RMH to Extensive
Regional Retail, Open Space and Residential Medium High. Because the LCP defers to the
General Plan for land use determination, the Master Plan's consistency with the LCP will
be established through the General Plan Amendment and an amendment to the East
Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt Properties segment (LCPA 93-06).
Local Coastal Program (LCP) requirements include:
Master Plan -Prior to the issuance of a Coastal Permit a Master Plan must be approved.
The project is a Master Plan;
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01;-92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 123/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 5
Twenty-five percent (25%) or greater slopes -The intent of the LCP is to preserve and
enhance slopes with significant native vegetation that are greater than 25%. Planning
areas proposed for development within the Master Plan are primarily confined to disturbed
areas with slopes less than 15%;
Wetlands buffer -A 50 foot buffer preserved as open space is required upland of the
riparian corridor. A minimum 50 foot varying width buffer is proposed along the western
upland side of the riparian corridor;
Thirty-five (35) foot height limit -Both commercial and residential buildings are limited
to a maximum height of 35 feet, with an allowance for non-habitable architectural
elements up to 45 feet;
Agriculture conversion mitigation fee -Conversion of the non-prime agricultural lands
within Green Valley is subject to Coastal Act Section 30171.5 which requires a mitigation
fee. At the time of discretionary development approvals, the conversion mitigation fee will
be required;
3: 1 mitigation for riparian disturbance -The LCP identified a maximum of two crossings
of the approximately 40 acre riparian corridor subject to the replacement of any resulting
disturbed wetlands at a ratio of 3 acres replacement for every one disturbed. As discussed
in the EIR, disturbed wetlands as a result of the two proposed crossings will be mitigated
at a ratio of 3:1.
View protection: bluffs and lagoon -The project will not affect the viewshed to the lagoon
and proposed development will occur at the base of the bluffs. The generalized character
of the bluffs will not be adversely affected because the great majority of the bluffs will still
be visible from most public spaces and throughways.
Coastal Permit -A Coastal Development Permit will be required for any development with
the Green Valley Master Plan.
The Master Plan incorporates those specific criteria established in the LCP segment. As
discussed under General Plan/Zoning, the proposed project is less intense than what could
be allowed under the existing General Plan. The amendment to the LCP which designates
the Master Plan as the approved land uses will guarantee a lesser intensity of development
on the site.
Planning Area 5
As the Master Plan was originally submitted, there were four ( 4) planning areas proposed.
Land uses within those planning areas were designated as: Riparian Corridor, Retail Center,
Multi-Family Residential and Neighborhood Commercial. During early staff review the
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-0l/M"2-011LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE sA1
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 6
applicant was directed to separate the upland bluffs from the Retail and Residential
planning areas into a separate Open Space planning area thereby creating five (5) planning
areas. The Neighborhood Commercial site at the southwest comer of La Costa and El
Camino Real became Planning Area 5.
Staff and the applicant have differing opinions on the best use for that comer. As shown
in the attached applicant report,. a limited commercial use is desired. Staff has based the
recommendation of Master Plan approval in part on exclusion of the Neighborhood
Commercial use from the comer and removal of the Red Barn and associated parking upon
construction of street improvements required for the larger project.
Support for exclusion of the use from that comer include:
Intersection Spacing -City standards require a minimum intersection spacing distance of
1200 feet for a major arterial and 2600 feet for a prime arterial unless no other access to
the site can be obtained. In such a case, drivewavs can be established at one-half the
distance of the required intersection spacing provided that acceptable levels of service can
be maintained. In this instance, acceptable levels of service cannot be maintained.
Intersection Congestion -Intensification of the commercial nature of the site will
significantly increase the turning movements and thereby reduce the capacity of the
intersection. This, along with inadequate intersection spacing will negatively impact the
traffic movement at the intersection.
Visual Impact -Development at this comer would lessen the sense of the natural setting
. created by the adjacent riparian corridor and Batiquitos Lagoon to the north.
General Plan -Policies within the General Plan regarding Neighborhood Commercial
encourage placement of such uses so that pedestrian traffic is encouraged. The site,
however, lends itself and would have to be directed toward high drive-by traffic in order
to be successful.
Open Space Resource Conservation Management Plan (OSCRMP) -A primary action
priority of the OSCRMP is the protection of open space alongside El Camino Real to form
a gateway into the City from Encinitas. Preservation of the comer as open space would
achieve that action priority.
Open Space
The project proposes preservation and restoration of significant natural open space areas
as well as the inclusion of developed open space areas for onsite recreation. Nearly 70%
of the total land area is devoted to open space with the remaining area to be developed.
--EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01/MP 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 87-23/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 7
Per the Zone 23 Local Facilities Management Plan, 15% of the total unconstrained land
area within the zone must be set aside as open space. As shown in the following TABLE
II the project will provide more than two (2) times the minimum open space requirement.
I TABLE II I
I OPEN SPACE I
ACRES
AREA DESCRIPTION: required proposed
LFMP 15% (Prior to a G.P.A.) 27.58 68.00
~
Developed area 86.40
Mitigation 29.50 29.50
Development constrained 97.30 97.30
Remaining unconstrained open space 68.00
TOTAL 281.20
The actual Open Space area within the Master Plan is approximately 195 acres which
includes the upland bluffs, riparian corridor, and mitigation areas. All of these areas are
placed into Open Space lots.
The preserved and revegetated areas provide for a substantial link from north to south of
the upland bluff and riparian corridor both with valuable natural plant communities. A
significant connection between the upland bluff and the riparian corridor is located at the
northerly end of the Master Plan paralleling La Costa Avenue. The majority of the open
space will be habitat conservation, however, a portion will be used for public trails
consistent with the Open Space Resource Conservation Management Plan and private trails
which connect the residential and commercial components of the Master Plan.
Open Space Advisory Committee
The Master Plan was presented to the .Open Space Advisory Committee on December 9,
1993. The Committee concurred with the adequacy of the provision of Open Space and
the public and private trail system and recommended that the project be forwarded to the
Planning Commission and City Council.
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01/MP 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 87-23/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 8
GROWTI-I MANAGEMENT -LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT PLAN: ZONE 23
Reviewed concurrently with the Master Plan is a Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP)
• for Zone 23. The LFMP analyzes the public facility impacts of the project and recommends
appropriate mitigation, including a financing plan. Land uses used for determining facilities
impacts are reflective of the Master Plan; i.e. Extensive Regional Retail, Open Space,
Residential Medium High and Neighborhood Commercial. The LFMP does not designate
land uses as a General Plan or Master Plan, but makes land use assumptions for the sake
of facilities planning. Therefore, assumption of the Master Plan land uses, including the
applicant proposed Neighborhood Commercial site at the comer of El Camino Real and La
Costa Avenue, is appropriate for a maximum facilities need analysis. As indicated in Table
III, all Public Facilities will comply with the adopted performance standards through
buildout. A summary of the Zone 23 facilities needs analysis follows:
I
TABLE III I
I LFMP IMPACTS ASSESSMENT I
I
FACILITY
I
IMPACTS
I
COMPLIANCE WITH I STANDARDS
City Administrative Facilities 1390 sq. ft. Yes (CFO No. 1)
Library 867 sq. ft. Yes (CFO No. 1)
Wastewater Treatment Capacity 733.3 EDU's Yes
Parks 2. 78 acres Yes (Park In Lieu Fee)
Drainage Basin D Yes
Circulation 33,400 ADT Yes (See Discussion)
Fire Station 2 Yes
Open Space 68.0 acres Yes (See Discussion)
Schools 212 studs. Yes
Sewer Collection System 733.3 EDU's Yes
Water Distribution System 303,376 GPO Yes
The project contains conditions of approval requmng various public improvements
including circulation system improvements to La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real. All
facilities requirements of the Zone 23 LFMP have been made a condition of project
ErR 93-02/GPA 93-01/MP 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 87-23/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 9
approval. The LFMP for Zone 23 limits the buildout and phasing of the zone based on
compliance with the Growth Management Plan standards.
The growth control point for the residential portion of the Master Plan (Planning Area 3)
is 11.5. The maximum number of units allowed within the Master Plan is based on a net
development area of 34.8 acres which equals 400.2. The Master Plan limits the number
of units to 400. Therefore, the proposed residential development is consistent with the
dwelling unit limitations established by Proposition E.
COMMUN[lY FAC[UTIES O[STRICT NO. 1
Community Facilities District (CFO) No. 1 was formed by City Council in 1986 in order to
fund improvements of specific public facilities throughout the City of Carlsbad. All
property which is not located within Local Facilities Management Zones 1, 2, 3, 4, & 6 at
first discretionary approval, except Master and Specific Plans, must be made part of (CFO)
No. 1.
Submittal and action on the Tentative Map subsequently requires that Zone 23 be annexed
into CFO No. 1. The project has been conditioned to annex.
TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION
Five circulation alternatives were analyzed. The components of the circulation analysis
included proposed Street "A", proposed Levante Street and Calle Barcelona extensions,
potential extension of Street "A" north to La Costa and the potential extension of Street "A"
south to the future Leucadia Boulevard extension.
As determined in the traffic analysis of the Green Valley Environmental impact Report,
there is no significant advantage to any of the alternatives reviewed over the proposed
project. Average Daily Trips (ADT) change at specified intersections and times of day,
however, Level of Service (LOS) does not change at significant intersections. Traffic is
projected to flow at acceptable levels after development of the project as proposed with
conditions.
Biolo'gical constraints, City boundaries and property ownership reduce the viability of an
extension of Street "A" north to La Costa Avenue. The most significant connection between
the upland bluff and riparian corridors for the purpose of wildlife movement occurs at this
northerly section of the Master Plan. Bisecting the connection with a road would reduce
the value of both the upland and riparian habitats. [n order to meet intersection spacing
standards, the extension of Street "A" would require an alignment westerly into the City
of Encinitas and through property under a different ownership.
EfR 93-02/GPA 93-01/rf 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE s13/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 10
Alignment constraints, City boundaries, potential disturbance to wildlife movement, and
property ownership are considerations for the viability of a connection to the south. In
addition, no roadway Level of Service (LOS) benefits are realized with a southerly
connection of Street "A" to the future Leucadia Boulevard. Therefore, staff does not
recommend that the southerly connection be a condition of approval.
The project's proposed extensions of Levante Street and Calle Barcelona will provide
sufficient ingress and egress to the retail center and residential planning areas. Streets are
designed at a width consistent with City standards in anticipation of the need at bµildout.
Improvements conditioned to be in place prior to occupancy of any portion of the project
include the widening of El Camino Real to three (3) lanes for southbound traffic, the
widening of La Costa Avenue to two (2) lanes for eastbound and westbound traffic and the
improvement of the La Costa/1-5 interchange.
Interior circulation will be provided through Street A and a network of smaller private
streets which connect all portions of the retail center and a separate private street and
driveway system for the residential planning area. Final design of the interior circulation
system will be established through subsequent discretionary review.
DEVELOPMENT /DESIGN ST AND ARDS
The Master Plan contains a full range of design and development standards and guidelines.
A focus of the guidelines is on architecture with the goal of creating development which
is rich in detailing and is reflective of .the surrounding natural setting.
Standards have been established with the intention of limiting the intensity of development
and preserving a quality relationship between structures, parking, pedestrian and vehicular
circulation areas and natural open space.
Adoption of the Master Plan will establish the underlying zoning and development
standards, Following is a description of the planning area standards:
Planning Areas 1 and 4 -Open Space:
Development within these open space planning areas is limited to roadways, trails, flood
control structures and habitat enhancement. No commercial, residential or private
recreation facilities are permitted.
Planning Area 2 -Retail Center:
Uses -Retail square footage is limited to a maximum of 600,000 and uses are typical of
a C2, General Commercial zone.
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01~ 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE ~3/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 11
Building Height -Building height is limited to 35 feet with an exception for non-habitable
architectural features allowed up to 45 feet.
Lot Coverage -Lot coverage is regulated by the parking to building area ratio (one space
per 200 gross square feet of building), landscape requirements and setbacks. Setback
standards proposed within the Master Plan are more precise -than what is found within
Chapter 21.28 of the Municipal Code (C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL).
All development proposals will require review and approval by the City Council.
P~anning Area 3 -Residential:
Uses -Uses allowed within the Planning Area are limited to multi-family residential units
typical of the RD-M Zone. The maximum base number of units allowed is 400. The
Master Plan requires that 15% of those be made available to low income households.
Therefore, if 400 units are approved by future discretionary action, 60 units will be
designated as affordable. However, the applicant may also request a density bonus.
Should the request to increase the base number of units be approved by the City Council,
a greater number of affordable units would be required. •
The following are reflections of the RD-M standards or adaptations of the Planned
Development and Parking standards.
Lot Coverage -Maximum building coverage is 60%. A minimum of 15% of the lot area
will be landscaped .
. PARKING
Development of residential units which include subdivision for individual ownership shall
provide:
2 covered resident spaces per unit;
5 guest spaces for the first 10 units; and
1 guest space for each 4 units over 10.
Development of residential units which do not include subdivision shall provide:
2 resident spaces per unit, 1 of which must be covered;
5 guest spaces for the first 10 units; and
1 guest space for each 4 units over 10.
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01/.2-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 8-3/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 12
I TABLE IV
Parking Comparison
Covered Open Parking
400 units Resident
Spaces Resident Guest
Unsubdivided 400 400 103
Subdivided 800 103
I
Total
903
903
Recreational Open Space -Such Open Space is to be provided at a ratio of 200 square feet
per unit regardless of whether the units are apartments or planned developments. A
minimum of 25% of that requirement shall be improved as active. A 10% credit of Open
Space may be granted for the provision of an onsite interior exercise facility.
Chapter 21.24 (RD-M) does nor have open space criteria, therefore, the Master Plan has
modified standards from Chapter 21 .45 (Planned Development). The amount of
recreational open space required has not been changed, however, how the space is
apportioned has been more clearly defined. A requirement for providing a balcony or patio
for each unit was not included.
Building Height -Building height is limited to 35 feet and/or three levels. Non-habitable
architectural features will be allowed up to 45 feet. Each of these standards are consistent
with current code requirements.
Streets/Driveways -Private residential streets or driveways will have a minimum width of
30 feet. At the discretion of the Planning Commission, internal private driveways will be
allowed at a minimum width of 24 feet. No on-street/driveway parking will be permitted.
Residential development proposals of greater than 50 units will require review and
approval by the City Council. Unless appealed, development proposals of 50 or fewer
dwelling units are subject to approval by the Planning Commission.
TENTATIVE MAP
An 11 parcel subdivision map has been submitted in conjunction with the Master Plan.
Subdivision of the planning areas into independent legal lots allows for separate ownership
and development of each parcel. Lots 4 through 7 are Planning Area 2 (Retail Center) and
lot 9 is Planning Area 3 (Residential). Lot 11 is the applicant proposed Planning Area 5
(Neighborhood Commercial). Staff, for reasons stated earlier, is recommending that lot 11
· should be .designated as an open space lot, such as lots 1, 2, 3, 8 & 1 O.
E[R 93-02/GPA 93-01/MP 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 87-23/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 13
All lots proposed are of adequate size and shape to allow for the future development of a
retail center and attached multi-family residential units.
HILLSIDE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The project site has varying terrain which includes 40% slopes and a general topography
which has an elevational difference greater than 15 feet. Information has been provided
as required by the Hillside Development Regulations identifying hillside conditions and
areas of proposed development and undevelopable areas identified.
The intent of the Hillside Development Regulations is to visually preserve and enhance the
natural contours of Carlsbad's hillsides. The project proposes preservation of the upland
bluffs which contain all of the continuous 40% slopes and nearly all of. the slopes greater
than 15%. Development is confined primarily to the disturbed agricultural areas of less
than 15%. Total grading quantities are approximately a balanced cut and fill of 729,000
cubic yards over 115. 9 acres of disturbance, including mitigation. areas, which is
approximately 6289 cubic yards per graded acre. Up to 10,000 cubic yards per acre within
non-residential developments and 7,999 cubic yards within residential developments is
permitted by the Hillside Regulations. The proposed project grading falls within those
limits.
The Planning Commission may approve slopes greater than 30 feet within non-residential
developments.· The Retail Center portion of the proposed Master Plan includes cut and fill
grading creating a crib wall with the maximum peak point of 40 feet. The proposed crib
walls are located along the western edge of Planning Area 2 at the base of the upland
bluffs. However, development of the retail center at the base of the bluffs will screen the
majority of the crib walls from public view. Therefore, the view of the bluffs by the public
will not be visually affected. The steep slopes requiring the crib walls are the result of a
need to grade large flat areas for commercial uses. The grading involves slopes generally
under 15% and without natural vegetation (i.e. the need for crib walls is not resulting from
the grading of steep slopes or natural areas). Therefore, the proposed grading meets the
intent of the Hillside Ordinance and the restrictions of the LCP.
SPECIAL USE PERMIT
A Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) is an area having special flood or flood related
erosion hazard potential. Encroachment into an SFHA requires analysis and issuance of
a Special Use Permit (SUP).
The project is located in the Encinitas Creek Basin of the Batiquitos watershed and
encroaches into a documented SFHA as shown on Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA), Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM).
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01/.2-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE 8-3/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 14
An integral part of the discretionary review process was the analysis of the potential
impacts to Encinitas Creek caused by the proposed development. Development of the
proposed project will cause significant increases in the water surface elevation of Encinitas
Creek during a 100 year storm. This impact can be mitigated however, in accordance with
the conditions of approval imposed on the project.
IV. ENVIRONMENT AL REVIEW
Potential environmental impacts have been reviewed in an Environmental Impact Report
(EIR 93-02). Action on the EIR will be certification that the document has completely and
adequately analyzed all potential impacts associated with the implementation of the Master
Plan.
Sections of discussion in the EIR are:
1. Land Use
2. Visual Quality/Landform Alteration
3. Agriculture
4. Biological Resources
5. Cultural Resources
6. Paleontological Resources
7. Geology/Soils
8. Hydrology/Water Quality
9. Traffic
10. Noise
11. Air Quality
12. Public Facilities and Services
As identified in the Draft EIR, impacts to each section but Long Term Air Quality are
potentially significant but mitigable. Mitigation has been proposed in the EIR for each of
the identified impacts.
Specific Discussion
Air Quality -Although the EIR has identified Long Term Air Quality as being unmitigable,
staff concludes that the impact is significant but the proposed mitigation is adequate to
reduce the cumulative long term impacts to below a level of significance for the following
reasons: The Master Plan has been coordinated with regional transportation agencies;
provision of a pedestrian/bicycle trail system; bike lanes along adjacent major roadways.
All of these measures will help to reduce vehicle miles traveled and the number of vehicle
cold starts.
E[R 93-02/GPA 93-01. 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP ZONE '-23/
CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05 -GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
JANUARY 19, 1994
PAGE 15
At this time, the only available nut1gation for cumulative air quality impacts is the
successful implementation of the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS), which have been
designed to implement all reasonable measures to try to achieve the State air quality
standards in the basin. The San Diego Air Pollution Control District is ultimately
responsible for implementing the RAQS and achieving the State and Federal air quality
standards in the San Diego basin. The Master Plan is in conformance with the General
Plan and has been determined to be in conformance with the requirements of the RAQS.
Encinitas Creek -Several alternative mitigation measures have been identified in the E[R
for the impacts associated with the two crossings of the Encinitas Creek. For reasons of
feasibility and traffic management, staff recommends that the fourth option be pursued.
That option requires that the applicant work with the California Department of Fish and
Game (CDFG) to design a crossing system which encourages wildlife movement along the
creek corridor versus removal of either Calle Barcelona or Levante .
.Staff, CDFG and the .applicant have had preliminary meetings to discuss just such solutions.
Historic Preservation Commission
The project was reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission and the Commission
was in agreement that the measures proposed in the Green Valley E[R regarding Cultural
Resources are adequate mitigation.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3598
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3599
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3600
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3601
5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3602
6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3603
7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3604
8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3605
9. Location Map
10. Background Data Sheet
11. Disclosure Form
12. Local Facilities [mpacts Assessment Form
13. Green Valley Master Plan (MP 92-01) (previously distributed)
14. Green Valley Master Plan Final Program E[R (E[R 93-02)(previously distributed)
15. Exhibit "XX", Applicant Report regarding Mini-Commercial
16. Exhibits "A" -"N", dated January 19, 1994.
CW:vd:lh
November 30, 1993
CITY Of F."'ICl"'IITAS ...................
COU"'ITY or SAN DIEGO
GREEN VALLEY MASTER PLAN
City of Cartsbd
EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01/
LCPA 93-06/LFMP 87-23/
MP 92-01/ CT 92-08/
HOP 92-15/SUP 92-05
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET-
CASE NO: EIR 93-0VGPA 93-01/MP 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP 87-23/CT 92-08/HDP 92-15/SUP 92-05
CASE NAME: Green Valley Master Plan
APPLICANT: Carlsbad Partners
REQUEST AND LOCATION: A request for certification of an Environmental Impact
Report and approval of a Master Plan. General Plan Amendment. Local Coastal Program
Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, and Special Use Permit to
allow for the future development of a 600,000 square foot commercial retail center and
400 attached multi-family dwelling units on 281 acres at the southwest comer of El
Camino Real and La Costa Avenue in Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 23.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Portion of Section 2, T13S, R4W: and a portion of Section 25, T12S, R4W.
APN: 216-122-24, 36, 37: 255-011-08-12: 255-021-05-08 Acres 281.2 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 11 Lots
(Assessor's Parcel Number)
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation Community Commercial/Office/Residential Medium-High
Density Allowed 8-15 du/ac Density Proposed 11.5
Existing Zone PC Proposed Zone PC.
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning
Requirements)
Zoning
Site PC
North OS
South Encinitas
East N/RMH/OS
West Encinitas
PUBLIC FACILITIES
Land Use
Vacant
Batiquitos Lagoon
Vacant
Neighborhood Commercial
Open Space, Condominiums
Vacant
School District Encinitas Union/San Dieguito Water District Olivenhain Municipal Sewer District Leucadia County
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) ..... 7 __ 3..;:;;3 ...... 3 _______________ _
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated ...;:N __ o __ v.;..;:e=m=b=e=r .... 6 .... ,_,l._.9'""9=2=-------------
ENVIRONMENT AL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
__ Negative Declaration, issued _____________________ _
1l._ Final Environmental Impact Report, dated ___ D __ e=ce=m=b __ e=r--'l::..t9 .... 9-=3 __________ _
Other, _______________________________ cw_:v<1_:1h
City of Carlsbad
-4 61,t,O ef• 1 ·24 •fit,;,,fJ,ii
DISCLOSL'RE STATEMENT
.:,;:c,_,c..=., .... -:-·s s-:-.:.7:V:~.-:-CF ::sc:..CSURE OF cE;rrA.IN OWNErlSHI? INTE;::esrs ON ALI.. ,:.pc,_:c,H,CNS w.-,c ... ,';I\..:.. ::;:::,~.=::
:.sc;:;~ICNARY AC7:CN CN 7;.,E c,:.;rr CF THE C:TY COi..;NCIL OR ANY A??OINTEO 80AR0. CCMMtSStCN CR CCMMrr:::.
F:ease Pnnr)
7he fellowing information must be disclosed:
1. Applicant
List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application.
2. Owner
List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involveo.
Carlsbad Partners. ltd,
Suite 2364, 1601 Elm St.
Dallas, Texas 75201
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names ar,c
addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any par1r.ersr.:;:
interest in the partnership.
Nelson Bunker Hqnt Ljq;pjdatiog Trust
William Herbert Hunt Liquidating Trust
T. J. Curnes
Pacwes, Ltd.
Penyen Partners, Ltd.
8235Douglas Ave,. #1300 Pallas, T:
8235 Douglas Ave., #1300. Dallas,
8235 Douglas Ave., #1300,Dallas,Tx
8235 Douglas Ave., #1300,Dallas, T:
8235 Douglas Ave.,#1300,Dallas,Tx.
75225
4. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names anc
addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or benefic:ar1
of the trust
FRM00013 8/90
2075 Las Pal mas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92009-4859 • (6i 9) 438-i, 6,
•
:·Over;
Disclosure Statement Page 2
f-ave you nad mere than S250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff. 3:a::s
Comm1ss;ons, Committees and Council within tne past tweive months?
Yes _ No -X It yes. please indicate person(s) ______________ ---'--------
~ ,1 oefined u: 'Any ,nc:1,v,duaI. firm, cocartnersn,c, I0Int venture. usoc:Iat1on. soc:,a_l club, !raternal or;an,:at,on, :orcorat,on. estate :r·.st.
rece,ver, syno,catt, t1i,1 and any otner county, :rty ana county, ctty mun,c:,0a1rty, o,11r11:t or 011,er 0011t1ca1 1u0drv,1,on, or any otner -.,01.c =r
:omc,natIon ac11ng u a -~nit.•
(NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.)
//-6-' 2-
SignareofOwneridate Signature of applicant/date
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
Dz v ~ '-o? M £ A., r ~ £ 1v 1: ;e II L
?t11e711,,c,<" C 11~£,s e AD
?~a._7 tve 12 s., L fcl
FRM00013 8/90
CTIY OF CARLSBAD
GROWilI MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACIUilF.S IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTI1Y AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO.: EIR 93-02/GPA 93-01/MP 92-01/LCPA 93-06/LFMP 87-23/CT 92-08/HDP 92-
15/SUP 92-05
LOCAL FACILI1Y MANAGEMENT ZONE: 23 GENERAL PLAN: C/O/RMH ZONING: Planned Comm.
DEVELOPER'S NAME: Carlsbad Parmers. Ltd.
ADDRESS: 1601 Elm Street. Suite 2364. Dallas, Texas 75201
•
PHONE NO: (214) 979-9072 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO: 216-122-24,36,37: 255-011-(08-12): 255-021-(05-08)
QUAN111Y OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ_. FT., DU): -=2=8=1.=2...a:a=c __________ _
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: _______________________ _
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
City Administrative Facilities:
Library:
Demand in Square Footage=
Demand in Square Footage=
Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer)
Park: Demand in Acreage =
Drainage: Demand in CFS =
Identify Drainage Basin =
Odentify master plan facilities on site plan)
Circulation: Demand in ADTs ==
Odentify Trip Distribution on site plan)
Fire:
Open Space:
Schools:
Served by Fire Station No. =
Acreage Provided -
(Demands to be determined by staff)
Sewer: Demand in EDUs -
Identify Sub Basin -
Odentify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
Water: • Demand in GPO -
1,390
867
733.3 EDU
2.78
BASIN D
33,400
2
68
212 Students
733.3
303,376
L. The project is .2 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
CW:vd:lh
EXHIBIT “XX?
December 1, 1993
P&D Technologies 401 W “K’ Stree!
Sutte 2500 San Dlego CA 92101 FAX 6191234-3022
619:232-4466 ’
Planning Englneenng Fansporfat~on Environmental Economics Landscape Archdecture
An Employee-Owned Company
Mr. Bailey Noble, Chairman
Carlsbad Planning Commission
City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576
Re: Green Valley Mini Commercial Site
Dear Commissioners:
City staff has requested the applicant, Carlsbad Partners, Ltd.,to delete Planning Area 5 land
uses from the Master Plan submittal. Planning Area 5 has accommodated a small commercial
facility for a numbers of years and is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of
La Costa Avenue and El Camino Real. The existing use on this site is commonly referred to
as the “Red Barn.” Attached is a copy of the Master Plan which deals with this site which
staff has deleted from the plan. The applicant disagrees with this modification of the Master
Plan document, and believes Planning Area 5 should be retained in the Master Plan. The
following is an overview of the issues.
BACKGROUND
The three-acre site is an existing commercial use comprised of the “Red Barn”, two small
parking lots and a graded pad. It has been used for commercial purposes for many years back
prior to the annexation of the parcel from the County of San Diego. The existing two access
points and parking lots were installed by the City of Carlsbad by agreement as part of the
widening of La Costa Avenue in exchange for the owner’s dedication of right-of-way for both
La Costa and El Camino Real.
The applicant and the City staff have a difference of opinion with respect to the future use
of this portion of the Green Valley property. This has resulted IT, a staf: ,ecommended plan
and an applicant’s requested plan alternative.
The applicant’s plan is to continue the commercial land use of the site but when economically
viable, replace the existing “Red Barn” structure with a building nearer the corner and possibly
a small second structure to the south. This is illustrated on the attached site plan. Existing
access would remain the same, and the property would additionally be subjected to a site plan
Planning Commission December 1, 1993
City of Carlsbad + Page 2
and architectural review process at a later date. At this master plan stage the central issue
is one of establishing the appropriate land use for this site.
The staff recommendation is that this entire area should be designated as open space and the
existing structure and parking areas removed.
ISSUES
There are three issues which have been put forward in discussions regarding this site; general
plan land use policies, specific types of land use, and traffic.
1. General Plan Land Use Policies
The issue regarding general plan land use is centered around the interpretation of
policies in the Carlsbad Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan
(COSCRMP).
The Green Valley EIR discusses the COSCRMP on pages 4.1-l 3 and 4.1-l 4. The
applicant feels that the discussion in the EIR of the COSCRMP is an incomplete
presentation of the plan’s provisions as it relates to Planning Area 5. The EIR focuses
on the idea that this is one of a series of strips of land located between the existing
riparian corridor and El Camino Real which should be open space. However, in addition
to the material presented in the EIR analysis the COSCRMP states that: “Although the
ultimate use for the property at this major intersection may be commercial, this would
not preclude the establishment of a secondary (trail) staging area.”
If the open space policies intended to include this existing developed areas as part of
the “additional .strips of land between El Camino Real and the riparian corridor” to be
included as open space, this would not have been discussed as a possible commercial
site.
In addition, there is no reasoning in the COSCRMP or in any other applicable plan or
policy, how an existing building, two paved parking areas and a graded pad would be
considered an integral part of a natural open space system.
The only reasonable conclusion from an analysis of the COSCRMP is that this area was
not to be include as part of these “strips” to be designated as open space. The “strips
of land” do exist in several places on the property south along El Camino Real, and
they are properly included in the project open space area.
There is no policy basis for changing the existing use and access.
Planning Commission
City of Carlsbad W
December 1, 1993
Page 3
2. Specific Land Uses
The issue regarding specific land uses has centered around the potential for uses that
would be seen as inappropriate in this location. These might include a gas station,
liquor store, fast food outlet, etc. In response the applicant has restricted the kinds
of uses to the very narrow range listed on Page IV-54 of the attached document. The
intent is a relatively low intensity use with small scale structures, a landscaped corner,
and drive and parking located behind the building. From a purely locational perspective
the intersection of the major arterial roadways is both very desirable and extremely
valuable. In fact, this locational circumstance is not present anywhere else on the
28 1 -acre site.
The restricted types of land use, the master plan design criteria and the future site plan
and architectural review process allows protection such that the development of this
site will be an asset to Carlsbad.
3. Traffic and Circulation
The proposed site plan for Planning Area 5, which has been subject to further
refinements not included in the draft EIR analysis, does respond to all significant issues
related to compatibility with circulation at the La Costa/El Camino Real intersection.
A copy of the refined site plan is included in the attachment. The proposed site plan
has nowhere near the traffic impacts that the existing service station use on the
northeast corner of the same intersection as suggested on Page 4.1-l 6 of the EIR.
The two access points along El Camino Real already exist to serve the existing
commercial use and are much further removed from the intersection than the access
points into the existing service station.
Right-in and right-out movements are well established methods to solve access to
properties near intersections and along major streets. This is particularly true where
the amount of traffic requiring access is low. The original master plan proposal, plus
the subsequent refinements that have been suggested by the applicant, establish a
workable circulation system for this site.
SUMMARY
The applicant believes that the-issues cited by the staff have either been resolved through
changes to the land use and design criteria, or are applications of policy inappropriate to the
circumstances. The staff alternative to terminate the existing use and remove all improve-
Planning Commission December 1, 1993
City of Carlsbad + Page 4
ments from the site does not seem a reasonable response to the situation. We request your
approval of the applicant’s alternative for this site.
Very truly yours,