Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAV 06-04; Kelly JRM Office Building; Administrative Variance (AV)O CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 1) /\_~L\ ,X" — — I — D ' — 2) 3) 4) APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHE Administrative Permit x: jAdministrative Variance /A-*/\2/ > v Coastal Development Permit Conditional Use Permit Condominium Permit Environmental Impact Assessment General Plan Amendment Hillside Development Permit Local Coastal Program Amendment Master Plan Minor Conditional Use Permit Non-Residential Planned Development Planned Development Permit ECK BOXES) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) o^-crf- • Planned Industrial Permit Planning Commission Determination Precise Development Plan Redevelopment Permit | I Site Development Plan Special Use Permit Specific Plan D T«ntnti\/f D*5"-oa! Man Obtain from Engineering Department Tentative Tract Map I I Variance I I Zone Change List other applications not specified (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: ^ PROJECT NAME: ^^V xrO-k, _T . 0 BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT:^S^-^ UL \JJ!^^\U(^( 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) MAILING ADDRESS CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE EMAIL ADDRESS: I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. SIGNATURE DATE 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) MAILING ADDRESS CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE EMAIL ADDRESS: I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. THE AND SIGNATURE DATE 7) BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. Form 14 Rev. 03/06 PAGE 1 OF 5 o 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE BETWEEN STREET ADDRESS SIDE OF (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST) AND (NAME OF STREET) 9) 10) 13) 16) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS TYPE OF SUBDIVISION PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 19) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTING ZONING 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE INADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN 23) PROPOSED ZONING (NAME OF STREET) (NAME OF STREET) 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 15) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION 24) HABITAT IMPACTS IF YES, ASSIGN HMP# 25) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE SIGNATURE FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE TOTAL FEE REQUIRED FEE REQUIRED RECEIVED CITY OF CARLSBAD DAT^S^MT^APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: Form 14 Rev. 03/06 PAGE 2 OF 5 c ,v o , CITY OF CARLSBAD . LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 1) APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECKBOXES) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) n Master Plan Q Specific Plan D Precise Development Plan Q Tentative Tract Map |~) Planned Development Permit n Non-Residential Planned Development EH Condominium Permit Q Special Use Permit [~] Redevelopment Permit Q tentative-Parcel Mop Obtain From Engineering Department Administrative Variance Administrative Permit - 2nd Dwelling Unit Ofe-Of D General Plan Amendment n Local Coastal Plan Amendment P3 Site Development Plan d Zone Change CJ Conditional Use Permit Q Hillside Development Permit Environmental Impact Assessment Q Variance ^J2 Planned Industrial Permit IJjjjJl Coastal Development Permjf Q Planning Commission Determination D List other applications not specified (FOR DEPARTMEt USE ONLY) 2) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: 3) PROJECT NAME: Kl5LLy / Jfttt 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: Lcee>y 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) HSU.)/ /JE M fift LfrMAft AV^lpb^T f^AOX^ LUfa 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) MAILING ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS CiTY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHOr 5AM 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUEAND CORRECT mjCHE BEST OF MY I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF 1 OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE A CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. DATE SIGNATURE DATE 7). BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION A of ^A PROPOSED PRO JECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICAT1ONS.BE FILED/'MUSTBE'SUBWllTTED PR10RTO 3:30 P.M. 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT: o ON THE BETWEEN (NORTH. SOUTH, EAST, WEST) (NAME OF STREET) T STREET ADDRESS SIDE OF AND O (NAME OF STREET) LA11P.&U (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1 0) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS 13) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION 16) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 1 9) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTING ZONING 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN 23) PROPOSED ZONING 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 1 5) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION 24)IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CI1 STAFFS-PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMEBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBEF TO-HtfSPHCT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE TQf ENTW FOR THIS PURPOSE IT UFOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE TOTAL FEE REQUIRED FEE REQUIRED RECEIVhD JAN 3 02003 CITY OF CARLSBAD DATE STAMP A ION RECEIVE RECEIVED BY: DATE FEE PAID RECEIPT NO. JUSTIFICATION FOR VARIANCE By law a Variance may be approved only if certain facts are found to exist. Please read these requirements carefully and explain how the proposed project meets each of these facts. Use additional sheets if necessary. 1. Explain why there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the vicinity and zone: SEE ATTACHED 2. Explain why such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question: SEE ATTACHED 3. Explain why the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located: SEE ATTACHED 4. Explain why the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan: SEE ATTACHED FormS Revised 04/04 Page 4 of 4 1. Explain why there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to other properties or class of use in the same vicinity and zone. The parcel is heavily encumbered by utility easements including a 150-foot wide SDG&E transmission corridor and a parallel Carlsbad Municipal Water District easement that run diagonally through the site. These easements limit building location flexibility. In addition, the property has been subject to two separate conservation actions taken to address protection of the same habitat feature. The first action was a known conservation easement recorded against the subject property as a condition to the Coastal Development Permit (6-89-127) issued by the California Coastal Commission in 1989 in conjunction with use of the site as a soils disposal site for the City of Carlsbad's widening of Palomar Airport Road. At the time of permit conditioning for the recordation of this easement the regulatory staff recognized and explicitly intended the easement "to be recognized in any future permit applications for ultimate development of the site". In addition, subsequent guidance was provided by the Wildlife Agencies regarding the conditions under which maintenance of a BMP bio-swale within the buffer on the adjacent Pacifica (now Biltmore) property could be performed. This guidance should be directly applicable to the Kelly/JRM project. Site design and layout, pro forma development, and feasibility analyses have been developed based on these elements as well as City standards. However, with the adoption of the Carlsbad HMP and during review of an environmental document for an office-building project on the site, the Wildlife Agencies requested the expansion of the buffer easement to 100-feet. This expansion would result in the loss of 16% to 24% of the site yield. Given existing constraints of utility easements, reconfiguration of the site to gain back some loss was determined to be impractical. As a result, a long process of working with the City, Developer, and Wildlife Agencies has been undertaken to attempt to minimize the additional impacts of the HMP driven requests of the Wildlife Agencies on the project. While not fully successful in defending the originally adopted 50-foot easement, a compromise resulting in the widening the buffer to 70-feet along Encinas Creek was worked out and documented in an email dated January 4, 2006 and confirmed by the Wildlife Agencies on January 4, 2006 via e-mail. On February 15, 2006 the City sent a letter as a follow up to the agreement confirming that given the site constraints of the HMP buffer expansion and the utility easements, the conditions support an issuance of an Administrative Variance ant that the City would support and intends to issue such a variance. 2. Explain why such a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question: The property is a highly constrained piece of land due to the presence of utility corridors, the creek constraints, and public right-of-way losses over time due to the expansion of Aviara Parkway and Palomar Airport Road. While these constraints were known at the time of initiation of development approval processing, they severely restricted flexibility in site design. The property was well into the process for entitlement of an office- building at the time the demand for an expansion of the buffer easement was made by Wildlife Agencies based on the City's NCCP/HCP adoption and federal permit issuance. The request for additional buffer setback hit the property hard for two reasons. First, the request for expansion of the buffer was unanticipated given the site regulatory history. As indicated above, the existing conservation easement deed restriction that was recorded against the subject property as a condition to the Coastal Development Permit (6-89-127) with a specifically, statement and intent for the easement to serve for "any future permit applications for ultimate development of the site". Further, the 50-foot buffer was consistent with the present buffer requirements for Army Corps permit and CDFG streambed alteration agreement for the Laurel Tree Lane crossing earlier in 2005. The establishment of this buffer, the approval of the stockpile permit and footprint, and the source of the fill soil was conducted through the normal City of Carlsbad discretionary approval processes and through the Coastal Commission Coastal Development Permit process. The buffer was a legally adopted and recorded land-use action taken prior to the adoption of the HMP and it has an explicit purpose for future development setback. As a result, the applicability of new buffer standards under the HMP are not necessarily appropriate. Because of the long-regulatory history and prior conservation easement recordation, the circumstances here are very unique and are not likely to be widespread in the City. Second, the highly constrained nature of the site, with existing utilities made a more flexible design response to the new constraint of expanding the conservation easement along Encinas Creek impractical and an AV has become a critical component to absorbing the new constraint. 3. Explain why granting such a variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in such vicinity and zone in which the property is located: The proposed variance is a request to encroach within landscape setbacks along Aviara Parkway and Palomar Airport Road as necessary to absorb parking displaced by the widening of the Encinas Creek buffer. The encroachment into the Aviara Parkway landscape setback would be to accommodate parking. The encroachment along Palomar Airport Road would be to accommodate the required movement of the office-building to accommodate parking reconfiguration. For the Palomar Airport Road encroachment, the buffer reduction would result in a reduction to 50 feet, of a 60-foot building height driven setback requirement. The landscape buffer between Palomar Airport Road and the building already includes mounded topography that will reduce building mass. Adding to this reduction of massing, the adjacent development is proposed to be set well back from the roadway and the development across Palomar Airport Road is the Municipal Golf Course. As a result, the enclosed urban corridor perception that is intended to be avoided, will not be generated in the area. %*•»' None of the requested variance elements would adversely affect public health, safety, or property rights. The project itself further provides benefits in the form of tax-base, participation in public infrastructure development, and development of a public recreation trail. 4. Explain why granting such a variance will adversely affect the comprehensive general plan: The proposed easement has no material consequence on the proposed general plan elements. The variance is not a request for reduction in traffic, open space, or utility standards, but rather a change in landscape setback standards driven by a requirement to provide a differing configuration of green-space on site that is driven by site constraints and Wildlife Agency and HMP objectives for conservation planning. Merkel & Associates, Inc. 5434 Ruffin Road, San Diego, CA 92123 Tel: 858/560-5465 • Fax: 858/560-7779 e-mail: associates@merkelinc.com May 25,2006 M&A #03-107-01 Van Lynch City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: SDP-03-01 Kelly/JRM OFFICE BUILDING ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE Dear Van, This letter is a follow up on the Kelly/JRM Office Building Administrative Variance Request for encroachments into the landscape setback areas along Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway. Per our prior discussions and correspondence, I am making this submittal on behalf of JRMC Real Estate for an administrative variance. Attached, please find the following materials. 1. A completed Land Use Review Application Form 2. Completed Variance Justification Form 3. Property Owners List and Addressed Labels Because this application is a modification of an existing submittal, some of the materials already on file with the City have been omitted from this package. I am also submitting some of the background correspondence addressing the AV, setback variance requested, and terms of the agreement supporting the settled buffer expansion from 50 feet to 70 feet. This includes: 1. My January3, 2006 email summary of the points of agreement regarding the buffer width negotiations 2. Wildlife Agency January 4,2006 email concurring with the buffer width agreement 3. Your February 15,2006 letter of intent for the City to issue an Administrative Variance to implement the buffer modification 4. JRMC email of February 15,2006 confirming receipt of the returned Land Use Review application form to proceed with the AV process. Please review this material and accept the information as submitted as a formal request for an Administrative Variance. If you require anything further, please contract me. Sincerely, Keith W. Merkel Principal Consultant Attachments o CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LAND USE REVIEW June 12, 2006 TO: Van Lynch - Senior Planner FROM: David Rick - Assistant Engineer COMPLETENESS REVIEW PROJECT ID: AV 06-04 KELLY/JRM The Engineering Department has completed its review of the above referenced project for application completeness and has determined that the application and plans submitted for this project are complete and suitable for continued review. Engineering staff does not have any comments or conditions to add to the project. If you or the applicant has any questions regarding the above, please either see or call me at extension2781. Rick Assistant Engineer - Engineering Development Services H:\LIBRARY\ENGWVPDATA\MISC\COMPREV CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Prevention Division Land Use Review Report PROJECT NAME: Kelly/JRM Palomar Airport Date: 06/26/06 Project number: AV 06-04 Staff Planner: V. Lynch Engineer: Project conditions: (Note: The following identifies specific conditions necessary to achieve Fire Department approval.) Fire Department has no comments or conditions regarding this application. GR Keith W. Merkel C From: Keith W. Merkel Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 5:47 PM To: Ben Prater (E-mail); David Mayer (E-mail); David Zoutendyk (E-mail); Nancy Frost (E-mail); Van Lynch (E-mail) Cc: Kathy Rogers; Jamie McCann (E-mail) Subject: Kelly/JRM Buffer WE ARE DONE!! - SORTA PROP-IMPROV-SHI FT.pdf Hi All, This e-mail is to follow-up on the long and painful Encinas Creek buffer width issues. After much anguish, mutual intimidation, and fist pounding we have a solution that meets with everyone's approval. I thank you all for sticking with it and being responsive and flexible. David Z. has indicated that he will respond to this email as a concurrence from the Wildlife Agencies confirming that with the components incorporated herein, the City and WAs have reached agreement on the buffer through the required coordination under the HMP and Implementing Agreement. I would like to request the City and JRM to also acknowledge their concurrence with this solution as well as each party has differing committments to the plan. The mutual acceptances will allow the City to proceed forward with the finalization of the CEQA document and calendaring of the project for hearing. They will also provide JRM the assurances necessary to proceed with the required implementation coordination and buffer enhancements with the adjacent 24-Hour Fitness project. To summarize the agreement, I offer the following points of understanding: 1} Except as modified by this agreement, the buffer improvements will be implemented as outlined in the Enhanced Buffer alternative presented in the Final Wetland Mitigation/Buffer Plan (concept plan 7/18/05, final plan 11/15/05) . 2) The Encinas Creek buffer will be expanded from 50-feet to 70-feet along the Kelly/JRM segment of the creek (see attached file PROP-IMPROV-SHIFT.PDF. 3) M&A shall modify the buffer plan to develop appropriate grades within the 20-foot expansion area and shall relocate the trail to the outer 15 feet of the expanded buffer. The area from which the trail is relocated and the non-trail portions of the expanded buffer are to be restored to coastal sage scrub as part of the enhanced buffer design. 4) No maintenance of the bioswale within the buffer will be allowed. As such, drain inlet filters and development side filter maintenance will be required. 5) The buffer expansion has been accomplished through some encroachments into the Aviara and the Palomar Airport Road setbacks as shown on the attached PDF. These have been reviewed by Van and Don Neu and are approvable at the Planning Director level, however some of the buffer grading will need to be tied out to accomodate the development shift. 6) M&A will provide the City with revised responses to the WA's CEQA comment letter that is reflective of the agreement reached. This letter will be copied to the WAs. We intend to commence implementation of the Encinas Creek buffer and wetland restoration work by mid-January as it is critical path to the 24-Hour Fitness project. For this reason, please respond to this e-mail at your earliest convenience. Again, I want to thank everyone for your tremendous efforts. Keith "I***"' SHIFT BUILDING LOCATION BACK BEHIND THE50'SETBACK SOUTH ON SAME BEARING ASWESTERL Y WA LL OU TL IfJE Keith W. Merkel Q O From: Benjamin_Frater@fws.gov Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2006 3:44 PM To: Keith W. Merkel Cc: David_Zoutendyk@fws.gov; NFrost@dfg.ca.gov Subject: Re: FW: Kelly/JRM Buffer WE ARE DONE!! - SORTA PROP-IMPROV-SHI FT.pdf Keith, I've just discussed the most recent proposal with Nancy Frost, and both Wildlife Agencies are willing to accept the 70' buffer with mitigating conditions you have outlined below. However, we would like to note that the attached figure did not have a scale on it, so it we were unable to determine if the new design reflects the 70' buffer. We are assuming it does, and though we are encouraging you to move forward with the project at this time, we would like to have a figure with a scale on it for our files. This should wrap it up. Thanks. Ben Benjamin Frater Fish and Wildlife Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, California 92011 (760) 431-9440 x310 "Keith W. Merkel" <KMerkel@merkelin c.com> To <Benj amin_Frater@fws.gov>, 01/04/2006 12:05 <david_zoutendyk@fws.gov> PM cc Subj ect FW: Kelly/JRM Buffer WE ARE DONE!! - SORTA Original Message From: Keith W. Merkel Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2006 5:47 PM To: Ben Frater (E-mail); David Mayer (E-mail); David Zoutendyk (E-mail); Nancy Frost (E-mail); Van Lynch (E-mail) Cc: Kathy Rogers; Jamie McCann (E-mail) 1 Subject: Kelly/ JRM Buffer Wfi^ARE DONE!! - SORTA Hi All, This e-mail is to follow-up on the long and painful Encinas Creek buffer width issues. After much anguish, mutual intimidation, and fist pounding we have a solution that meets with everyone's approval. I thank you all for sticking with it and being responsive and flexible. David Z. has indicated that he will respond to this email as a concurrence from the Wildlife Agencies confirming that with the components incorporated herein, the City and WAs have reached agreement on the buffer through the required coordination under the HMP and Implementing Agreement. I would like to request the City and JRM to also acknowledge their concurrence with this solution as well as each party has differing committments to the plan. The mutual acceptances will allow the City to proceed forward with the finalization of the CEQA document and calendaring of the project for hearing. They will also provide JRM the assurances necessary to proceed with the required implementation coordination and buffer enhancements with the adjacent 24-Hour Fitness project. To summarize the agreement, I offer the following points of understanding: 1) Except as modified by this agreement, the buffer improvements will be implemented as outlined in the Enhanced Buffer alternative presented in the Final Wetland Mitigation/Buffer Plan (concept plan 7/18/05, final plan 11/15/05) . 2) The Encinas Creek buffer will be expanded from 50-feet to 70-feet along the Kelly/JRM segment of the creek (see attached file PROP-IMPROV-SHIFT . PDF. 3) M&A shall modify the buffer plan to develop appropriate grades within the 20-foot expansion area and shall relocate the trail to the outer 15 feet of the expanded buffer. The area from which the trail is relocated and the non-trail portions of the expanded buffer are to be restored to coastal sage scrub as part of the enhanced buffer design. 4) No maintenance of the bioswale within the buffer will be allowed. As such, drain inlet filters and development side filter maintenance will be required. 5) The buffer expansion has been accomplished through some encroachments into the Aviara and the Palomar Airport Road setbacks as shown on the attached PDF. These have been reviewed by Van and Don Neu and are approvable at the Planning Director level, however some of the buffer grading will need to be tied out to accomodate the development shift. 6) M&A will provide the City with revised responses to the WA ' s CEQA comment letter that is reflective of the agreement reached. This letter will be copied to the WAs. We intend to commence implementation of the Encinas Creek buffer and wetland restoration work by mid-January as it is critical path to the 24-Hour Fitness project. For this reason, please respond to this e-mail at your earliest convenience. Again, I want to thank everyone for your tremendous efforts. Keith (See attached file: PROP-IMPROV-SHIFT.pdf) Page 1 of 1 Keith W. Merkel From: Jamie [Jamie@jrmcre.com] Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 4:43 PM To: Keith W. Merkel; 'Van Lynch1 Subject: RE: Land Use Review application form Thank you both very much - it will be great to get this behind us - upon which we'll finally be able to resume with Smith Consulting Architects what is a very nice class A building. Thank you again. Jamie James R. McCann JRMC Real Estate, Inc. 1040 Andreasen Drive, Suite 200 Escondido, CA. 92029 (760)781-5300 (760) 78 1-5333 fax. jamie@jrmcre.com 5/25/2006 City of Carlsbad Planning Department February 15, 2006 Merkel and Associates, Inc. 5434 Ruffin Road San Diego, CA 92123 RE: SDP 03-01 - KELLY/JRM OFFICE BUILDING Dear Keith, As indicated in our prior e-mails and discussions between you, me, and Don Neu (Assistant Planning Director), the City supports and intends to issue an Administrative Variance (AV) for reduced setback standards on the Kelly/JRM Office Building project (SDP 03-01) due to the HMP buffer expansion along Encinas Creek from the 50-foot buffer that was previously recorded as a conservation easement in this area and because of the SDG&E easement constraints on the project site. This AV is necessary to accommodate the resolution reached between the City, Wildlife Agencies, and Project Proponent regarding the Encinas Creek Buffer and associated improvements. This AV would allow for a building setback reduction along Palomar Airport Road from 60 feet to approximately 50 feet and a parking lot setback reduction along Aviara Parkway to approximately 45 feet. As we have discussed, the project applicant must submit an application for the AV to the Planning Department. The site plan (with setback dimensions labeled) that you have previously provided and which I have attached to this letter will serve as the principal exhibit for the application. I have recently provided you the application materials for the AV including the application and a copy of the Land Use Review Application previously submitted so that the AV request may be added to the list of project applications. Once we receive an application, the City will circulate a public notice for a 10-day period and will act on the application within approximately 5 to 10 days thereafter. Based on the factual circumstances on the project site, we do not see any reason why the AV would not be approved. I hope this letter addresses your questions. Please let me know if you have any other questions and I look forward to receiving your application for the AV shortly. VAN £YNCH Senior Planner c: file 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us City of Carlsbad Planning Department June 13, 2006 Kelly/JRM Palomar Airport Road I, LLC Suite 200 1040 South Andreasen Escondido CA 92029 SUBJECT: AV 06-04 - KELLY/JRM OFFICE BUILDING The Planning Director has completed a review of your application for an Administrative Variance, AV 06-04 on the southeast corner of Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway to reduce the required setbacks on Palomar Airport Road from 60 feet to 50 feet, Aviara Parkway setback from 60 feet to 47 feet and the interior side yard from 20 feet to 10 feet. After careful consideration of the circumstances surrounding this request, the Planning Director has determined that the four findings required for granting an Administrative Variance can be made and therefore, APPROVES this request based on the following findings and conditions. Findings: 1. There are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class of use in the same vicinity and zone because the property is encumbered by Carlsbad Municipal Water District and a 150-foot wide SDG&E transmission corridor which runs diagonally through the southwestern quarter of the site. The development of the site is also restricted by a 70 foot riparian buffer from the creek on the southern portion of the property. Other properties in the vicinity encumbered by the transmission corridor were adequate in size to not be significantly impacted by the transmission corridor. The riparian setback is larger than those of the up and downstream projects. 2. The requested variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in question because other properties in the vicinity have been approved for three story office buildings with similar intensity of development. 3. The granting of this variance would not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and zone in which the property is located because the project would maintain the minimum development setbacks for the project site. The Planned Industrial (PM) zone allows buildings to increase their building height with a proportionate increase in all setbacks. The project proposes to increase the building height by ten feet which would result in an increase in all required setbacks by 10 feet. The 10 foot setback reduction from 60 feet to 50 feet along Palomar Airport Road would still maintain the minimum 50 foot setback required by the PM Zone. In addition, the building design is such that a 60 foot average setback is maintained from Palomar Airport Road. The 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us OPWCEAV 06-04 - KELLY/JRM OPPfCE BUILDING June 13, 2006 Page 2 i-street side yard reduction from 60 feet to 50 feet and the interior setback from 20 feet to 10 for the parking areas would also maintain the minimum required of the PM zone. 4. The granting of this variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive General Plan because the property will be developed with a corporate office building consistent with the Planned Industrial Land Use designation. Conditions: 1. Approval is granted for AV 06-04 as shown on Exhibit "A" dated June 12, 2006, on file in the Planning Department and incorporated herein by reference. Development shall occur substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions. This decision may be appealed by you or any member of the public to the Planning Commission within ten days of receipt of this letter. Appeals must be submitted in writing to the Planning Commission at 1635 Faraday Avenue in Carlsbad, along with a payment of $550.00 plus notice costs. The filing of such appeal within such time limit shall stay the effective date of the order of the Planning Director until such time as a final decision on the appeal is reached. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact Van Lynch at (760) 602-4613. DON NEU Assistant Planning Director DN:VL:bd c: David Rick Data Entry File Copy FILE COPY City of Carlsbad Planning Department NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE Notice is hereby given that an Administrative Variance has been applied for to allow a reduction of the street side yard setback from the minimum required 60 feet to 30 feet and interior side yard setback from the minimum required 20 feet to 10 feet on property generally located on the southeast corner of Palomar Airport Road and Aviara Parkway, Carlsbad, California, and more particularly described as: A portion of Parcel C and all of Parcel D of Parcel Map No. 2993 filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, August 23, 1974 as File No. 74-230326, O.R., and a portion of Parcel 2 of Certificate of Compliance filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, February 15, 1990 as File No. 90-085876 O.R. all being in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. (APN 212-040-64-00) The Administrative Variance request is for the reduction of street and side yard setbacks due to the increased setback requirement for a habitat buffer from the adjacent creek and open space. If you have any objections to the granting of this variance or wish to have an informal hearing to discuss the requested variance, please notify the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008, in writing within 10 days of the date of this notice. If you have any questions, please call Van Lynch (e-mail vlync@ci.carlsbad.ca.us) in the Planning Department at (760)602-4613. CASE NO.:AV 06-04 CASE NAME: KELLY/JRM OFFICE BUILDING DATE:JUNE 1,2006 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us SHIFT BUILDING LOCATION BACK BEHIND THE 50' SETBACK SOUTH ON SAME BEARING ASWESTERLY WALL OUTLINE SCALE (FEET) EXISTING 50^-7 CONSERVATION EASEMENT-- ADMINISTRATIVE VAR ANCE SETBACKS 300 foot project site buffer | | parcel boundary (label = APN#) = 200' 300 Foot Radius Map for Administrative Variance Merkel & Associates, Incr