Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCDP 98-91; Armstrong Garden Center; Coastal Development Permit (CDP) (5)CflRlTfiScompflnv November 2, 1999 Mr. Chris DeCerbo ^ ^ V^ City of Carlsbad <^f\ ~; '^ V^ Planning Department "v\: ;, ^ ,^ 2075 La Palmas Dr. V'V- ^' V) Carlsbad, CA 92009-15 76 %•'-..-. Re: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - Armstrong Garden Center Dear Chris: Attached is the Notice Concerning Aircraft Environmental Impacts as required by condition 18 of Resolution No. 4644. The form was prepare by the City of Carlsbad and has been executed for recording. Attached is the Notice of Restriction on Real Property as required by condition 17 of Resolution No. 4644. The form was prepare by the City of Carlsbad and has been executed for recording. Written Consent for Christopher C. Calkins to sign as President is attached for the both forms. The Receipt of Notice of Intent from the State Water Resources Control Board dated October 28,1999, is attached for your files as required by Condition 29 of Resolution No. 4644. As part of that requirement, a Water Quality Management Plan and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan are attached. We are retaining a copy to be kept on-site during construction. Attached is a report prepared by Geocon, Inc. with recommendations for paving in the three areas requiring paving - 1) existing paved areas, 2) truck/bus access isles requiring a Traffic Index of 5.0, and 3) parking and other isle areas being paved. This report is referenced on the improvement plans and satisfies Condition 34 of Resolution No. 4644. We are waiting on your production of the two hold harmless agreements. j» ^ Cc/J/7 Sincerely, f—• ~ "~ Chris Calkins Jim Borneman Mike Cardosa Clyde Wickham Attachments as referenced above 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 -CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net CflRlTflScompflnv November 1,1999 ^E^EU Mr. Chris DeCerbo wny « . City of Carlsbad NUV U 1 Planning Department CITY OF CARLSBAD 2075LaPalmasDr. PLAMM© BEPTDCarlsbad, CA 92009-1576 iriuw ua/ / Re: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - Armstrong Garden Center Dear Chris: Attached are six sets of landscaping, civil and improvement plans that have been revised from the set approved at the Planning Commission. The changes in the plans reflect the conditions of approval as we understand them. An additional sheet has been added to illustrate the improvements to the property, including curbs and utility laterals. The attached checklist illustrate the items that we need approval or review from you. A list of actions from Clyde is being submitted concurrently to Clyde. I understand that you will distribute plans to Clyde for his review. It would be a pleasure to meet with you to verify that this is an adequate response and fulfills our conditions of approval. As you know, we are attempting to satisfy all the conditions of approval in order to request a building permit on Monday, November 8, 1999. Sincerely, John H. Nabors,Jr. Project Manager Cc: Chris Calkins Mike Cardosa Tim White Clyde Wickham Attachments: Tasks Requiring Approval.by Chris DeCerbo Tasks Requiring Approval by Clyde Wickham Letter from Chris Calkins to Chris DeCerbo Letter from Chris Calkins to Bob Wojcik 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - ARMSTRONG GARDENS CUP Task Requiring Approval by Chris DeCerbo Condition Subject of Condition 5 Indemnity to City DeCerbo: is there a form for this? John will pick up at the City and have executed. If so, Responsibility Nabors 11 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Proposal. DeCerbo stated that the first condition can be visually confirmed by the City. The second condition will be reflected after City Council defines the methodology. The condition pertaining to Palomar Airport Road will be satisfied by an agreement being prepared by the City. Verify with engineering that the building permit can be issued prior to the completion of the agreement by the City and execution of the agreement by Carltas. A letter from Chris Calkins to Bob Wojick is attached pertaining to this condition. Nabors 12 Subject to Coastal Permit (CDP98-91). CDP 98-91 is being approved at the same tune. No separate action required. Verify with DeCerbo. Nabors 13 24" X 36" Mylar of Conditons. Chris DeCerbo will supply a set of signed conditions of approval as required. Carltas will have the mylars produced and will submit to City. Nabors 15 Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan. Applicant has request that the landscape plans be submitted on a date certain by a letter from Chris Calkins, a copy of which is attached. The City is requested to acknowledge this request. Calkins 18 Avigation Easement. Chris DeCerbo provided a form of document on Thursday, October 21. After form is approved, Carltas will execute and record. Nabors 19 Trash Areas - Approval (Armstrong) Gary Lipska will add note to the new Improvement Plan Sheet C 1.1 using the wording of the condition. DeCerbo to confirm that the note will suffice. Carltas will submit revised sheets on 11/1 for review and approval. Lipska Nabors \\FS2\WP\JohnN\Armstrong CUP\Reso 4644 DeCerbo.doc Planning Commission October 29, 1999 Resolution^)644 Conditions Page 2 of 2 Condition Subject of Condition 21 Exterior Lighting - Parking/Access Building. Bennitt will prepare a lighting plan on the Landscape Plan Sheet I 1.1 to comply with City of Carlsbad standards. Lights shall cover entry and required parking. Carltas will submit revised sheets on 11/1. Chris DeCerbo will confirm or coordinate review of lighting plan. Responsibility Bennitt Nabors 23 Commuter Information Install bus route signage and route maps in the building. Ask DeCerbo how they will verify the installation of this information. White should show a note on his plans referring to this signage or display. White Nabors 28 Geologic Hold Harmless . Nabors obtained the form at front counter, completed and submitted to City on Wednesday, October 20. ->DeCeitt£3&-^QQrdinate preparation of final form for execution by applicant. ° Nabors 32 Underground Utilities There are no overhead utilities on-site. Ask Clyde Wickham orChrio DcCorbo to signoff on this condition. Nabors 44 Signs. DeCerbo will be asked to approve existing signage. Tim will process any new signage as part of the building permit process. Armstrong \\FS2\WP\JohnN\Armstrong CUP\Reso 4644 DeCerbo.doc CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - ARMSTRONG GARDENS CUP Task Requiring Approval by Clyde Wickham Condition Subject of Condition 11 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Proposal. DeCerbo stated that the first condition can be visually confirmed by the City. The second condition will be reflected after City Council defines the methodology. The condition pertaining to Palomar Airport Road will be satisfied by an agreement being prepared by the City. Verify with engineering that the building permit can be issued prior to the completion of the agreement by the City and execution of the agreement by Carltas. A letter from Chris Calkins to Bob Wojick is attached pertaining to this condition. Responsibility Nabors 25 Sight Standards at Intersections Nabors has asked Clyde to see if latticed posts can remain. Nabors 29 N.O.I. State Water Resources Control Board Gary Lipska has prepared this notice and it will be submitted to Clyde Wickham on November 1 for review and approval. Gary Lipska John Nabors 31 Drainage Facilities. Curbs will be added to the new Improvement Plan sheet and details for the curb type will be illustrated. Improvement Plan will be submitted to Clyde on November 1. Nabors Lipska 32 Underground Utilities There are no overhead utility lines. Ask Clyde Wickham to signoff on this condition. Nabors 33 NPDES Gary Lipska will submit documents required for a NPDES plan on November 1 to be reviewed by Clyde Wickham. Lipska Nabors 34 Road/Parking Pavement Sections; R Values John will obtain pavement recommendations from Geocon for paved areas. Lipska to add note to Improvement Plans to reflect traffic index and paving requirements. Nabors to submit to Clyde for approval on November 1. Nabors Lipska \\FS2\WP\JohnN\Armstrong CUP\Reso 4644 Wickham.doc Planning Commission Resolutionq644 Conditions October 29, 1999 Page 2 of 2 Condition Subject of Condition Responsibility 35 Recycled Water Map Cardosa will mark up a site plan to show Cardosa recycled water and submit to Carlsbad Municipal Water District Nabors for approval. Provide approval to Clyde Wickham when available. 37 Laterals (Improvement Plan) Carltas will provide new sewer Nabors laterals to Lipska to put on Improvement Plan. Nabors will submit site plan and new Improvement Plan to Deputy City Engineer - Utilities for approval and provide to Clyde. Verify with Clyde that irrigation laterals will be shown on landscape plans. 42 ADA Compliance. Clyde will be asked to sign off on site plan Tim White issues. Tim will request compliance as part of his building plans. j ^ Nabors \\FS2\WP\JohnN\Armstrong CUP\Reso 4644 Wickham.doc CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - ARMSTRONG GARDENS CUP Task Requiring Approval by Clyde Wickham Condition Subject of Condition 11 Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Proposal. DeCerbo stated that the first condition can be visually confirmed by the City, the second condition will be reflected after City Council defines the methodology. The condition pertaining to Palomar Airport Road will be satisfied by an agreement being prepared by the City. Verify with engineering that the building permit can be issued prior to the completion of the agreement by the City and execution of the agreement by Carltas. A letter from Chris Calkins to Bob Wojick is attached pertaining to this condition. Responsibility Nabors 25 Sight Standards at Intersections Nabors has asked Clyde to see if latticed posts can remain. Nabors 29 N.O.I. State Water Resources Control Board Gary Lipska has prepared this notice and it will be submitted to Clyde Wickham on November 1 for review and approval. Gary Lipska John Nabors 31 Drainage Facilities. Curbs will be added to the new Improvement Plan sheet and details for the curb type will be illustrated. Improvement Plan will be submitted to Clyde on November 1. Nabors Lipska 32 Underground Utilities There are no overhead utility lines. Ask Clyde Wickham to signoff on this condition. Nabors 33 NPDES Gary Lipska will submit documents required for a NPDES plan on November 1 to be reviewed by Clyde Wickham. Lipska Nabors 34 Road/Parking Pavement Sections; R Values John will obtain pavement recommendations from Geocon for paved areas. Lipska to add note to Improvement Plans to reflect traffic index and paving requirements. Nabors to submit to Clyde for approval on November 1. Nabors Lipska \\FS2\WP\JohnN\Armstrong CUP\Reso 4644 Wickham.doc Planning Commission Resolution 4644 Conditions October 29, 1999 Page 2 of 2 Condition Subject of Condition Responsibility 35 Recycled Water Map Cardosa will mark up a site plan to show Cardosa recycled water and submit to Carlsbad Municipal Water District Nabors for approval. Provide approval to Clyde Wickham when available. 37 Laterals (Improvement Plan) Carltas will provide new sewer Nabors laterals to Lipska to put on Improvement Plan. Nabors will submit site plan and new Improvement Plan to Deputy City Engineer - Utilities for approval and provide to Clyde. Verify with Clyde that irrigation laterals will be shown on landscape plans. 42 ADA Compliance. Clyde will be asked to sign off on site plan Tun White issues. Tun will request compliance as part of his building plans. r , vrauors \\FS2\WP\JohnN\Armstrong CUPVReso 4644 Wickham.doc CRRITA5company October 29, 1999 Mr. Chris DeCerbo Planner, Planning Department -City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re: Armstrong Garden Center CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 Condition 15 Dear Chris: The purpose of this letter is to confirm to you that we will file the final Landscape and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City's landscape manual on or before November 22, 1999. This follows our discussions with Larry Black determining the scope of the plan and our desire to see that it fully incorporates the recycled water program currently in place as well as the existing improvements which are in conformance with the Tentative Plan, all of which needs to be reviewed and approved by Mr. Black. We understand that based upon this letter and our representation of submission by such date that the City may proceed to issuance of building permit in order to avoid the potential conflicts with the growing season. We also understand and agree that if for any reason whatsoever a final Landscape and Irrigation Plan prepared in conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City's landscape manual is not filed by November 22, 1999, the City may issue a stop order and all construction work shall cease and desist until such plan has been filed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. I appreciate the City's willingness to work with us in light of the difficulty in understanding of the combination of elements that are delaying our submission. Very truly yours, interposes CCC:/d Todd Bennit, ASLA Tim White, AIA Mike Kunce, Armstrong Garden Centers 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS 'SUITE 100 'CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas @ worldnet.att. net CflRlTflScompflnv VIA FACSIMILE & US MAIL October 29, 1999 (760) 438-0894 Total Pages: 2 Robert Wojcik' Engineering Department City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re; Armstrong Garden Center CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 Mitigation Measure No. 3 Dear Bob: As you are aware, Mitigation Measure No. 3 for the above-referenced CUP requires execution of a Reimbursement Agreement to design and construct an additional west-bound lane on Palomar Airport Road from west of Armada Drive to Paseo Del Norte. We had submitted a proposed draft on October 13, 1999, and were advised that the Reimbursement Agreement would need to be redone using current City formats and standard provisions. Subsequently, we have been advised that this Reimbursement Agreement is among a series that are going to be prepared by Mike Shirey and that there are significant other priorities in work before him. Because of our unique circumstances caused by the agricultural growing operation, it is very important that we are in a position to have a building permit issued a week from Monday (November 8, 1999). We understand that the priority workload confronting Mike Shirey is sufficient that it is unlikely that he will have the Reimbursement Agreement redrafted and in a condition for us to sign by that date. We request that you allow the building permit to be issued on our representation that we will proceed promptly to execute the Reimbursement Agreement as soon as it is prepared by Mr. Shirey and we have had the opportunity to review it and return it. We understand the urgency of the matters that are being given priority to our document. However, the burden on our operation if we are unable to commence construction on November 8 (or as soon thereafter as the building permit is otherwise ready to issue) will be extreme and may threaten the project altogether. Accordingly, we request your confirmation that if the agreement has not been prepared and provided to us for review and execution prior to completion of all other conditions that you permit issuance of the permit with our understanding that failure to promptly review and execute may result in a stop work order. 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 -CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net Letter to Bob Wojcik October 29, 1999 Page 2 of 3 Because of the short period of time within which we will be able to resolve any priorities if you do not believe that you can proceed on the foregoing basis, I ask that you advise us early next week if the procedure described above will be satisfactory or not. Very truhLyours, 'for CB R6hch Enterprises CCC:dd c: Clyde Wickham, City of Carlsbad S:\CCC\LETTERS\Wojcik.doc GEOCON INCORPORATED GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANTS Project No. 06412-22-01 October 29, 1999 Carltas Company 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008-4452 Attention: Mr. John H. Nabors, Jr. Subject: CARLSBAD ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA PAVEMENT INVESTIGATION Gentlemen: In accordance with your authorization of our proposal LG-99473 dated October 21, 1999, we are submitting the results of our pavement study of the Carlsbad Armstrong Garden Center in Carlsbad, California. Original geotechnical recommendations were presented in the soils report entitled Geotechnical Investigation, Carlsbad Armstrong Garden Center, Carlsbad, California prepared by Geocon Incorporated dated July 24, 1999. We understand that the upgrades to existing parking and driveway areas will consist of the following: 1. Place an overlay or replace the existing asphalt driveway at the north end of the site to provide a minimum Traffic Index of 5.0. 2. Replace or add base and asphalt to existing aggregate base traffic circle in the central portion of the site to provide a minimum Traffic Index of 5.0. 3. Replace or add base and asphalt to existing aggregate base parking area in the southern-central portion of the site to provide adequate parking pavement sections. Our investigation consisted of coring one core though the existing asphalt driveway and measuring the thickness of asphalt and aggregate base. In addition, the thickness of existing aggregate base in parking areas was measured at five locations. The core in the driveway indicated !3/4 inches of asphalt concrete over 6 inches of aggregate base. Silty sand subgrade soils were encountered beneath the pavement section. In the proposed traffic circle, existing aggregate base was found to be about 2 to 5 inches thick with silty sand subgrade soils. In the proposed parking area, l'/2 to 3'/2 inches of existing aggregate base was found over silty sand subgrade soils. 6960 Flanders Drive • San Diego, California 92121-2974 • Telephone (858) 558-6900 • Fax (858) 558-6159 Recommendations to upgrade the existing pavements were calculated using an R-value of 10 which was obtained for a clayey silt encountered at the southwest corner of the site. Silty sand was encountered at subgrade elevation in all the areas examined for this study providing a relatively conservative design. Aggregate base encountered on the site was assumed to meet the requirement of Class 2 Aggregate Base outlined in Caltrans Standard Specifications. Recommendations for the 3 areas of concern are as follows: 1. In the driveway area, for a TI of 5.0 and an R-value of 10, the final pavement section should consist of 4'/2 inches of asphalt concrete over 6 inches of Class 2 base. Therefore, an overlay of 2% inches is needed to provide the final section. 2. In the traffic loop that currently consists of 2 to 5 inches of aggregate base, the final pavement section should consist of 3 inches of asphalt concrete over 9 inches of Class 2 base. Therefore, 4 to 7 inches of Class 2 base and 3 inches of asphalt concrete should be added. 3. In the proposed parking area that currently consist of l!/2 to 31A inches of aggregate base, the final pavement section should consist of 3 inches of asphalt concrete over 11A inches of Class 2 base. Therefore, 3 to 6 inches of Class 2 base and 3 inches of asphalt concrete should be added. Recommendations for preparation and compaction of aggregate base and asphalt concrete can be found in Section 6.9 of the original geotechnical report referenced above. In areas of existing aggregate base, the material should be moisture conditioned and compacted to 95 percent relative compaction in accordance with ASTM D 1557-91 prior to the placement of new Class 2 base. In areas of existing pavement distress, the distressed area should be repaired prior to placing asphalt overlays. Should you have any questions regarding this letter report, or if we may be of further service, please contact the undersigned at your convenience. Very truly yours, GEOCON INCORPORATED Joseph J. Vettel GE2401 JJV:bas (2) Addressee Project No. 06412-22-01 -2-October29, 1999 10/29/99 08:55 STORM UflTER •* 760 439 2866 NLI.676 P002/002 Winston n. mckux Environmental Protection State Water Resources Control Board Division of Water Quality 901 P Street • SuLmincnlo, California 95814 • (91 &) 657-090.1 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1977- Sattamento, California '95812-1977 •1011 • Intrmd Address: http://www.s>ATCb.ci.gcjv Cray Davis Governor October 28,1999 CHRISTOPHER CALKINS CB RANCH ENTERPRISES5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS STE 100 CARLSBAD, CA 92008 RECEIPT OF YOUR NOTICE OF INTENT The State Water Resources Control Board (Stale Wa*r Beard) fee receded aod processed your NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GENERAL PERMIT TO DISCHARGE STORM WATER ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTT\TTY Accorbagh, >ou arc required to comply with the permit rcquiraaenis. Your WD!D identification number is: 9 ITS? 11973. Pkrasc use Uus number m arn future communications regarding this permit. SITE DESCRIPTION OWNER; CB RANCH ENTERPRISES DEVELOPER: CB RANCH ENTERRUSES COUNTY: SAN DIEGO SITE ADDRESS: PASEO DEL MORTE PALOMAR AIRPOR CARLSBAD. CA 92tM8 COMMENCEMENT DATE:linw EST. COMPLETION DATE: .VIW When conslmction is complete or ownership has bee» iraarfcrrcd. ikachafgcifs arc required to notify the Regional Walcr Board tn submining a Nodce of Tennuuoon iNOTl All Sate and local requirements must be met in accordance with Special Pmisku So ^ of UK General Perm:! I iu\c codosed a NOT for your future use. if you do not notifv the Stae Water Board that construction acthin has been completed you continue (o be invoked for the annual foe each October. If you ha\ e ah> qucstioas. regarding permit requirtmeais. pkease cootaa >ow RegjoaL Waia- Board at (619)467-2952. Sincerely. Audrey Shimizu Slonn Water Unit Division of Water Quality Enclosure Prnitction Slat* Watw Resources Control Board NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GENERAL PERMIT TO DISCHARGE STORM WATER . ASSOCIATED WITH CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY (WQ ORDER No. 99-08-DWQ) I. NO! STATUS (SEE INSTRUCTIONS) II. PROPERTY OWNER Attachment 2 | MARK ONLY ONEITEM 1-XC }J New Construction 2.D • -•• - I Change of Information for WDID# I . Name CB Ranch Enterprises. Mailing Address 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 City . • • . ' Carlsbad Contact Person Christopher Calkins Tills President State CA Zip 92008 Phone (760 431--56.PO II. DEVELOPER/CONTRACTOR INFORMATION Developer/Contractor CB Ranch Enterprises Mailing Address 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 City Carlsbad Contact Person Christopher Calkins Title President State CA 2p. 92008 Phone (760) 431 - 5600 IV. CONSTRUCTION PROJECT INFORMATION Site/Project Name Armstrong Garden Center Physical Address/Location Paseo -'del Norte & Pa lomar Airport City (or nearest City) Carlsbad A. Total size of construction site area: 3 _ fi Acres B. Totalirea to be disturbed: •3 £ Acre* (% of totalLDJXj .'£; Site Contact Person Mike Cardosa Latitude Zip 92008 Longitude 1170 County San Diego Site Phone Number Emergency Phone Numoar ( , TBD_ ,760, 431.5600 C. Percent of site imperviousness (including rooftops): Before Constnjction: 5 6 % Alter Construction: 100 % f. Is the construction site part of a larger common plan of development or sale? XX63 YES D NO H. Constnjction commencement date: 11/7 / 99 1. % ol site to be mass qraded: 0% • - K. Type of Constiuction (ChecX all that apply): 1. D Residential i j£J Commercial 3. CD Industrial 8. D Utility Description:/ ' " 7. d < 0. Trad Number(s): E, Mile Post Martter: G. Name of plan or development: Carlsbad Flower Fields J. Projects Complete grad 4. D Recc Dther (Please Us construction dat ng-. 12/!5 es: /99 Comoleteoroiect 03/ 0 I/ 00 nstrviction 5. LJ Transportation t): V. BILLING INFORMATION SEND BILL TO: jg^H/VNER (as In II. above) D DEVELOPER (as In III. above) D OTHER (enter information at right) Name Mailing Address City Contact Person Phone/Fax State Zip I. REGULATORY STATUS A. Has a local agency approved a required erosion/sedimem control plan?...W.11.1 be—p-EOV-ided. by 14./.7--/-9-9 XE2 YES C NO Does the erosion/sediment control plan address construction activities such as infrastructure and structures? j^ YES LJ NO Name of local agency: City Of Cafclsbad Pnone- (760)438- 1161 B. Is this project or any part thereof, subject to conditions imposed under a CWA Section 404 permit of 401 Water Quality Certification? O YES >Q NO If yes, provide details: II. RECEIVING WATER INFORMATION A. Does the storm water runoff from the construction site discharge to (Check all that apply): " 1. XS Indirectly to waters of the U.S. 2. G3 Storm drain system - Enter owner's name: 3. D Directly to waters of U.S. (e.g., river, lake, creek, stream, bay, ocean, etc.) 8. Name of receiving water: (river, lake, creek, stream, bay, ocean): Pacific Ocean III. IMPLEMENTATION OF NPDES PERMIT REQUIREMENTS I A. STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) (check one) D A SWPPP has been prepared for this facility and is available for review: Date Prepared: / / Date Amended: _ ••"G* A SWPPP will be prepared and ready for review by (enter date): 11/7 / 9 9 CH A tentative schedule has been included in the SWPPP for activities such as grading, street construction, home construction, etc. B. MONITORING PROGRAM X)S A monitoring and maintenance schedule has been developed that includes inspection of the construction BMPs before ^~^ anticipated storm events and after actual storm events and is available for review. If checKed above: A qualified person has been assigned responsibility for pre-storm and post-storm BMP inspections to identify effectiveness and necessary repairs or design changes : :'. X.XYES LJ NO Name: Mike CardoSB Phone: (760) 431- 5600 C. PERMIT COMPLIANCE RESPONSIBILITY .-• . A qualified person has been assigned responsibility to ensure full compliance with the Permit, and to implement all elements of the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan including: 1. Preparing an annual compliance evaluation X}0C ^^ I I NO Name? Mike Cardosa Ph0ne: (760)431-5600 ':! 2. Eliminating all unautnorized discharges..... 1: :.. : : D YES D NO IX. VICINITY MAP AND FEE (must show site location in relation to nearest named streets, intersections, etc.) Have you included a vicinity map with this submittal? .}£\J YES Q NO •' Have you included payment of the annual lee with this submittal?. )QJ YES Q NO X. CERTIFICATIONS If "i certify under penally of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction and supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure th$l qualified personnel properly gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, oT-those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine or imprisonment. In addition, I certify that the provisions of the permit, including the development and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan and a Monitoring Program Plan will be complied with." Primed Name: ^ /7 frit* HT*<?H<4_ C CflRlTflScompany October 27, 1999 Mr. Chris DeCerbo \ City of Carlsbad \ 2075 Las Palmas Dr. Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: Armstrong Garden Center/ Department of Conservation Letter Dear Chris: When we last spoke about your conversation with Ken Trott from the Department of Conservation, you indicated the he seemed to get comfort from the fact that there may be a deed restriction recorded against the Flower Fields property. In the event he desires to discuss the matter further with you, I am enclosing for your reference a copy of the Deed Restriction recorded in favor of the California Coastal Commission on July 11, 1996. You will note on Page 3 of the Deed Restriction that the property is designated for continued agricultural use under the LCP and the Specific Plan and that any use other than a permitted use under the Specific Plan will require an amendment to the LCP and the Specific Plan. As you know, the Specific Plan expressly allows "Facilities for the sale of flowers, produce and other items related to the promotion of the 'Flower Fields'." Please do not hesitate to call me if I can be of any further assistance. Very truly yours, . /£wv Monica R. Browning ^ Enclosure cc: Chris Calkins (w/encl.) 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 -CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net 3: Recorded Request OfFIDELITY NATIONALTTTL& BECORDtHG REQUESTED BY AND RETURN TO: California Coastal Commission 45 Fremont St., Suite 2000 San Francisco .CA 94105-2219Attn: Legal Division 879 DOC I 1996-03«21 ll-JUL-1996 12*19 P|1 QFFICIftL RECORDS SflH DK60 COBITY RECORDER'S OFFICE ! 6RE60RY S1ITH, CGUHTY RECORDER : Rfj 34.00 FEES: 94;00 !ffi LOO : !a? • •—i:Sr <7i I 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 113 7»C* "»•**» DEED RESTRICTION CB Ranch Enterprises, a California corporation, and I. .WHEREAS, Carlsbad Ranch Company, L.P., a California limited partnership , herein*fc«t referred to as the "Owner (a)," is/are the' record owner(3) of the following real property: See Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference hereinafter referred to as the "Property;'.' and II. WHEREAS, the California Coastal Commission, hereinafter referred to as the "Commission," is act.ing on behalf of the People of the State of California; and HI. WHEREAS, the subject property is located within the coastal zone as' defined in §30103 of Division 20 of the California Public Resources Code, hereinafter referred to as the "California Coastal Act of 1976," (the Act); and IV. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act, the Owner applied to the Commission for a. coastal development permit on the Property described above; and V. WHEREAS, coastal development permit number 6-96-9 . hereinafter referred to as the "Permit," was granted on April 11 , 19_§£, by the Commission in accordance with the provision of the Staff Recommendation and Findings, attached hereto as EXHIBIT A and herein incorporated by 830 L 2 3 '-. 4 : reference; and VI. WHEREAS, the Permit was subject to the terms and conditions including, but not United to, the following conditions): 5 • i 7i 9] 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 27 Agricultural DQ3d Rgstrietion. Prior to the issuance of the coastal developaent permit, the applicant shall record a deed restriction against Lot1 designated Open Space as shown on C.T 94-09, free of prior liens and encumbrances, except tax Hens, and binding on the permittees1 successors in interest and any subsequent purchasers of any portion of the real property. The deed restriction shall indicate that Lot 1 Is designated for continuedagricultural use under the certified Carlsbad Local Coastal Program Hello II land-Use Plan and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, and that conversion to any use "othejr than a permitted use pursuant to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan shall require an amendment to the LCP and the Specific Plan, and an amendment to this coastal, development permit. The fora and content of the deed restriction shall be subject to review and approval of the Executive Director. ' 113 t«ev •.?!* VII. WHEREAS, ttxe Commission found that but for the imposition of the above condition(s) the proposed development could not be Eousd coos istent vith the pcovisions of the California Coastal Act of 1976 and that a permit could therefore not have been granted; and VIII. WHEREAS, Owner has elected to comply with the condition(s) imposed ty the Permit and execute this Deed Restriction so as to enable Owner to undertake the development authorized by the Permit. -2- 881 i' 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 13 17 >. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 SOW, THEREFORE, is consideration of the granciag of the Permit Co the Owner by the CoBsnission, the Owner hereby irrevocably covenants with Che Commission chat there be and hereby is created the following restrictions on the use and enjoyment of said Property, to be attached to and became a part of the deed to che property. 1. COVESAST. COtmiTIOS ASP RESTRICTION. The undersigned Owner, for himself/herself and for his/her heirs, assigns, and successors in interest, covenants and agrees that: Lot i of Master Tentative Map for Carlsbad Ranch C.T. 90-09, as shown on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (the "Master Tentative Map"), is designated for continual agricultural use under the certified Carlsbad Local Coastal Program Mello H Land Use Plan and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Conversion of said Lot 1 to any use other than a permitted use pursuant to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan shall require an amendment to the LCP and die Specific Plan, and an amendment to Coastal Development Permit No. 6-96-9. 1. HORATIOS.. Said Deed Restriction snail remain in full force and effect during the period that said permit, or any modification or amendment thereof remains effective, and during the period that the development authorized by the Permit or any modification of said development, remains in existence in or upon any part of, and thereby confers benefit upon, the Property described herein, and shall bind Owner and all his/her assigns or successors in interest. 3. TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS. It is intended that this Deed Res triceion is irrevocable and shall constitute an enforceable restriction within the meaning of a) Article XIII. §8, of the California Constitution; 2 i? 882 | 1 and b) §402.1 of the California Revenue and Taxation Code or successor | 2 statute. Furthermore, this D««d Restriction shall ba deemed to constitute 3 . 4. servitude upon and burden to the Property within the meaning of 537l2(d) : ', i 4 .; of the California Revenue and Taxation Code, or successor statute, which i •'I j 5 survives a aale of tax-deeded property. i 4. RIGHT OF ENTRY. The Commission or its agent may enter onto the Property at times reasonably acceptable to the Owner to ascertain whether the use restrictions set forth above are being observed. 9! 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 5. REMEDIES. Any act, conveyance, contract, or authorization by the Owner whether written or oral which uses or would cause to be used or would permit use of the Property contrary to the terms of this Deed IRestriction will be deemed a violation and a breach hereof. The Commission i and the Owner may pursue any and all available legal and/or equitable remedies | to enforce the terms and conditions of this Deed Restriction. In the event of a breach, any forbearance on the part of either party to enforce the terns and provisions hereof shall'not be deemed a waiver of enforcement rights regarding any subsequent breach. 6. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of these restrictions is held to be invalid, or for any reason becomes unenforceable, no other provision shall be thereby affected or impaired. Dated: Vj/fll/ / _, 1996 SIGNED: Signatures on page 4A SIGHED: * * PRINT OR TYPE SAME OF ABOVE PRINT OR TYPE SAME OF ABOVE NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT OH THE NEXT PAGE * * -4- SIGNED:Carlsbad Ranch Company, L.P., a California limited partnership By: Carltas Company, a California limited partnership Its: General Partner By: Carltas Management, a California corporation Its: 833 cTTaTEBSTTFfesident SIGNED:CB Ranch Call -4A- 1 '• 2*i 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13- 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF 834 on before me.Al appeared <L. , A Notary _. personally COUNT PAPntnwnav e fvo. 113 < Public known to me (or proved to IBP fin the basis .of satisfactory evidence) to be the personfs.) whose namsfrs) <@5are subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that(fig(sh*yth*y executed the same In (fiTWhgr/thoIr authorized capac1ty(1es). and that by(fjj»/her/thefr slgnature(s) on the Instrument the person(«), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)- acted, executed the Instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF On before me. Public personally appeared .. A Notary _, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose naroe(s) Is/are subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same 1n his/her/their authorized capadty(les). and that by his/her/their slgnature(s) on the Instrument the personfs), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the Instrument. WITNESS my hantf and official seal. Signature -5- *85 !' 1 This 1s to certify that the deed restriction set forth above Is hereby 2 acknowledged by the undersigned officer on behalf of the California Coastal 3 : Commission pursuant to authority conferred by the California Coastal r> 4 j! Commission when 1t granted Coastal Development Permit No. 6-96-9i! April 11, 19965 ;> oniiI and the California Coastal Commission consents 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ZT to recordatlon therof by Its duly authorized officer. , Dated: •T?. Ill IMCV. Bowers, Staff Counsel California Coastal Commission STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUHTY OF SAN FRANCISCO On before me,Deborah L. Bove Public personally appeared John Bowers ., A Notary _, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) Is/are subscribed to the within Instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same In his/her/their authorized capaclty(les), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the Instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the Instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature -6- STATE Jf CAUFOBNU—THt tKOUfOS AOENCT CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION SAM DKOC COAST A*CA 3111 CAAMNO OB no NOKM, sum 200 SAH WKJO. CA 9210M7Z3 (619) S21-MSA 1EXHBIIT A Filed: 49th Day: 180th Day:Staff:Staff Report:Hearing Date: 2/8/96 3/28/96 8/6/96HNP-SO 3/20/96 4/9-12/96 REGULAR CALENDAR STAFF REPORT AND PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATION SEE SUBSEQUENT PAGE /' R» COMMISSION ACTION ~ Application No.: 6-96-9 Applicant: Car Has Company Agent: Hofman Planning Description:Subdivision of 447.4 acres Into 19 parcels (Master Tentative Mapfor Carlsbad Ranch - C.T 94-09 - Units 1,2 and 3) to allow thedevelopment of office, research and development, related light manufacturing, commercial, hotel/tlmeshare, destination resort',golf course, agriculture, a vocational school campus, andLegoland Carlsbad. Approx. 2,083,900 cu.yds. of grading and Installation of roads and drainage Improvements Is alsoproposed. Also proposed are provisions ensuring that easements for public access trails shall be dedicated to the City of Carlsbad and the Installation of a rest/vista point which Includes benches an a trash receptacle on the public pedestrian/golf cart trail located between proposed Lots 5. 17 and 18. Lot Area Zoning Plan Designation 447.5 acres Multiple Commercial ZonesMultiple Designations Site:East of Paseo del Norte, North of Palonar Airport Road, South of Cannon Road, Carlsbad, San Diego County. 211-022-QJ-Q3, 07-013, 211-023-01-06 Substantive File Documents: Certified Carlsbad LCP Hello II segment. Local Coastal Program Amendments 2-87, 1-88, 1-93. COP *nS-93-34Summary of Staff's Preliminary Recommendation: Staff Is recommending approval of the tentative map and associated Improvements subject to a number of special conditions addressing agricultural conversion and controls, recordatlon of public trail and walkway access easements, public use of the proposed golf course/open space, future publicaccess trail Improvements, visual resources, grading and erosion controls, and future development. This permit application accompanies, and 1s contingentupon approval of. an amendment request to the City of Carlsbad Hello II LCP segment Land Use Plan and Implementation Program (LCPA #1-96. including Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan 207(A)), also scheduled for the April 1996 Commission meeting. COP 6-96-9Page 2 837 PRELIMINARY STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends the Commission adopt the following resolution: I. Approval wth The Commission hereby aranli a permit for the proposed development.subject to the conditions below, on the grounds that the development, asconditioned, trill be In confomity with the adopted Local Coastal Program, andwill not have any significant adverse Impacts on the environment within themeaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. II. Standard Conditions. See attached page. III. Special Conditions. The permit 1s subject to the following conditions: 1. Agricultural Conversion. Prior to the Issuance of the coastal development permit, the applicant shall record a deed restriction against Lots2,3,5.6.7,8,9.13.14,17 and 18, as shown on tester Tentative Nap C.T 94-09. The restriction shall be recorded free of prior liens and encumbrances, excepttax Hens, and binding on the permittees' successors 1n Interest and anysubsequent purchasers of any portion of the real property. The restrictionshall Indicate the following: a. The agricultural mitigation fee required In option #3 of Policy 2-1 of the certified Hello II LCP Land Use Plan Is applicable to approximately 202acres (as shown on Attachment C/Exhlblt 8) of the Carlsbad Ranch SpecificPlan, and Includes Lots 2,6,7,9,13,14,17 and portions of Lots 8 and 18 ofMaster Tentative Nap CT 94-09. In the event the proposed golf course on Lots3 and 5, as shown on Master Tentative Kap CT 94-09. 1s not exempt from Policy2-1. or the exemption 1s voided, then the mitigation fee shall be applicable to Lots 3 and 5 consisting of approximately 74 acres. b. Agricultural mitigation fees for any lot shall be paid to the City upon issuance of a building penal t for any Improvement constructed on suchlot. except for any fees due for the proposed golf course. Any fee due for the proposed golf course shall be paid upon Issuance of a grading permit forgolf course purposes or. In the event such golf course Is Initially exemptfrom the payment of mitigation fees and the exception 1s later voided, then such fees shall be paid at the tine the exemption Is voided. c. Conversion from agricultural use to a public recreation or open space use which 1s owned, leased or controlled by the City of Carlsbad shall beexempt from Policy 2-1 of the Hello II LCP Land Use Plan. d. If at any time In the future, a public recreation or open space use,which was exempt from Policy 2-1, Is no longer owned, leased or controlled by COP 6-96-9 Page 2 837 PRELIMINARY STAFF RECOHHEHDATION: The staff recommends the Commission adopt the following resolution: I. Approval <r|th Conditions. The Cooa1ss1on hereby ojcanii a permit for the proposed development* subject to the conditions below, on the grounds that the development, asconditioned, will be In conformity with the adopted Local Coastal Program, andwill not have any significant adverse Impacts on the environment within themeaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. II. Standard Conditions. See attached page. III. Special Conditions. The permit Is subject to the following conditions: 1. Agricultural Conversion. Prior to the issuance of the coastaldevelopment permit, the applicant shall record a deed restriction against Lots2.3.5.6.7,8.9.13.14.17 and IB, as shown on Master Tentative Nap C.T 94-09.The restriction shall be recorded free of prior liens and encumbrances, excepttax Hens, and binding on the permittees' successors 1n Interest and anysubsequent purchasers of any portion of the real property. The restrictionshall Indicate the following: a. The agricultural mitigation fee required 1n option #3 of Policy 2-1 ofthe certified Hello II LCP Land Use Plan is applicable to approximately 202acres (as shown on Attachment C/Exhibit 8) of the Carlsbad Ranch SpecificPlan, and Includes Lots 2.6,7.9,13,14,17 and portions of Lots 8 and 18 ofMaster Tentative Map CT 94-09. In the event the proposed golf course on Lots 3 and 5, as shown on Master Tentative Map CT 94-09, Is not exempt from Policy2-1, or the exception is voided, then the mitigation fee shall be applicableto Lots 3 and 5 consisting of approximately 74 acres. b. Agricultural mitigation fees for any lot shall be paid to the City upon Issuance of a building permit for any Improvement constructed on such lot, except for any fees due for the proposed golf course. Any fee due forthe proposed golf course shall be paid upon issuance of a grading permit for golf course purposes or. in the event such golf course is initially exemptfrom the payment of mitigation fees and the exemptlom 1s later voided, thensuch fees shall be paid at the time the exemption is voided. c. Conversion from agricultural use to a public recreation or open space use which is owned, leased or controlled by the City of Carlsbad shall be exempt from Policy 2-1 of the Hello II LCP Land Use Plan. d. If at any time in the future, a public recreation or open space use,which was exempt from Policy 2-1, 1s no longer owned, leased or controlled by 888 the City of Carlsbad, the exemption from Policy 2-1 will be voided and one ofthe three conversion options shall be implemented for said acreage. The form and content of the deed restriction shall be subject to review andapproval of the Executive Director, prior to the Issuance of the coastal development permit. 2. Agricultural Deed Restriction. Prior to the Issuance of the coastal development permit, the applicant shall record a deed restriction against Lot1 designated Open Space as shown on C.T 94-09, free of prior Hens andencumbrances, except tax Hens, and binding on the permittees' successors Ininterest and any subsequent purchasers of any portion of the real property.The deed restriction shall indicate that Lot 1 Is designated for continuedagricultural use under the certified Carlsbad Local Coastal Program Hello IILand Use Plan and the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, and that conversion to anyuse other than a permitted use pursuant to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Planshall require an amendment to the LCP and the Specific Plan, and an amendmentto this coastal development permit. The form and content of the deedrestriction shall be subject to review and approval of the ExecutiveDirector. 3. Recordation of Public Trail and Halkway Access Easements. Prior to the issuance of the coastal development permit, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director for review and written approval, evidence of compliance with the following, as proposed by the applicant: a. Revision to the Master Tentative Hap for Carlsbad Ranch (C.T. 94-09) to include notes to the effect that the pedestrian, trail and/or access easements shown on the Tentative Hap, to inplement provision of the pedestrianways and trails shown on the Dedicated Trail Plan attached as Exhibit 6, shall be for use by the general public, and that easements for the identified trails shall be dedicated to the City of Carlsbad on the final subdivision nap (Master TM 94-09 Units 1,2 and 3) which Includes the easement area, or an irrevocable offer to dedicate such trail easements shall be given to the Cityon or before the date such final map 1s recorded 1n the Office of the CountyRecorder. b. Submittal of evidence of compliance with either the easement dedications or recordatlon of the offers to dedicate trail easenents, prior to Issuance of the coastal development permit for the Unit of the Master TM 94-09 which contains the trail easements. 4. Public Use of Golf Course/Open $paee. Prior to the Issuance of the the coastal development permit, the applicant shall record a deed restrictionagainst Lots 3.5 and 17 as shown on C.T 94-09 revised 10/95, free of priorliens and encumbrances, except tax liens, and binding on the permittees' successors in Interest and any subsequent purchasers of any portion of the real property. The deed restriction shall indicate that the future golfcourse within the Open Space Lots 3 and 5, If managed by the resort or otherprivate entity, shall be open to the public on a fee basis. This restriction 1s Intended to clarify that "open to the public on a fee basis" means the golfcourse shall be open to the public on a dally fee basis as well as to resort patrons or club members. At least 50% of the tee times must be reserved for COP 6-96-9 Page 4 the general public, as opposed to exclusively for resort patrons or club members. Details regarding operation of the facility and other restrictions Including, but not limited to. reservation procedures and attendancemonitoring, will be developed through future coastal development permits forthe golf course and the resort to be developed on the adjacent TouristRecreation Lot 17. Said restriction shall be recorded in a form and content acceptable to the Executive Director, prior to issuance of this coastal development permit. 5. Future Public Access Trail Improvements. Implementation of the Dedicated Trail Plan as shown on attached Attachment A/Exhibit 6, shall occur concurrent with development of the planning areas which contain the traileasements, and Improvements shall be Installed prior to occupancy of thedevelopment within those lots that Include the public trail system. In addition to the trail Improvements Identified 1n the Carlsbad Ranch SpecificPlan, the applicant has proposed the Installation of a rest/vista point which Includes benches an a trash receptacle on the public pedestrian/golf cart trail located between proposed Lots 5. 17 and 18. An Illustration of the concept Is attached as Exhibit 7. Installation of the proposed pedestrian trail Improvements on the resort/Legoland trail shall occur prior to occupancy of the Legoland development on Lot 17. 6. Grading/Erosion Control. Prior to the issuance of the coastal development permit, the applicant shall submit to the Executive Director forreview and written approval, final site and grading plans approved by the Cityof Carlsbad which Incorporate the following requirements: a. All grading activity shall be prohibited between October 1st and April1st of any year. b. All areas disturbed by grading shall be planted within GO days of the Initial disturbance and prior to October 1st with temporary or permanent (in the case of finished slopes) erosion control methods. The use of temporary erosion control measures, such as berms. Interceptor ditches,sandbagging, filtered inlets, debris basins and silt traps, shall be utilized in conjunction with plantings to minimize soil loss from thegraded areas. Said planting shall be accomplished under the supervision of a licensed landscape architect, shall provide adequate coverage within 90 days, and shall utilize vegetation of species compatible with surrounding native vegetation or agricultural crops 1n designated agricultural areas, subject to Executive Director approval. c. All permanent runoff and erosion control devices shall be developed and installed prior to or concurrent with any on-site grading activities. 7. Final Grading.and DralnaggJlans. Prior to the issuance of the coastal development permit, the applicant shall submit for the review and written approval of the Executive Director, final grading plans approved by the City of Carlsbad for utility, road, and drainage Improvements. The plansshall clearly show the existing and finished contours, the topography of theareas to be graded or filled, as well as the existing topography of the COP 6-96-9 890Page 5 agricultural areas to be loft In their natural.condition. The plan shall submit a grading schedule which addresses the proposed phasing of grading andInsures that agricultural uses will remain 1n contlnous production as long asfeasible prior to being graded. To that end, the grading plan shall clearlyIndicate a) what agricultural areas will be graded (site prepared) to maintainacceptable grades for continuing agricultural production and b) what existingagricultural areas will be graded to be permanently converted to accommodateurban uses. The coastal development permit may be released In phases 1naccordance with the approved grading schedule and the phasing programIdentified 1n the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. All conditions applicable tothe parcels and/or development Included In the Individual phases shall becomplied with prior to the Issuance of the permit for those phases. 8. Final Landscape Plans. Prior to the Issuance of the coastaldevelopment permit, the applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan forthe Interim and. 1f permanent, long-term slope plantings that Indicates thetype, size, extent and location of all plant materials, the proposedIrrigation system and other landscape features. Drought tolerant native ornaturalizing plant materials shall be utilized to the maximum extentfeasible. Special emphasis shall be placed on use of specimen size streettrees consistent with the requirements of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan for those permanent slope areas to be landscaped upon completion of the gradingassociated with this permit, to provide effective screening of the development froa views from major roadways and coastal access routes. I.e. 1-5. PalomarAirport Road and Cannon Road. Also, special emphasis shall be placed onlandscaping the proposed deslltatlon basin with native species compatible withthe riparian and freshwater marsh vegetation within the existing deslltatlon basin/drainage area north of Palomar Airport Road. The plant species 11st andlandscape plan shall be reviewed by the Executive Director, In consultationwith the State Department of Fish and Game, to guard against Introduction of any species which are Inherently noxious to, or incompatible with on-sltenative vegetation and surrounding agricultural crops and floriculture. Said plan shall be submitted to, reviewed and approved In writing by the Executive Director. 9. Future Development. This coastal development permit Is for the subdivision of the 447.5 acre site and site preparation. Including roughgrading, construction of roads, utility, and drainage Improvements as shown onTM 94-09. All other development proposals for the site, Including but notlimited to the subsequent development of the hotel or any other structures, shall require review and approval by the Coastal Commission, or Its successor in interest, under a separate coastal development permit(s). 10. LCP Effective Certification. Approval of the coastal development permit is conditioned upon certification of Local Coastal Program Amendment#1-96(C>. Accordingly, prior to Issuance of the coastal development permit,the applicant shall obtain a written statement of the Executive Director ofthe Coastal Conrolsslon confirming that the Coastal Commission has effectivelycertified LCPA #l-96(C) in accordance with California Code of Regulationstitle U, section 13544. COP 6-96-9 Page 6 891 IV. Findings and Declarations. The Commission finds and declares as follows: 1. Detailed Project DescHntlon/LCP History. Proposed Is the subdivisionand site preparation of 447.5 acres of mostly vacant agricultural land 1nCarlsbad known as the Carlsbad Ranch (Master Tentative Map for Carlsbad Ranch - C.T 94-09 - Units 1,2 and 3). The site Is located east of Paseo Del Norteand west of the future Hidden Valley Road and between Cannon Road and Palomar Airport Road to the north and south, respectively. In the Hello II segaent ofthe Carlsbad LCP. The subdivision would create 19 parcels to allow thedevelopment of office, research and development, related light Manufacturing, coanerdal, hotel/tloeshare. destination resort, golf course, agriculture, avocational school campus, and Legoland Carlsbad. Approx. 2,083,900 cu.yds. ofgrading and Installation of roads and drainage Improvements 1s also proposed. The amended Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan proposes the creation of nineplanning areas. Development standards and design guidelines are specified foreach planning area. The proposed planning areas are as follows: Genologlcal Institute of AmericaResearch and Development • Hotel/RetailLegoland Carlsbad ResortSpecialty Retail Flower FieldsGolf CourseNatural Open Space The Coastal Commission approved the original Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan 207 In 1993 <LCPA 1-93, CDP 6-93-34). A comparison of the acreage by use type Isprovided below of the previously approved Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan 207 andthe proposed amended Specific Plan 207(A): 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.7. 8. 9. Planning Area 1Planning Area 2 Planning Area ?, Planning Area 4Planning Area 5 Planning Area 6Planning Area 7Planning Area 8Planning Area 9 Total Acreage Institutional Uses Office/R&D UsesRetail UsesCommunity HotelResort LegolandGolf Flower Fields/AgricultureAgricultural/Open Space 1993 Approval 423.5 acres17.8 acres44.4 acres13.6 acres11.1 acres0 acres0 acres24.5 acres 39 acres267.3 acres Proposed Plan 447.4 acres28.9 acres40 acres27.7 acres9.4 acres 52.8 acres129.2 acres72 acres53.4 acres 10.0 acres October 20, 1999 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER (CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91) - Modifications to Resolutions The following modifications should be made to Planning Commission Resolution 4644: Condition No. 15 should be revised as follows: Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall submit a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City's Landscape Manual. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy for the building, the Developer shall obtain Planning Director approval of the Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan. The Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash and debris. CflRlTflScomponv VIA FACSIMILE October 14, 1999 \. ] ruB1"""c^6f " Total Pages: 2 Gary Wayne Assistant Planning Director City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re: Flower Fields CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - Armstrong GardenCenter Request for Modification to Condition Dear Gary: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 for the Flower Fields is scheduled for hearing on October 20, 1999. Among the conditions, Condition 14 requires the completion of the Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan prior to issuance of building permit. Because of the tight time frames to undertake construction of the building without interference with the spring blooming at the Flower Fields, we request that this condition be modified as set forth on the enclosed to require that the Landscape and Irrigation Plan be approved prior to the Certificate of Occupancy for the building. As you are aware, much of the landscaping has previously been installed, and we will be doing extensions of existing landscaping, and showing the as-built conditions for plan and field checking with only a limited amount on new plant material immediately adjacent to the buildings. Without modification to this condition, the project cannot go forward, given the constraints of the growing season. Accordingly, we request this modification be made at the Planning Commission hearing. Very truly yours, f. Christopher C. Calkins for Carltas Company CCC/dd c: Chris DeCerbo, City of Carlsbad - (760) 438-0894 John Nabors, Carltas Company \\FS2\WP\CCOLETTERS\Waync - CUP 98-20.doc 5600 AVENIDA ENCIMAS "SUITE 100 -CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net Replacement Condition 14 14. Prior to issuance of the building permit, the The-Developer shall submit obtain approval of a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City's Landscape Manual. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy for the building, the Developer shall obtain Planning Director approval of the Final Landscape and Irrigation Flan. The Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved Final Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash and drbris. CfllUTflScomppnv October 8, 1999 Mr. Chris DeCerbo \ Planner, Planning Department City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - Armstrong Garden Center Dear Chris: A series of questions were raised by the City Attorney regarding the arrangement with Armstrong and related issues. The application for the Conditional Use Permit and the operation of the Armstrong facility is on a part of the single parcel which makes up the entire Flower Field operation. Consequently, it is accessory to the much larger farming operation. The arrangement: with Armstrong Garden Centers will be pursuant to an Occupancy License and Operating Agreement between CB Ranch Enterprises, the owner, and Armstrong Garden Centers that will reflect their entry and operation of that facility. The City Attorney may have been raising a question that if pursuant to a lease, is there a possibility that this would violate the Map Act. As noted above, it is not done pursuant to a lease and, therefore, is not subject to the matters of which he is concerned. We note, however, that even if it were deemed a lease, there is a specific exemption under Section 66412.1 of the Government Code which excludes leasing of a commercial building (such as the Armstrong Center) where the project is subject to review regulating design and improvement as this is the project under both the Design Review standard and CUP standard of the City of Carlsbad. I enclose a copy of that section in case you have any questions regarding it. However • the fundamental arrangement is an operating arrangement which doesn't even raise the act as an issues. 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 -CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net Letter to Chris DeCerbo* October 8, 1999 Page 2 of 3 For purposes of execution of the various documents, please note that the signature block for all of the agreements that you will ultimately prepare should be "CB Ranch Enterprises, a California Corporation by. Christopher C. Calkins, President" Very truly yours, tier C. Calkins for^CB Ranch Enterprises CCC:dd S:\CCC\LETTERS\DeCerbo - Armstrong CUP2.doc P.3 '99 10:35RM GCWF 20 RECPT. (3) The local agency certifies that the above requirements were satisfied If the local agency, by ordinance, provides for that certification. A (h) Unless a parcel or final map was approved by the legislative body of a local agency, the conversion of a stock cooperative, as defined in Section 11003.2 of the Business and Professions Code, to a condominium, as defined in Section 783 of the Civil Code, but only if all of the following requirements are met: (1) At least 51 percent of the units in the cooperative were occupied by stockholders of the cooperative on January 1, 1931, or individually owned by stockholders of the cooperative on January 1, 1981. As used in'this paragraph, a cooperative unit is "individually owned" if and only if the stockholder of that unit owns or partially owns an interest in no more than one unit in the cooperative, (2) No more tha-i 25 percent of the shares of the cooperative were owned by any one person, as defined in Section 17, including an incorporator or director of the cooperative, on January 1, 1981, (3) A person renting a unit in a cooperative shall be entitled at the time of conversion to all tenant rights in state or local law, including, but not limited to, rights respecting first refusal, notice, and displacement and relocation benefits. (4) The local agency certifies that the above requirements were satisfied if the local agency, by ordinance, provides for that certification. (i) The leasing ol, or the granting of an easement to, a parcel of land, or any portion or portions thereof, in conjunction with the financing, erection, and sale or lease of a windpowered electrical generation device on the land, il the project is subject to discretionary action by the1 advisory agency or legislative body. (j) The leasing or licensing of a portion of a parcel, or the granting of an easement, use permit, or similar right on a portion of a parcel, to a telephone corporation as defined in Section 234 of the Public Utilities Code, exclusively for the placement and operation of cellular radio "transmission facilities, including, but not limited to, antennae support structures, microwave dishes, structures to house cellular communications transmission equipment, power sources, and other equipment incidental to the transmission ol cellular communications, if the project is subject to discretionary action by the advisory agency or legislative body. (k) Leases of agricultural land for agricultural purposes. As used In this subdivision, "agricultural purposes" means the cultivation of food or fiber, or the grazing or pasturing of livestock. [Amended. Chapter 458, Statutes of 1994] 66412.1. Act not applicable to financing and leasing of com* mercial and industrial buildings This division shall also be inapplicable to: (a) The financing,or leasing of any parcel of land, or any portion thereof, in conjunction with the construction of commercial or industrial buildings on a single parcel, unless the project is not subject to review under other local agency ordinances regulating design and improvement. , (b) The financing or leasing of existing separate commercial or industrial buildings on a single parcel.' [Amended, Chapter 37, Statutes of 1982] 66412.2. Exempts construction, financing and (easing of speci- fied dwelling units This division shall not apply to the construction, financing, or leasing of dwelling units pursuant to Section 65852,1 or second units pursuant to Section 65852.2, but this division shall be applicable to the sale or transfer, but not leasing, of those units. [Added, Chapter 1013, Statutes of 1983] 66412.3. Local agency to consider housing needs of region In carrying out the provisions of this division, each local agency shall consider the effect of ordinances and actions adopted pursuant to this division on the housing needs 5 CARITA5company October 7, 1999 VIA FACSIMILE & US MAIL (760) 438-0894 Total Pages: 3 Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Clyde Wickham City of Carlsbad Engineering Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re: Armstrong Garden Centers/Flower Fields CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 Dear Chris and Clyde: We are scheduled for a DCC meeting on Friday, October 8, 1999, at 9:00 AM. In preparation of this, we have gone over the Staff Report in some detail. The following summarizes questions we have that would need to be answered either at that meeting or in a subsequent meeting in order to be able to comply with the conditions: MAJOR ISSUES .•:•.:.v.t, ..^-. ,-,,....;>.-.-:. -. . . The two major issues relate to the called out mitigation: 1) The provision that no building permit can be issued until construction of Cannon Road Reach 2 has commenced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Our Traffic Engineer, who has had a series of conversations with your Traffic Engineering Department, will be present and will have a written response for you before the meeting. We will want to discuss the condition at the meeting. Obviously if this condition is imposed and Reach 2 is not going to be under construction prior to November 15, 1999, then we will be unable to proceed with the Armstrong facility and the associated improvements this year. 2) The condition that the "Flower Fields" will be planted in an open field flowering crop each year and will remain in bulb growing and cut flower production in perpetuity. We need a standard for monitoring that the financial institution for our improvements can read and be assured can be measured to determine satisfaction of the condition. On this basis, we request that there be either a finding, a note, or a comment on the monitoring that would note that the CUP condition would be deemed minimally satisfied as follows: "If a physical area, measured on a gross basis of not less than 22 acres has been planted or continues to be maintained in cut flower/bulb growing cultivation." 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS 'SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net Armstrong Garden Centers/Flower Fields CDP-CUP October 7, 1999 Page 2 of 3 This would not be in derogation of the general requirement about planting the Flower Fields, but would provide a measurable minimum standard for the cut flower and bulb addition to the flowering crop standard. It would also allow for reasonable farming practices if necessary to leave areas fallow, to shift crops around, and other kinds of activities. This relates to both the mitigation measure and findings of Planning Commission Resolution 4643 and Condition 10 of 4644. SPECIAL CONDITIONS - PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 4644 1) Condition 10 - Mitigation Monitoring Program. Is any document required for the implementation of this program since the two conditions will be visibly obvious? 2) Conditions 14 and 15 - Landscape. We request a meeting next week with Chris DeCerbo, Larry Black, and whomever else should be there to review the area that will be plan checked versus the area that is shown as-built to assure our compliance with the condition. 3) Condition 16 - Recorded Restriction. Two whom should we submit the form for approval? 4) Condition 19 - Outdoor Storage. We do not understand the condition as written. It appears to require direction for outdoor storage by the Fire Chief and, otherwise, no outdoor storage can occur. Please clarify. 5) Condition 20 - Lighting. We would like to confirm the area to be studied and for which lighting will be provided. We are assuming that it includes the paved access and the related parking together with the building area. For a variety of reasons (primarily our farming operations) we wish to minimize lighting and maintain as low a profile of lighting as possible. 6) Condition 20-A - Flowering Production. The provision relating to the Flower Fields production should probably be numbered as a separate condition. We suggest numbering it as 20-A. 7) Conditions 22 and 23 - Security/Commuter Plans. Please describe the scope of the security plan needed for the fields and describe what the document should look like. Also, will it be adequate to provide rack cards with bus schedules and routes to meet the commuter information requirement? 8) Condition 32 - Drainage states that additional drainage facilities will be required. We are not proposing to change the existing farming or the de-silt/detention basins that have been provided for the farming operations that were developed as a part of the planning for the Carlsbad Ranch and the Carlsbad Company Stores. On this basis, what other drainage facilities does Engineering think we are going to need relating to the farming area? 9) Condition 35 - Structural Section/Aisles. Because the parking lot area is partially paved and partially gravel, we assume that the structural section standards set forth in Armstrong Garden Centers/Flower Fields CDP-CUP October 7, 1999 Page 3 of 3 Section 35 should reflect the truck access route shown on Sheet L 1.2 (Truck and Bus Traffic Flow) as included in the submission. Other than the circulation aisles, none of the aisles will have an ADT greater than 500. We would like confirmation so that we can conduct the R Value tests as soon as possible. 10) Conditions 36 - 37 - Recycled Water/Service. Both conditions make reference to "map", and we assume this refers to site plan. In addition, we would like confirmation of who will review the colored recycled water use map for the approval by CMWD. Since a portion of the property includes existing as-built improvements that will be serviced by reclaimed water as well as new improvements, we assume we need a different plan than that which will be submitted for landscape improvements that reflect the new work to be,completed. We realize that many of these conditions can be clarified either with a simple note on a copy of this letter or oral comment from you, but we wanted to get as many answers as we can so that we are as clear as possible on our submissions to whomever will be the reviewing and approval authority will be easily compared with the conditions. Very tealy yours, Christopher C. Calkins For^arltas Company CCC:dd cc: Monte Enright, Armstrong Garden Centers Tim White Todd Bennitt CflRlTPScomponv October 8, 1999 Mr. Chris DeCerbo Planner, Planning Department City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - Armstrong Garden Center Dear Chris: The Condition 20 of the proposed Conditional Use Permit for the Armstrong Garden Center provides that it is "...subject to the condition that the "Flower Fields" will be planted in a open field flowering crop each year and will remain in bulb growing and cut flower production in perpetuity". We understand this condition to be measured in a manner .similar to the general condition adopted with the Specific Plan. This reflects the historic operation of the. Flower Fields^and the objective, of not only a basic agricultural operation continuing, but also a reasonable area in which a colorful show of flowers appears annually. The area within which ranunculus flowers have bloomed has been between 22 and 28 gross acres while other products have been grown in and around the ranunculus. We intend to continue to pursue the farming on this basis, primarily with the color on the westerly face, which is most visible from both the freeway and Paseo del Norte and its approaches. This farming is subject to the vagaries of the agricultural business including weather, water availability (and quality in light of our current use of recycled water), quality of the seed, etc. We may also be required to vary the planting areas in order to reinvigorate the soil using good horticultural practices. Over the years, modifications to drainage, the ways in which the fields are planted, and the treatment of the soil have all been incorporated and will continue to be incorporated in the farm as we go forward. , . We anticipate that in some years portions of the plantings will be maintained on a more than single year basis. All of these specific details of the agricultural operation, as well as the exact lineal feet of plants, will be subject to reasonable agricultural practices. 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 -CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net Letter to Chris DeCerbo October 8, 1999 Page 2 of 2 There are changes occurring in the manner in which young plants are propagated and there may be a shift at any given time from bulb growing to "plug" propagation. In all events, our objective and our understanding is that the goal is to have the opportunity to grow the floral product in bloom in a manner generally consistent with our historic production on the site. We assume that the interpretation of this clause on an on-going basis will reflect the foregoing and that it is not intended to impose a different or broader standard than that which would accompany such normal and usual agricultural processes. Very twriy yours, instc for G$ Ranch Enterprises CCC:dd S:\CCC\LETTERS\DeCerbo-Armstrong CUP.doc CRRLTflS compflnv & US MAIL (760)438-0894 Total Pages: J October 8, 1999 Mr. Clyde Wickham Project Engineer, Engineering Department City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - Armstrong Garden Center Dear Clyde: The purpose of this letter is to confirm that we will accept the condition imposed as part of the application for a Conditional Use Permit for the Armstrong Garden Center facility that would require that we design and build a one-lane right turn lane on Palomar Airport Road, subject to full reimbursement from the City pursuant to a Reimbursement Agreement to be entered into with the City with the impovement to be completed within 24 months. We understand this condition will be in lieu of any condition requiring that Cannon Road Reach 2 be under construction to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. As we discussed, we are prepared to proceed on this improvement in the same manner in which we proceeded with the improvement of Cannon Road, including a monthly reimbursement for costs. Because we will have to go through design before we can complete the Reimbursement Agreement, it does not seem that the condition requiring this to be done before occupancy is realistic, but rather that design would need to commence promptly with the completion of the improvement within the 24-month period. Please let me know if this condition in lieu of the other conditions previously discussed will not be acceptable. Ver rs, spher C. Calkins for (?arltas Company CCC:dd c: Chris DeCerbo 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net CflRlTflScompany f Octobers, 1999 /. 1 \ Mr. Chris DeCerbo § ^ City of Carlsbad 3 '/ 2075 Las Palmas Dr. . . ^ Carlsbad, CA 92009 ---^ RE: Armstrong Garden Center/ Department of Conservation Letter Dear Chris: In accordance with our telephone conversations, enclosed please find a copy of the Memorandum I received from Bill Geyer concerning the "grandfathering" of the retail nursery use under the Williamson Act Contract. Although it is clear that the "three principles" test is satisfied in the case of the Armstrong Garden Center at the Flower Fields, Mr. Geyer suggests and we request that the Memorandum be submitted to the Planning Commission at the hearing on October 20, 1999 and made a part of the official record. Very truly yours, Monica R. Browning Enclosure cr cc: Chris Calkins (w/encl.) Bill Geyer (w/encl.) 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 -CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net BILL GEYER GEYEfl ASSOCIATES CONSULTING AND ADVOCACY IN CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT 1029 K ST.. SUITE 33, SACRAMENTO, CA 95S14, (916) 444-9346 MEMORANDUM TO. MONICA BROWNING FROM: BILL GEYER f DATS: OCTOBERS, 1999 SUBJECT: RETAIL NURSERY GRANDFATHER ISSUE In our review of the City of Carlsbad's response to the comment letter from the Department of Conservation, we agreed that the proposed retail nursery, properly understood, met the current Williamson Act "three principles" test (Section 51238.1) and therefore did not require a discussion of the compatible use grandfather provisions (Section 51238,3) adopted in 1994 along with the mice principles. However, in case the Department or anyone else wishes to challenge the compliance of the proposed nursery with the three principles, it might be appropriate for the city to also find, as a part of its action, that the nursery use would also be grandfathered pursuant to Section 51238,3 (c) under the provisions of the existing contract between the city and me', : ; landowner, even if it (the nursery) were not consistent with 51238.1, .>r:s< Section 51238.3 provides that the three principles do not apply to uses that, prior to June 7, -; 1994, were on the ground, in the approval pipeline, or "expressly specified within the contract itself." Although there has been some debate since over the meaning of the "expressly specified" concept, the most reasonable application is to uses that are guaranteed to the landowner by the contract against deletion without his consent. In the Carlsbad contract, the retail nursery is included in Exhibit B as one of the original allowable compatible uses, and the contract also contains a provision which protects the landowner from deletion of any of the Exhibit B uses without his consent (Sections 4 and 5), The intent to treat the Exhibit B compatible uses as . obligations of the contract is also demonstrated by subsequent amendments to the contract . (12-15-87 and 4-12-93), which specifically augment the ExhibitB list of uses through the . : contract amendment process, rather then through a unilaterally revisable process. Further legislative deliberations in the just completed 1999 session would appear to further cement the construction of the effect of the "expressly specified" language in the present circumstance. Presently awaiting the (governor's action (he has until October 10) are two Jinked Williamson Act revision bills, SB 985 (Johnston) and AB 1480 (Cardoza). As adopted, A3 1480 contains a provision prospectively narrowing the "expressly specified" language and excluding uses that displace agricultural uses. However, the new language is made inapplicable to contracts non-renewed before January 1,2001. The provisions of the new law will have no direct effect on the City's action since, even if signed, they would not go into effect until January 1,2000. However, particularly since the contract has already been non-renewed, the proposed language would seem to document an assumption by the legislature that the current grandfather provisions; should be read broadly enough to pover the fact situation posed by the Carlsbad contract (AB - 1480 enclosed). it fVi . . .'_. V'-5-. •Jcdk "' . AMENDED IN SENATE SEPTEMBER 2,1999 AMENDED IN SENATE JUNE 28,1999 . AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 17,1999 AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY MAY 6,1999 CALIFORNIA LEGISUTURB-I 999-2000 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1480 Introduced by Committee oa Agriculture (Cardoza (Chair), FloFez, Reyes, ThomaoB. and Wiggins) Assembly Member Cardoza February 26,1999 An act to amend Seeee* Sections 51238.3 and 51256 of, to add Section S12S6.1 to, and to add and repeal Section S12S6.S of, the Government Code, relating to land use. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 1480, as amended, Committee - en Cardoza. Williamson Act: agricultural conservation easement.' (1) Under existing law, the Williamson Act authorizes a city or county, upon petition by a landowner, to cancel -any contract if a city or county makes specified findings and the landowner pays a cancellation fee. The act also authorizes a city or county, upon petition by a landowner, to enter into an agreement with the landowner 'to rescind a Williamson Act contract in- order to simultaneously place other land under an r AB 1480 —2— !'! agricultural conservation easement if the legislative body of the city or county makes specified findings, including, among other things, that the proposed agricultural conservation easement is consistent with specified criteria. ; This bill instead would require that the: land subject to the proposed easement be within the city, the county, or the county where the contract is canceled rescinded and that the' easement be consistent with the purposes and requirements of the Agricultural Land Stewardship Program. The bill would also require the legislative body to make findings that the easement is consistent with specified eligibility criteria and is evaluated pursuant to specified selection criteria. The bill would make this a cancellation, process, instead of a rescission process, that is subject to additional, specified findings and the payment of a cancellation fee. : (2) The act permits specified activities and facilities on land within an agricultural preserve as compatible uses. This bill would provide how a compatible use is expressly specifiedJbr purposes of the act ; , This bill would authorize until January 1. 2005. a Sierra foothill county to enter into an agreement with the landowner to rescind a Williamson Act contract in I order to place other land under an agricultural conservation easement with the intent to approve, on a demonstration basis, a temporary nonagricuftural manufacturing facility associated with a compatible use if the board of supervisors makes certain findings and subject to approval by the Secretary of Resources. • (3) This bill would provide that it shall become operative only if SB 985 is chaptered prior to this bill, Vote: majority Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: ae yes, State-mandated local program: no. '• The people of the State of California do enact as follows: -. 1 SECTION 1. Section 51238.3 }of the Government 2 Code is amended to read: 3 51238.3, (a) The fequitemeata provisions of Sections 4 51238.1 and S12383 shall not apply to compatible uses for 5 which an application was submitted to the city or county r —3— AB 1480 1 prior to June 7, 1994, provided that the use constituted a 2 "compatible use" as that term was defined by this chapter 3 either at the time the application was submitted, or at the 4 time the Williamson Act contract was signed with respect 5 to the subject contract lands, whichever is later. 6 (b) Neither shall the requirements provisions of 7 Sections 51238.1 and 51238.2 apply to land uses of 8 contracted lands in place prior to June 7, 1994, that 9 constituted a "compatible use" as the term "compatible 10 use" was defined by this chapter either at the time the use 11 was initiated, or at the time the Williamson Act contract 12 was signed with respect to the subject contract lands, 13 whichever is later. 14 (c) (1) Neither shall the gequltemcnta provisions .of 15 Sections 51238.1 and 51238.2 apply to uses mat are 16 expressly specified within the contract itself prior to June 17 7, 1994, and that constituted a "compatible use" as the 18 term "compatible use" was defined by this chapter at the 19 time that Williamson Act contract was signed with 20 respect to the subject contract lands, or at the time the 21 contract was amended to include the uses, whichever is 22 later. For purposes of this subdivision, the foquiicmcpta 23 provisions of Sections 51238.1 and 51238.2, effective 24 January 1, 1995, shall apply to contracts for which contract 25 nonrenewal was initiated and was withdrawn after 26 January 1,1995. ' 27 (2) (A) For purposes of this chapter, a compatible use 28 is considered to be expressly specified within the contract 29 only if it is specifically enumerated within the four 30 comers of the Williamson Act contract without the 31 benefit of referenced documents. This subdivision shall 32 be narrowly construed to avoid uses that displace or 33 replace agricultural use of the affected land. 34 (B) Subparagraph (A) shall apply to any contract 35 entered into after January I, 2000. or any contract 'upon 36 which notice of nonrenewal has not been filed prior to 37 January 1. 2001. 38 (3) This subdivision shall not apply to mining 39 operations in compliance with Section 51238.2. r OCT. 7.1999 ll:15ftM 7(504319030 CAIUTfPcompflnv _ NO.206 P.1/3" October 7, 1999 VIA FACSIMILE & US MAE, (760) 438-0894 Total Pages: 2. Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Clyde Wickham City of Carlsbad Engineering Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re; Armstrong Garden Centers/Flower Fields CUP 98-20/CDP 9$-9l Dear Chris and Clyde: We are scheduled for a DCC meeting on Friday, October 8, 1999, at 9;00 AM. In preparation of this, we have gone over the Stjaff Report in some detail. The following summarizes questions we have that would need to be answered either at that meeting or in a subsequent meeting in order to be able to comply with the conditions: MAJOR ISSUES The two major issues relate to the called out mitigation: 1) The provision that no building permit can be issued until construction of Cannon Road Reach 2 has commenced to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Our Traffic Engineer, who has had a series of conversations with your Traffic Engineering Department, will be present and will have a written response for you before the meeting. We will want to discuss the condition at the meeting. Obviously if this condition is imposed and Reach 2 is not going to be under construction prior to November 15, 1999, then we will be unable to proceed with the Armstrong facility and the associated improvements this year. , ( 2) The condition that the "Flower Fields" will be planted in an open field flowering crop each year and will remain in bulb growing and cut flower production in perpetuity. We need a standatd for monitoring that the financial institution for our improvements can read and be assured can be measured to determine satisfaction of the condition. On this basis, we request that there be either a rinding, a note, or a comment on the monitoring that would note that the CUP condition would be deemed minimally satisfied as follows: "If a physical area, measured on a gross basis of not less than 22 "1 acres has been planted or continues to be maintained in cut flower/bulb growing__J cultivation." 5600 AVENIDA ENC1NAS »SUIT^ 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 earttas@worldnet.att.net NO.206 P.2/3 OCT. 7.1999 11=15PM 7604319020 \\v Armstrong Garden Cem^flower Fields, CDP-CUP October 7, 1999 , . Page 2 of 3 l This would not be hi derogation of the general requirement about planting the Flower Fields, but would provide a measurable minimum standard for the cut flower and bulb addition to the flowering crop standard. It would also allow for reasonable fanning practices if necessary to leaye areas fallow, to shift crops around, and other kinds of , activities. This relates to;both the mitigation measure and findings of Planning Commission Resolution 4643 and Condition 10 of 4644. SPECIAL CONDITIONS - PLAP^NING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 4644 0 1) Condition 10 - Mitigation lyionitoring Program. Is any document required for the ' implementation of this program since, the two conditions will be visibly obvious? 2) Conditions 14 and 15 - Landscape. We request a meeting next week with Chris DeCerbo, Larry Black, and whomever else should be there to review the area that will be plan checked versus the area that is shown as-built to assure our compliance with the condition. Condition 16 - Recorded Restriction. Two whom should we submit the form for approval? i \ ,i 4) Condition 19 - Outdoor Storage. We do not understand the condition as written. It appears to require direction for outdoor storage by the Fire Chief and, otherwise, no outdoor storage can occur. Please clarify. 5) Condition 20 - Lighting. We would like to confirm the area to be studied and for which lighting will be provided. We are assuming that it includes the paved access and the related parking together with the building area. For a variety of reasons (primarily our farming operations) we wish to minimize lighting and maintain as low a profile of lighting as possible. i6) Condition 20-A - Flowering production. The provision relating to the Flower Fields production should probably be numbered as a separate condition. We suggest numbering it as 20-A. 7) Conditions 22 and 23 - Security/Commuter Plans. Please describe the scope of the security plan needed for the fields and describe what the document should look like, 0 tAlso, will it be adequate to proyide rack cards with bus schedules and routes to meet the Y Commuter information requirement? 8) Condition 32 - Drainage states! that additional drainage facilities will be required. We are not proposing to change the existing farming or the de-silt/detention basins that have been provided for the farming qperations that were developed as a part of the planning for the Carlsbad Ranch and the Carlsbad Company Stores. On this basis, what other drainage facilities does Engineering think we are going to need relating to the farming area? 9) Condition 35 - Structural Section/Aisles. Because the parking lot area is partially paved and partially gravel, we a'ssume that the structural section standards set forth in OCT. 7.1999 ll:16flM Armstrong Garden G October 7, 1999 7604319020 ; newer Fields, CDP-CUP MO.206 P.3/3 Page 3 of 3 Section 35 should reflect the?, truck access route shown on Sheet L 1,2 (Truck and Bus Traffic Flow) as included in the submission. Other than the circulation aisles, none of the aisles will have an ADT greater than 500. We would like confirmation so that we can conduct the R Value tests as soon as possible. 10) Conditions 36 - 37 - Recycled Water/Service. Both conditions make reference to "map", and we assume this refers to site plan, In addition, we would like confirmation of who will review the colored recycled water use map for the approval by CMWD. Since a portion of the property includes existing as-built improvements that will be serviced by reclaimed water, as well as new improvements, we assume we need a different plan dian that whichi will be submitted for landscape improvements that reflect the new work to be completed', We realize that many of these conditions can be clarified either with a simple note on a copy of this letter or oral comment from you, but we wanted to get as many answers as we can so that we are as clear as possible on our submissions to whomever will be the reviewing and approval authority will be easily compared with the conditions. Very farltas C, Calkins! Company CCCidd cc: , Monte Enright, Armstrong Garden Centers Tim White Todd Bennitt r City of Carlsbad Planning Department October 1, 1999 Mr. Jason Marshall Assistant Director Department of Conservation 801 K Street, MS 24-02 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: Armstrong Garden Center at the Flower Fields SCH #99081011 Dear Mr. Marshall: This letter is in response to your correspondence dated September 8, 1999. It appears that a more comprehensive description of the subject parcel, its surroundings and the nature of the proposed project may be in order. The Flower Fields at Carlsbad Ranch is a unique agricultural operation that has for many years attracted people by its panoramic beauty when millions of ranunculus flowers bloom on the coastal hillside. It has become a major source of City pride treasured by the citizens of Carlsbad while instilling an appreciation of California's agriculture in all that experience it. The continuation of the Flower Fields is a major element of the recently adopted Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The plan includes provisions to promote the economic viability of the operation, including facilities for the "sale of flowers, produce, and other items related to the promqtion of the Flower Fields" and "other similar accessory uses and structures." The plan also provides the City with a first right of refusal to acquire the property if its floral use is judged infeasible by the landowner at some future time. Unfortunately, the grower who cultivated the ranunculus crops from the late 1970's through the early 1990's could no longer run the operation profitably. In order to maintain the agricultural operation as economically viable, the proposed project will generate income to offset losses from the growing operation and will do so in a way that is completely compatible with the unique agricultural operation. The proposed garden center is unique from all of the other Armstrong Garden Centers. The proposed project is intended to promote the agricultural operation by showcasing potted ranunculus plants, cut ranunculus flowers, and ranunculus bulbs grown on the parcel. In addition, Armstrong will participate in numerous educational programs with the property owner including a growing program for students from pre-school through 2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-0894 ARMSTRONG.GARDWJ C»ER AT THE FLOWER FIELW 80^99081011 OCTOBER 1, 1999 Page 2 fifth grade (6,000 student participants are projected for 2000), a master-gardener program, and an artist program (using the flower growing as a medium). All of the educational programs are designed to promote an appreciation of The Flower Fields and agriculture. The proposed garden center is more than compatible with the agricultural operation on the parcel; it will enhance it. The retail nursery operation, including parking, will occupy approximately 1.7 acres of the 53.8-acre Flower Fields parcel. This area has not been farmed for at least 15 years and has been customarily used by recent tenants as a staging, storage, parking and support area for the operation. The site has also been used more or less continuously for seasonal retailing of the floral or truck crops produced on the property and related products. Thus the proposed specialized Armstrong Garden Center facility is spatially merely a contemporary and more cost-efficient extension of the uses that have occupied this portion of the site in the recent past. The 53.8-acre parcel is in an urban location surrounded by development. Specifically, the parcel is located at the northeast corner of a busy intersection with a 7-11, Mobil Gasoline Station and Holiday Inn on the other three (3) comers of the intersection. The parcel is bordered by an outlet mall, a hotel/timeshare, two (2) office buildings and a parcel designated for golf course development. The proposed project will be located on the land closest to the intersection. This area is the most suitable portion of the parcel for the retail, storage, staging and parking uses it has been put to. Even absent the project, it is unlikely the area would be used for actual production. In addition, according to the property owner, it would require too much work and expense to sustain crops on the 1.7- acre site because it has not been cultivated for such a long period. With respect to the Williamson Act issues raised in your letter, the City of Carlsbad has reviewed and analyzed the proposed project and determined that (i) the project is consistent with the terms and conditions of the specific contract covering the parcel, and (ii) the project is consistent with the statutory provisions of Government Code Section 51238.1. Project Consistency with Land Conservation Contract 76-1 The subject parcel is Assessor's Parcel Number 212-022-21 (the "Property"). The Property is subject to Land Conservation Contract 76-1 dated February 10, 1976, as amended by instruments dated December 15, 1987, December 23, 1988, April 12, 1993 and January 9, 1996 (the "Contract"). The Property owner submitted an application for a conditional use permit to allow a retail nursery operation on a small portion of the Property. Section l.b) 6) of Exhibit B of Land Conservation Contract 76-1, states that a retail nursery is permitted on the Property provided a conditional use permit is issued by the City of Carlsbad authorizing such use (copy of Section 1 .b) 6) attached for your reference). ARMSTRONG OCTOBER 1, 1999 Page 3 GAR»4 CJWER AT THE FLOWER FIEcH sdH9908101 Pursuant to the Zoning Ordinance for the City of Carlsbad, the City of Carlsbad proposes to issue a conditional use permit, which includes the following condition, for the project: This Conditional Use Permit for a retail garden center within Planning Area 7 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan is approved subject to the condition that the "Flower Fields" will be planted in an open field flowering crop each year and will remain in bulb growing and cut flower production in perpetuity. The Conditional Use Permit for this retail garden center may be revoked at any time if this condition has not been met." Upon the City's issuance of a conditional use permit for the project, the City of Carlsbad determines that the proposed retail nursery on the Property is in compliance with the terms and conditions of the Contract. This condition assures that the Armstrong Garden Center is dependent on the continued existence and viability of the Flower Fields. This condition and the Specific Plan commitments to perpetuate the Flower Fields will continue in force even after the expiration by non-renewal of the contract in 2006. Project Consistency with Statutory Provisions The three (3) principles of compatibility stated in Government Code Section 51238.1 are set forth below, along with a discussion of the City's determination that the proposed project meets each principle. 1. The use will not significantly compromise the long-term productive agricultural capability of the subject contracted parcel or parcels or on other contracted land in the agricultural preserve. Discussion: The location of the proposed project is remote from the other contracted land in the agricultural preserve and therefore will not compromise the long-term productive agricultural capability of other contracted land in the agricultural preserve. With respect to the subject contracted parcel, its long-term productive agricultural capability will not be compromised by the proposed project because the 1.7-acre project site has not been used for agricultural production for at least 15 years, its long-term productive agricultural capability is already minimal, and it is in any event insignificant because it affects less than 4% of the parcel's total area, in the portion least suited to production. 2. The use will not significantly displace or impair current or reasonably foreseeable agricultural operations on the subject contracted parcel or parcels or on other contracted lands in agricultural preserves. Discussion: As discussed above, the 1.7-acre Armstrong project site has not been used for agricultural operations for at least 15 years so there is no possibility for displacing or ARMSTRONG GARB^ CW^ER AT THE FLOWER FIElS ScSl99081011 OCTOBER 1, 1999 Page 4 impairing current agricultural operations anywhere. With respect to reasonably foreseeable agricultural operations, based on statements from the property owner they will not be displaced or impaired on the subject contracted parcel or on other contracted lands in agricultural preserves. (Note: The owner of the subject parcel also owns all of the other contracted lands in agricultural preserves in the City of Carlsbad.) However, even if there were to be any displacement or impairment it would not be "significant" because of the small quantity of land to be used for the proposed project. 3. The use will not result in the significant removal of adjacent contracted land from agricultural or open-space use. Discussion: The only contracted land adjacent to the 1.7-acre project site is the remainder of the 53.8-acre subject parcel. As discussed above, the proposed project will enhance the feasibility of the ranunculus operation on the remainder of the parcel. The only contracted land adjacent to the subject parcel is a 45.6-acre parcel which is already slated for development as a portion of a golf course pursuant to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The contract specially authorizes golf courses as a compatible use, but it appears that any actual golf course construction will not take place until sometime after the contract on that property expires through non-renewal in 15 months. There is no discernible causal connection between the two projects. Finally, the City has considered the factors described in Section 51220.5 with respect to the impacts of human activities on agriculture and believes that because of the nature of the agricultural operation, the urban context of the site, and the historic use of the specific project site for similar purposes, these concerns are minor or irrelevant, and are in any event easily outweighed by the benefits the proposed project brings to the agricultural operation. Conditional Uses and Mitigation The Williamson Act authorizes governments to adopt compatible uses which "without conditions or mitigations" would not be legally compatible (Section 51238.l(b)). In the present instance the City believes the proposed project is consistent with the three principles even without the condition because the small size, location, and history of the project site in relation to the overall parcel makes its impacts insignificant in that context. However, the condition is necessary and appropriate to implement the City's Williamson Act contract and rules, the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, and to mitigate any potential adverse impacts for CEQA purposes. The permanent planting requirement cements the tie between the Flower Fields and the nursery, and ensures that the nursery's continued existence at that location is dependent upon the continued existence of the Flower Fields and their need for retail support. ARMSTRONG GARTEN CM^ER AT THE FLOWER FIELllscfll99081011 OCTOBER 1, 1999 Page 5 In its initial study for CEQA purposes, the City conservatively identified the minimal agricultural conversion associated with the project as potentially significant absent mitigation. The City continues to believe that the mitigation provided in the draft negative declaration is appropriate, and that measures of the type suggested by your letter such as conservation easements or exactions, are not warranted in this case and would be disproportionate to the scale and nature of the conversion, particularly in light of the right of first refusal the City acquired pursuant to the Specific Plan to acquire and, if necessary, operate the Flower Fields if the present owner determines it to be infeasible at some future time. Sincerely, CHRIS DECERBO Principal Planner CD:kc Enclosure W EXHIBIT B AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE MO. 76-1 Section 1. In the above named Agricultural Preserve only the follow- ing uses are permitted: a) The follov/ing agricultural uses: 1) Cattle, sheep, goats and swine production, provided that the number of any one or combination of said animals shall not exceed one animal per half acre of lot area. Said animals shall not be located within fifty feet of any habitable structure, nor shall they be located within three hundred feet of habitable structure on an adjoining parcel zoned for residential uses, nor shall they be located within one hundred feet of a parcel zoned for residential uses where a habitable structure is not involved. In any event, the distance from the parcel zoned for residential uses shall be the greater of the distances so indicated; 2) Crop production; 3) Floriculture; 4) Greenhouses; 5) Horses, private use; .6) Nursery crop production; 7) Poultry, rabbits, chinchillas, hamsters and other small ani- mals provided not more than twenty-five of any one or combina- tion thereof shall be kept within fifty feet of any habitable structure, nor shall they be located within three hundred feet of a habitable structure on an adjoining parcel zoned for residential uses, nor shall they be Iocat2d within one hundred feet of a parcel zoned for residential uses when a habitable structure is not involved. In any event, the distance from the parcel zoned for residential uses shall be the greater of the distances so .indicated; 8) Roadside stand for display and sale of products produced on the same premises, provided that the floor area shall not exceed two hundred square feet and is located not nearer than twenty feet to any street or highway; 9) Tree farms; 10) Truck farms; 11) Wildlife refuges and game preserves; 12) Other uses or enterprises similar to the above customarily carried on in the field of general agriculture. 13) The following uses if necessary and incidental to the agri- cultural use of the land: a) Accessory uses and accessory buildings and structures, including but not limited to private garages, children's playhouses, radio and television receiving antennas, windmills, silos, tank houses, shops, barns, offices, coops, lath houses, stables, pens, corrals, and other similar accessory uses and structures required for the conduct of the permitted uses; b) Dogs, cats and other domestic pets, provided not more than four dogs or four cats older than six months or any combination thereof shall be kept on any lot or parcel of land; c) Farmhouse, single-family dwelling; d) Guest house; e) Home oppupation. b) The following compatible uses, provided a conditional use permit authorizing such use is issued by the Planning Commission or City Council of the City of Carlsbad. Such conditional use permit shall be applied for, considered, granted or denied in the manner pre- scribed by the Zoning Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad for the application for, consideration, granting or denying of applications for conditional use permits under that ordinance. 1) Apiary, provided that all hives or boxes housing bees shall be placed at least four hundred feet from any street, school, park, "R" zone, or from any dwelling or place of human habitation other than that occupied by the owner or caretaker of the apiary; 2) Aviaries; 3) Poultry, rabbits, chinchillas, hamsters and other small animals in excess of the number specified in Section 21.07.020; 4) Farm employee housing for persons working on site, provided the number of units shall not exceed two per gross acre of land area and no such housing is located closer than fifty feet from any lot line; 5) Hay and feed stores; \^. 6) Nurseries, retail and wholesale: -2- Awliii. W ASlessory uses and structures Public Rest Rooms, Changing Rooms; Playground Equipment; Fencing, Patios, Stairways, Barbecue and Fire Pits; Parking, Staging, Processing and Storage Areas for agricultural crops; Shade Houses; Facilities for the sale of flowers, produce and other items related to the promotion of the "Flower Fields"; Other similar accessory uses and structures, determined by the Planning Director to be required for the conduct of the principal uses. iv. The following uses and structures are permitted by a conditional use permit: Farmers markets; Private picnic area; Green houses greater than 2,000 sq.ft.; b. Parking Standards Parking spaces for all permitted and ancillary uses shall be provided consistent with Section 21.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. c. Building Height Building Height for all structures within the open space parcels shall not exceed twenty-five feet in height, unless a higher elevation is approved by a conditional use permit issued by the Planning Commission. d. Signs Signs consistent with the style and character of the specific plan shall be utilized for all agricultural, recreational and accessory uses on Open Space Area 7. Signs shall be consistent with Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.41. e- Access Vehicular access to Planning Area 7 shall be at a City Engineer approved location on the east side of Paseo del Norte north of the intersection of Paseo del Norte and Palomar Airport Road. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan 161 QOLF COURSE OPME"WT \\\ PEDESTRIAN WALK SPECIALTY RETAIL RETAINING WALL \ ic PEDESTRIAN PLANN.NG AREA \ P«™ENAOE FLOWER FIELDS HOTEL/ RETAIL VEHICULAR ACCESS & EMPLOYEE/EOUP'T PARKING PEDESTRIAN WALK (WITHIN R.O.W.) c LAND USE: AGRICULTURE NET PARCEL AREA: 53.42 ACRES DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM: CONTINUATION OF CURRENT USE- FLOWER 3UL9, CUT FLOWER PRODUCTION. 500' Figure 49 PLANNING AREA 7 - FLOWER FIELDS C 162 1?.) Other uses o carried on in similar to tlic ftbove customari of general agriculture. 13} The following uscs'if necessary and incidental to tho agri- cultural use of the land: n) Accessory uses and accessory buildings and structures. Including but not limited to private garages, children's playhouses, radio and television receiving antennas, windmills, silos, tank houses, shops, barns, offices, coops, latli houses, stables, pens, corrals, and other . similar accessory uses and structures required for the conduct of the permitted uses; b) Dogs, cots and other domestic pets, provided not more than four Jogs or four cats older than six months or any combination thereof shall be kept on any lot or parcel of land; , c) Farmhouse, single-family dwelling; d) Guest liotisc; ' c) Home oppupation. The following compatible uses, provided a conditional use permit authorizing such use Is issued by the Planning Co.T,-nssic.- or city Council of the City of Carlsbad. Such conditional us* penult slnll be applied for, considered, granted or denied in tho planner pre- scribed by the Zonimj Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad for the applic-itjon for, consideration, granting or denying oF appf tcn-tinns for conditional use permits under that ordinance. 1) Apiary, provided that all hives or boxes housing bees shall br placed at least four hundred feet front any street, school, park, "R" zone, or from any dwelling or place of human h.ihftarfon other than that occupied by tiie owner or caretaker of thu apiary; 2) Aviaries; 3} Poultry, rabbits, chinchillas, haws tors and other small a now Is in excess of the number specified in Section 21.07,020; 1) Farm Oftployee housing for persons working on site, provided the number of units, sh.il 1 not exceed two prr gross acre of land arc-i ami no suctf housing is located closer tlwn fifty feet from any lot line; 5) Hoy and feed stores; C) Nurseries, retail iir;d wholesale: .0. y, . 3 CM CO MEMORANDUM September 29, 1999 TO: Associate Engineer, Clyde Wickham FROM: Associate Engineer, John Kim CUP 98-20 ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER I have completed my second review of the traffic impact analysis prepared by O'Rourke Engineering. The following are my comments to the report as well as other issues that were brought up at our recent internal meeting. 1) The last iteration of the report showed a buildout failure at I-5 NB Ramps/Palomar Airport Road in the AM Peak (ICU=0.911, LOS=E). But the revised report indicates an LOS of D due to a change in the adjusted volume for the critical NB Right (from 1632 to 1593). The ICU value is now shown as 0.899, just under the failure threshold of 0.90. Why was the adjusted volume changed? In any case, it is my recommendation that this be treated as a failure and to require recommendations for mitigation. 2) It is my understanding that the applicant will provide right-of-way only and construct a berm along the project frontage on Palomar Airport Road and will not be required to widen the roadway to provide an additional westbound through lane. The report needs to clarify any inconsistencies regarding this mitigation measure. 3) The buildout scenario presented in the report assumes the completion of Cannon Road, which is currently facing environmentally-related delays. Therefore, it is recommended that this project not be built until Cannon Road is complete. 4) The Kelly Corporate Center report showed worse existing conditions at Paseo Del Norte and Palomar Airport Road than the Armstrong Garden Center report. The Armstrong Garden Center report needs to explain the differences in the two reports, which were most likely the result of using different count data and the inability of ICU to account for congestion along a corridor with closely spaced intersections. 5) The report needs to have page numbers on each page. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please give me a call at (760) 438-1161, extension 4500. JN T. KIM, P.E. Associate Engineer Traffic Operations Section Public Works Director Deputy City Engineer, Transportation City of Carlsbad Planning Department September 28, 1999 Attn.: Chris Calkins C B Ranch Enterprises Ste. 106 5600 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad CA 92008 SUBJECT:CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER The preliminary staff report for the above referenced project will be mailed to you on Friday, October 1, 1999. This preliminary report will be discussed by staff at the Development Coordinating Committee (DCC) meeting which will be held on October 8, 1999. A twenty (20) minute appointment has been set aside for you at 9:00 a.m. If you have any questions concerning your project you should attend the DCC meeting. It is necessary that you bring your required unmounted colored exhibit(s) with you to this meeting in order for your project to go forward to the Planning Commission. If you do not plan to attend this meeting, please make arrangements to have your colored exhibit(s) here by the scheduled time above. If you need additional information concerning this matter, please contact your Planner, Chris DeCerbo at (760) 438-1161, extension 4445. CITY OP-CARLSBAD GA~RYE< WAYNE Assistant Planning Director GEW:CD:eh c: File Copy 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-O894 CflRlTflS • • • •company September 20,1999 Mr. Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad 2075 La Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 Subject: CUP 98-20 / CDP 98-81 - Armstrong Garden Center Dear Chris: I have discovered that I omitted the reduced elevations and floor plans for the structure from my submittals on September 16,1999. Please excuse this oversight and accept them at this time. Sincerely, in H. Nabors,Jr. Cc: Chris Calkins Attachments: Reduced elevations and floor plans 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 'CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net SEP. 7.1999 3:29PM 7604319020 NO. 578 P. 1/2 f, CARLTAS MEMO DATE: TO: CC: FROM: SUBJECT: Tuesday, September 07,1999 Tim White, Opart (909) 466-4379 Chris C. Calkins John Nabors, Project Manager Armstrong Garden Center The City has requested that we provide the final documents for the public hearing package, Attached is the letter outlining the requirements in 1, B) for 8 Vz" X 11" originals for reproduction of elevations and floor plans. Please send me originals for copying of A-2.1 and A -2.2 (floor plans) and A-3.1 (elevations), I would try reducing the originals I have, but I am afraid there are too lightly drawn to be reproduced. Please have these delivered to me no later than Tuesday a.m., September 14. If you have any questions, call me at 858 673-4150, Carhas Company SfiflO Aveniria Enemas. Suite 100 Carlsbad. CA 92008 f7601 431-5600 T -ffH [p—1 i.f J A-2.1 MPUKTBP CHUN* PLAN v_ 1 -H*I !/»•« noon*Mf LBCTBO SU». A-2.2 r T i MTON MGVNKKUMr *fi' I Z«-61"grf .83 See! S°-5gS5 Si§ BLBVATVSN*!PCTA1U8 JOB w. iflcn NORTH-CAST B-gVATlON A-5.1 Gray Davis GOVERNOR STATE OF CALIFORNIA _TTACHMENT MAA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse STREET ADDRESS: 1400 TENTH STREET ROOM 222 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CA 95812-3044 916-445-0613 FAX 916-323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov/clearinghouse.html Loretta Lynch DIRECTOR Septembers, 1999 Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009 Subject: Armstrong Garden Center at the Flower Fields SCH#: 99081011 Dear Chris DeCerbo: The enclosed comment (s) on your draft environmental document was (were) received by the State Clearinghouse after the end of the state review period, which closed on September 1, 1999. We are forwarding these comments to you because they provide information or raise issues that should be addressed in your final environmental document. The California Environmental Quality Act does not require Lead Agencies to respond to late comments. However, we encourage you to incorporate these additional comments into your final environmental document and to consider them prior to taking final action on the proposed project. Please contact the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions concerning the environmental review process. If you have a question regarding the above-named project, please refer to the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number (99081011) when contacting this office. Sincerely, Terry Robes Senior Planner, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data SCW# 99081011 Project Title Armstrong Garden Center at the Flower Fields Lead Agency Carlsbad, City of Type neg Negative Declaration Description A Coastal Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit for a 6,400 square foot retail garden center building and associated 27,600 square foot nursery yard and 503 at grade parking spaces on a 53.80 acre lot. Lead Agency Contact Name Agency Phone email Address City Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad 760438-1161x4445 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD Fax State CA Zip 92009 Project Location County San Diego City Carlsbad Reg/on Cross Streets Parcel No. Township Palomar Airport Road and Paseo Del Norte 211-022-21 Range Section Base Proximity to: Highways I-5 Airports McClellan/Palomar NCTDRailways Waterways Schools Land Use The existing land use is the Carlsbad Flower Fields. The existing zoning and General Plan land use is Open Space (OS). Project Issues Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Coastal Zone; Public Services; Solid Waste; Traffic/Circulation Reviewing Resources Agency; State Coastal Conservancy; Colorado River Board; Department of Conservation; Agencies Department of Fish and Game, Region 5; Department of Parks and Recreation; Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics; Caltrans, District 11; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 9; Native American Heritage Commission; State Lands Commission Date Received 08/03/1999 Start of Review 08/03/1999 End of Review 09/01/1999 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. STATE OF CALIFORNIA - THE RESOURCES ACS GRAY DAVIS, Governor DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION 801 K Street, MS 24-02 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 445-8733 Phone (916) 324-0948 Fax (916) 324-2555 TDD Septembers, 1999 Chris DeCerbo 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009 Subject: Armstrong Garden Center at the Flowers Fields SCH #99081011 Dear Chris DeCerbo: The Department of Conservation's Division of Land Resource Protection (Division) has reviewed the Armstrong Garden Center project with respect to the project's compatibility with the Williamson Act. The Division administers the California Land Conservation (Williamson) and Open Space Subvention Administration Acts. We offer the following comments for your consideration. The proposed project calls for a Coastal Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit for a 6,400 square foot Armstrong retail garden center, an associated 27,600 square foot nursery yard, and parking spaces for 503 vehicles on a 53.80 acre lot. This lot is currently under City of Carlsbad Williamson Act Contract No. 76-1. Williamson Act Issues As noted above, the project site is restricted by a California Land Conservation (Williamson) Act contract. A Williamson Act contract restricts the use of affected lands to agricultural, open space and compatible uses. The ND asserts that this project is a compatible use. We question this conclusion. The determination of the compatibility of a use is within the authority of the city or county that administers an agricultural preserve. However, Government Code section 51201 requires that for a use to be compatible it must not disrupt the purpose of the Williamson Act contract to preserve agricultural and open space lands. Also, in Government Code section 51220.5, the Legislature directs administering cities and counties, when determining the compatibility of a use, to consider the adverse impacts of increases in human population density generated by a use on agricultural operations. Chris DeCerbo Page 2 In light of this guidance from statute, it is difficult to understand how the proposed commercial retail operation could be deemed a use compatible with agriculture. Further, in January 1995, Assembly Bill 2663, which clarified the more general provisions on compatible use cited above, went into affect. Government Code section 51238.1 now contains three principles of compatibility that must be met for a use of prime agricultural lands: 1. The use will not significantly compromise the long-term productive agricultural capability of the subject contracted parcel or parcels or on other contracted land in agricultural preserve. 2. The use will not significantly displace or impair current or reasonably foreseeable agricultural operations on the subject contracted parcel or parcels or on other contracted lands in agricultural preserves. Uses that significantly displace agricultural operations on the subject contracted parcel or parcels may be deemed compatible if they relate directly to the production of parcels or neighboring lands, including activities such as harvesting, processing, or shipping. 3. The use will not result in the significant removal of adjacent contracted land from agricultural or open-space use. In our estimation, the proposed use would not meet any of these principles. The negative declaration seems to infer that since the garden center will be selling flower growing supplies, it will be incidental to the flower growing use of the agricultural land on which it will be located. However, the proposed use - one outlet of the 44-store Armstrong Company chain - is an inappropriate comparison with the typical farm produce stands that could conceivably be deemed compatible uses under principle number two, above. Therefore, unless we misunderstand the nature of the project proposed, and the City is able to make the three findings of section 51238.1, we advise that the Williamson Act be terminated, preferably via contract nonrenewal, before this project proceeds. Farmland Conversion Impact Mitigation Once the above Williamson Act contract compatibility issue has been resolved, and if the project were to proceed as proposed, we suggest that future CEQA documents address the following comments. Page five of the ND appropriately identifies the proposed project's impact on agricultural resources as "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated". The mitigation measure incorporated into the project requires the applicant to replant the "Flower Fields" each year in perpetuity. Notwithstanding the merits of this mitigation measure, we believe that it falls short of fully addressing the project's farmland Chris DeCerbo PageS conversion impacts. We suggest that a broader range of measures be considered in a mitigated negative declaration or DEIR to address both the direct and indirect project impacts on farmland. The Division has compiled an annotated listing of approximately 30 "conservation tools" which have been used to conserve or mitigate project impacts on agricultural land. (The unpublished list may be requested from the Division at the phone number, below.) One of the tools described in the listing is the purchase of agricultural land conservation easements on land of equal quantity and size as replacement mitigation for land converted by a project. We highlight this mitigation measure because of its growing acceptance as a conservation tool by state and local agencies in California and other states. For example, the City of Davis currently requires a 1:1 mitigation via conservation easements for every acre of prime farmland converted by development. Caltrans has proposed using conservation easements as mitigation for agricultural land that would be converted by a freeway. Also, at least one California court has ruled that conservation easements should be considered as a feasible mitigation measure for the loss of agricultural land (El Toro Land Use Planning Authority, et al v. County of Orange, et al, San Diego Superior Court #710123, January 6, 1998). An alternative to the outright purchase of easements is the donation of mitigation funds to a local regional or statewide program promoting and implementing the use of agricultural conservation easements, such as local land trusts or conservancies, or the statewide Agricultural Land Stewardship Program (ALSP). The latter is an agricultural conservation easement grant program that can receive donations of funds for grants to local agencies and private non-profit land trusts and conservancies for the purchase of easements. This program is administered by the Division in cooperation with the USDA's Farmland Protection Program (administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service), which also awards grants for the purchase of agricultural land conservation easements. If the conservation easements are considered, the search for property to be placed under an easement need not be limited strictly to the Carlsbad area. The loss of prime agricultural land is considered to be a regional and statewide issue. Therefore, candidate lands for easements could come from at least a regional search. Information on the ALSP, and conservation easements generally, is available on the Department's website, or by contacting the Division at the address and phone number listed below. The Department's website address is: www. consrv. ca. gov/dlrp/alsp/index.htm Chris DeCerbo Page 4 Of course, these are only a few of the mitigation measures that could be considered to fulfill the requirements of CEQA with respect to the project's environmental impacts. We encourage you peruse the above-mentioned listing on conservation tools for other mitigation strategies that might fit the needs of Carlsbad. If you have questions on our comments, or require technical assistance or information, please contact Emily Kishi, Division of Land Resource Protection, at (916) 324-0850. Sincerely, /Jason Marshall Assistant Director cc: Luree Stetson, Assistant Director Division of Land Resources Protection CflRlTflS componv September 7, 1999 Mr. Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 Re: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - Armstrong Garden Center Dear Chris: We have field measured the current civil drawing No. Cl .0 against the 1998-1999 crop limits of planting and have identified the issues being discussed by Clyde Wickham regarding the grading limits. The very easternmost portion of the farm road as shown on the civil plans is within the 1999 limits of planting. This is contrary to what we believed and told you on August 24. However, we believe this to be an immaterial point due to the dynamics of the farming business. To put this area in perspective, the area impacted by the road realignment into the 1998-1999 field area will be 2,600 square feet out of the 2.1 million square feet in the property, less than 1/100 % of the "flower fields" area. The 1999-2000 planting program is planned to vary the planting scale of operations, crop rotation, experimental plantings, expansion of visitor access to the flowers, and relocation of several farm and visitor access roads. These changes are for several reasons. 1. The first road relocation is the road up to scenic lookout between blocks 2 and 3. This road was removed by the field preparation this summer and will be rebuilt later this fall. This road is for visitor access and for farming purposes. It will begin at about the same point as the 1998-1999 road, but will terminate further north at the base of the visitor viewing station. This is the principal visitor access route to the top of the flower fields. 2. Additional north-south trails will be added at mid slope to allow better visitor access to the flower fields and to provide varied vistas and experiences. These new trails were fully planted in the prior season. 3. The upper farm road will be constructed in an area above the crop planting and west of the wall. This area may increase in width to reflect the newer setback requirements for pesticide applications adjacent to non-agriculture land uses. The farm road may or may not be required to move within this buffer area. 4. The lower farm road will be constructed below the farm fields in generally the same location as the last planting season. Portions of this year's road may be moved east to provide the pesticide separation from the retail center and the Armstrong Garden Center which replaces a prior, seasonal retail use. We are preparing the 1999-2000 fields to provide up to 30 feet of additional visitor access near Armstrong Garden 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net Center and for equipment access from north to south. This area is less than 210 feet in length along about 3600 lineal feet of farm roads at the toe of the fields. I am attaching a drawing of the 1998-1999 field location relative to the proposed road. 5. The crops grown in Blocks IB and 1C along Palomar Airport Road are planned to be fallow this year due to abundance of the 1998-1999 non-ranunculus bulb crop. That crop will be moved to the foot of Blocks 3 and 4 near the retail stores. Block 1A at the corner of Palomar and Armada Drive was fallow this year and no crop again is forecasted for the 1999-2000 season. 6. The crops will be planted in a different order in the upcoming planting season to facilitate visitor enjoyment and crop harvesting techniques. Ranunculus plantings will start with Block 3, followed by Blocks 4, 5 6 and finishing with Block 2. A field plan is attached for clarity. 7. In addition to the bands of ranunculus viewed by visitors each year, we are going to plant 1.5 acres just north of block 7 as an experimental, early ranunculus crop. Another experimental crop of late season ranunculus will be planted at the north end of the flower fields. Therefore, we are certainly desirous of the small change in the visitor entrance and the related farm road just east of the proposed Armstrong Retail Center. While it is located at a maximum of 25 feet into the 1998-1999 fields, it will be adjacent and outside of the newly prepared 1999-2000 fields. We do not see this change as significant. The farming business is dynamic especially when we encourage visitors to view the fields by immediate access to the flowers. The roads carry both visitors and farm vehicles. The flexibility of both is essential to this mixture of people into the agricultural process. We are sorry that we have not clarified this issue earlier and do so now because we realize that the City is equating visitor/farm roads with permanent pathways such as in park areas. Farm roads with the visitor component must have some flexibility. Do not hesitate to contact me if you require further explanation of this information. Sincerely, John H. Nabors,Jr. Project Manager Cc: Chris Calkins Jim Borneman Mike Cardosa Clyde Wickham Attachment: Field Map 1998-1999 season Added Visitor Area 132.10 AC. 128.32 NET AC SEP. 7.1999 2=30PM 7604319020 NO.576 P.1/1 W W W WCAKLTAS MEMO DATE: Tuesday, September 07,1999 TO: Chris DeCerbo CC: Chris C. Calkins FROM; John Nabors, Project Manager SUBJECT: Armstrong Garden Center Per our discussion this morning I am providing the following information: 1. Sheets in the plan submittal; LI ,0 Site Development Plan cover page Ll.l Site Plan Enlargement 1" = 40* LI.2 Truck/Bus Traffic Flow Diagram 1" = 40' L2.1 Landscape Plan 1" = 40' Cl.O Grading Plan 1" = 40' A-2,1 Trellis Plan and Elevations 1/8" « T A-2.2 Floor and Reflected Ceiling Plans and Details 1/8" = 1' A-2.3 Clerestory and Roof Plans 1/8" = 1' A-3.1 Exterior Elevations and Details 1/8" = !' A-4.1 Building Sections and Details 3" = 1' 2. Area of Building = 6,400 sq. ft, Area of Tract = 2,100,000 sq. ft. Building Coverage = 3/10 % Area of Building and Outside Display Area = 34,000 sq. ft. Building and Outside Display Coverage =1.6% Carltas Company 5600 Avenida Encinas. Strite 100 Carlsbad. CA 92008 (1&K\ 431-5600 Gray Davis GOVERNOR kTATE OF CALIFORNIA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse STREET ADDRESS: 1400 TENTH STREET ROOM 222 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CA 95812-3044 916-445-0613 FAX 916-323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov/clearinghouse.html Loretta Lynch DIRECTOR September 2,1999 Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009 Subject: Armstrong Garden Center at the Flower Fields SCH#: 99081011 Dear Chris DeCerbo: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period closed on September 1, 1999, and no state agencies submitted comments by that date. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please call the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. If you have a question about the above-named project, please refer to the eight-digit State Clearinghouse number when contacting this office. Sincerely, Terry Roberts Senior Planner, State Clearinghouse Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 99081011 Project Title Armstrong Garden Center at the Flower Fields Lead Agency Carlsbad, City of Type neg Negative Declaration Description A Coastal Development Permit and Conditional Use Permit for a 6,400 square foot retail garden center building and associated 27,600 square foot nursery yard and 503 at grade parking spaces on a 53.80 acre lot. Lead Agency Contact Name Agency Phone email Address City Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad 760438-1161 x4445 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD Fax State CA Zip 92009 Project Location County San Diego City Carlsbad Region Cross Streets Parcel No. Township Palomar Airport Road and Paseo Del Norte 211-022-21 Range Section Base Proximity to: Highways I-5 Airports Railways Waterways Schools Land Use McClellan/Palomar NCTD The existing land use is the Carlsbad Flower Fields. The existing zoning and General Plan land use is Open Space (OS). Project Issues Agricultural Land; Air Quality; Coastal Zone; Public Services; Solid Waste; Traffic/Circulation Reviewing Resources Agency; State Coastal Conservancy; Colorado River Board; Department of Conservation; Agencies Department of Fish and Game, Region 5; Department of Parks and Recreation; Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics; Caltrans, District 11; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 9; Native American Heritage Commission; State Lands Commission Date Received 08/03/1999 Start of Review 08/03/1999 End of Review 09/01/1999 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. CONDITIONS Date: September 1. 1999 Planning Department City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009 TO: Chris DeCerbo FROM: Kelly Weaver CMWD NO. 99-213 SUBJECT: Armstrong Garden Center (CUP 98-20) We have the following conditions regarding potable water, recycled water and sewer systems: 1. The Developer shall be responsible for all fees, deposits and charges which will be collected before and/or at the time of issuance of the building permit. The San Diego County Water Authority capacity charge will be collected at issuance of application for any meter installation. (Code Reminder) 2. Prepare and submit a colored recycled water use area map and submit this map to the Planning Department for processing and approval by the District. 3. The following note shall be placed on the final map. "This project is approved upon the expressed condition that building permits will not be issued for development of the subject property unless the District serving the development has adequate water and sewer capacity available at the time development is to occur, and that such water and sewer capacity will continue to be available until time of occupancy." 4. Water, Sewer and Irrigation laterals shall be located and shown on an improvement plan in accordance with City and District Standards to the satisfaction of the Deputy City Engineer - Utilities. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned. Kelly Weaver Associate Engineer KJW:kjw City of Carlsbad Planning Department August 25, 1999 Mr. Chris Calkins CB Ranch Enterprises, A California Corporation 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 106 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT:CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER Dear Mr. Calkins: Pursuant to the recently adopted Assembly Bill 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990, it has been determined that your project is subject to filing fees of $1275 levied by the State Department of Fish and Game. This fee is payable to the County on approval of your project. Please submit a check for the above amount (payable to the City of Carlsbad) to the City of Carlsbad, Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009-1576. Please note the application will not be scheduled for a hearing until the fee has been received by the Planning Department. If you have any questions, please contact Chris DeCerbo at (760) 438-1161, extension 4445. Sincerely, Chris DeCerbo Principal:Planner CD:eh c:File 2O75 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (76O) 438-O894 NOTE ADDITIONAL FEES. STATE DEPARTMENT OF FISH & GAME Cities and Counties throughout California has been notified of legislation (AB 3158, Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990) which became effective on January 1, 1991. This law requires the State of California Department of Fish and Game to levy a fee to all project applicants (public and private) subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) to defray the cost of managing and protecting fish and wildlife trust resources. Projects which are categorically exempt from CEQA and which have no adverse impact on fish and wildlife or projects which are denied, are not subject to the fee. All other projects are subject to the following fees: Projects with Negative Declarations $1,275. Projects with EIRs $875. Due to State Law constraints the City of Carlsbad will collect the fee where applicable and pass it to the County of San Diego. After submission, the City of Carlsbad Planning Department will make an Environmental Assessment of your application. After this initial assessment the Planning Department will notify you if the fee is required. State Department of Fish and Game P.O. Box 944209 Sacramento CA 94244-2090 (916) 445-3531 City of Carlsbad Planning Department August 25, 1999 Mr. Chris Calkins CB Ranch Enterprises, A California Corporation 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 106 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER Your application has been tentatively scheduled for a hearing by the Planning Commission on October 20, 1999. However, for this to occur, you must submit the additional items listed below. If the required items are not received by September 16, 1999, your project will be rescheduled for a later hearing. In the event the scheduled hearing date is the last available date for the City to comply with the Permit Streamlining Act, and the required items listed below have not been submitted, the project will be scheduled for denial. 1. Please submit the following plans: A) 12 copies of your (site plans, landscape plans, building elevation plans, floor plans) on 24" x 36" sheets of paper, stapled in complete sets folded into 81/2' x 11" size. B) One SVz" x 11" copy of your reduced site plan, building elevation and floor plans. These copies must be of a quality which is photographically reproducible. Only essential data should be included on plans. 2. As required by Section 65091 of the California Government Code, please submit the following information needed for noticing and sign the enclosed form: A) 600' Owners List - a typewritten list of names and addresses of all property owners within a 600 foot radius of the subject property, including the applicant and/or owner. The list shall include the San Diego County Assessor's parcel number from the latest equalized assessment rolls. B) 100' Occupant List - (Coastal Development Permits Only) a typewritten list of names and addresses of all occupants within a 100 foot radius of the subject property, including the applicant and/or owner. 2O75 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (76O) 438-1161 • FAX (76O) 438-0894 CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - August 25, 1999 Page 2 ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER C) Mailing Labels - two (2) separate sets of mailing labels of the property owners within a 600 foot radius of the subject property and occupants within a 100 foot radius of the subject property. The list must be typed in all CAPITAL LETTERS, left justified, void of any punctuation. For any address other than a single family residence, an apartment or suite number must be included but the Apartment, Suite and/or Building Number must NOT appear in the street address line. DO NOT type assessor's parcel number on labels. DO NOT provide addressed envelopes - PROVIDE LABELS ONLY. Acceptable fonts are: Arial 11 pt, Arial Rounded MT Bold 9 pt, Courier 14 pt, Courier New 11 pt, and MS Line Draw 11 pt. Sample labels are as follows: UNACCEPTABLE UNACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE Mrs. Jane Smith 123 Magnolia Ave., Apt #3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 D) E) Sincerely, Mrs. Jane Smith 123 Magnolia Ave. Apt. #3 Carlsbad, CA 92008 MRS JANE SMITH APT 3 123 MAGNOLIA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Radius Map - a map to scale, not less than 1" = 200', showing all lots entirely and partially within 600 feet of the exterior boundaries of the subject property. Each of these lots should be consecutively numbered and correspond with the property owner's list. The scale of the map may be reduced to a scale acceptable to the Planning Director if the required scale is impractical. Fee - a fee shall be paid for covering the cost of mailing notices. Such fee shall equal the current postage rate times the total number of labels. Cash check (payable to the. City of Carlsbad) and credit cards are accepted. Chris DeCerbo Principal Planner CD:eh Attachment I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS LIST AND LABELS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ON THIS DATE REPRESENT THE LATEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION FROM THE EQUALIZED ASSESSOR'S ROLES. APPLICATION NAME AND NUMBER APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE BY: DATE: RECEIVED BY DATE: w CITY OF CARLSBAD ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT LAND USE REVIEW TO: Senior Planner - Chris Decerbo August 23,1999 FROM: Associate Engineer - Clyde Wickham RE: CDP 98-91 / CUP 98-20 : ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER VIA: ^Principal CiviLErjfljneer - Land Use Review Based upon support from Traffic Division (Full review is outstanding as of this memo) The Engineering Department has completed its review of the above referenced project and is recommending: X That the project be approved subject to the conditions as listed on the attached sheet. That the project be denied for the following reasons: Grading: Quantities: Cutd .768 cv) FNK562 cv) Export(1206 cv) to be spread on the flower fields -Tatar ntified on centjeptual DlanSand theH ature/Jf this area/iys^vid^Hhat<«Cpernajt>Will be Permit Required:* Offsite Approval required/obtained: Yes / Not in file, conditioned prior to issuance of permit. Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Performed by: Conditioned as part of the grading plan check. Drainage and Erosion Control: Drainage Basin: BA Erosion Potential: Moderate Land Title: Conflicts with existing easement: Yes, A portion of the proposed use is located in an existing open space easement (The Flower Field) The proposed use must be approved by discretionary action as provided in the granting documents. The previous approval conditioned right of way dedication. The dedication is in process. A portion of the existing parking lot, landscape irrigation and fence is located within the proposed right of way, an encroachment agreement is also being processed for the removal and relocation of fence, landscaping, and irrigation. Easement dedication required: No Site boundary coincides with land title: YES Improvements: Frontage Improvements Required: No Standard Variance Required: No Engineering Conditions General Note: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following engineering conditions, Prior to the approval of, or issuance of grading or building permits whichever occurs first.. 46. Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within this project, the developer shall submit to and receive approval from the City Engineer for the proposed haul route. The developer shall comply with all conditions and requirements the City Engineer may impose with regards to the hauling operation. 48. The developer shall install sight distance corridors at all street intersections in accordance with Engineering Standards. "No structure, fence, wall, tree, shrub, sign, or other object over 30 inches above the street level may be placed or permitted to encroach within the area identified as a sight distance corridor in accordance with City Standard Public Street-Design Criteria, Section 8.B.3. The underlying property owner shall maintain this condition." Fees/Agreements 50. The developer shall pay all current fees and deposits required. 51. The owner of the subject property shall execute an agreement holding the City harmless regarding drainage across the adjacent property. 55. The owner shall execute a hold harmless agreement for geologic failure. Grading 59. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or building permit, whichever occurs first, the developer shall submit proof that a Notice of Intention has been submitted to the State Water Resources Control Board. 61. No grading for private improvements shall occur outside the limits of the project unless a grading or slope easement or agreement is obtained from the owners of the affected properties and recorded. If the developer is unable to obtain the grading or slope easement, or agreement, no grading permit will be issued. In that case the developer must either amend the site plan or modify the plans so grading will not occur outside the project site in a manner which substantially conforms to the approved site plan as determined by the City Engineer and Planning Director. Dedications/Improvements 63. Additional drainage facilities will be required. Drainage structures shall be provided or installed prior to or concurrent with any grading or building permit to de-silt the runoff from the agricultural fields to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. 66. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall underground all existing overhead utilities along/within the project boundary. 70. The developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The developer shall provide best management practices as referenced in the "California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be approved by the City Engineer. Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants of the following: A. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and hazardous waste products. B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil, antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective containers. C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements. 75. The structural section for the access aisles must be designed with a traffic index of 5.0 in accordance with City Standards due to truck access through the parking area and/or aisles with an ADT greater than 500. The structural pavement design of the aisle ways shall be submitted together with required R-value soil test information and approved by the City as part of the building site plan review. Code Reminder The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the following: 79. The developer shall exercise special care during the construction phase of this project to prevent offsite siltation. Planting and erosion control shall be provided in accordance with the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the City Engineer. Gray Davis GOVERNOR DATE: TO: RE: TAT E OF CALIFORNIA Governor's Office of Planning and Research State Clearinghouse STREET ADDRESS: 1400 TENTH STREET ROOM 222 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CA 95812-3044 916-445-0613 FAX 916-323-3018 www.opr.ca.gov/clearinghouse.html ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT August 11, 1999 Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CA 92009 Armstrong Garden Center at the Flower Fields SCH#: 99081011 Loretta Lynch DIRECTOR This is to acknowledge that the State Clearinghouse has received your environmental document for state review. The review period assigned by the State Clearinghouse is: Review Start Date: August 3,1999 Review End Date: September 1,1999 We have distributed your document to the following agencies and departments: Caltrans, District 11 Caltrans, Division of Aeronautics Colorado River Board Department of Conservation Department of Fish and Game, Region 5 Department of Parks and Recreation Native American Heritage Commission Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 9 Resources Agency State Coastal Conservancy State Lands Commission The State Clearinghouse will provide a closing letter with any state agency comments to your attention on the date following the close of the review period. Thank you for your participation in the State Clearinghouse review process. CARLTASMEMO DATE: TO: CC: FROM: SUBJECT: Monday, August 09, 1999 i, City of Carlsbad Chris C. Calkins Jim Borneman John Nabors, Project Manager Armstrong Gardens CUP I am submitting jSnipaated and revised sets of the landscape plans and the civil drawing per our conversation last Thursday. The new site plans match the civil drawings previously submitted. Note that we have settled on the artist garden inside the grading limits of the road. Let me know if there is anything else that I can do to help you finish this analysis. Carltas Company 5600 Avenida Encinas. Suite 100 Carlsbad. CA 92008 (760) 431-5600 Memorandum TO: Principal Planner, Chris Decerbo FROM: Associate Engineer, Clyde Wickham DATE: July 29, 1999 CDP 98-91 / CUP 98-20: ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER TRAFFIC COMMENTS Engineering Department staff has received comments from traffic division that should be forwarded to the applicant. The comments are attached for your review and to pass on to the applicant or his engineer. I have made a copy of the comments and will review them next week. Has the applicant resubmitted the application for review? We have pieces but nothing official from planning as far as a complete submittal. If you or the applicant have any questions, please contact me at extension 4353. CLYDEWICKHAM Associate Engineer Land Development Division c: Bob Wojcik Principal Civil Engineer, Land Development Division JUL.27.1999 li:43flM 7604319020 FAX NO.831 P. 1/1 Date: Attn: July 27, 1999 Mr. Clyde Wickham Engineering Department CARLTAS COMPANY 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California Telephone: (760) 431-5600 Fax: (760)431-9020 ! Total Pages (including cover sheet): 1 ( " I ! Fax Number: (760)438-0894 Company: City of Carlsbad From; Copy to: Christopher C. Calkins Bob Johnson - Traffic Chris DeCerbo-j' Planning For yourreyjew DjReply ASAP Re: Flower Fields Traffic Timing As further information, the Flower Fields visitor attendance has the following characteristics: i • The fields (and the store) are never open during the morning peak driving time. • According to our tracking, eighty percent (8,0%) of the attendance occurs from 10:00 a.m to 4:00 p,m. | • Approximately sixty percent (60%) of all [visitors come on the weekend (Saturday and Sunday).i • Approximately thirty-five percent (35%) o|f attendance (during a normal year) occurs during the two weeks and three weekends of Easter vacation. • During the approximately eight-week bloomrag season (March 1 - May 1), two-thirds of the visitors come during April. i • Garden centers are virtually exclusively midday and weekend operations; exactly counter- cyclical to the real traffic on Palomar Airport Road from industrial employers. CCC:dd I NOTICE This communication is ONLY far the person named above. Unless othewise indicated, it contains information that is confidential, privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the pertcn named above, or responsible for delivering ii to that person be aware that disclosure, copying, distribution or use of ihls communicaito|i is strictly PROHIBITED. If you have received it in error, or are uncertain as to its proper handling, please immediately notify us by telephone or fax and mail the original to us at die above address ' Thankyou- j \\FS2\\Vp\CCC\FAX\\Viefcham2,doc CflRlTflScompnnv July 26, 1999 Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Re: Armstrong Garden Centers/Flower Fields CDF - CUP Dear Chris: I have tried to get in touch with you over the last two weeks to determine if a process can be developed that would allow for a timely hearing on the request for a Conditional Use Permit for the Flower Fields site of the Armstrong Garden Center. We believe that the project is one which is both positive in supporting the Flower Fields as a long term viable horticultural farming activity as well as providing a service to the community that is sorely needed. Our problem is that we need to construct in a manner that meets the needs of the garden center but does not disrupt either the flower growing or the visitor serving activites. Based on your last message, we understand that you are in the process of environmental review and noticing for the project and are awaiting comments from Engineering. It is very important that we be able to be at a hearing before the end of September so that the operational planning can be done in a way which will accommodate whatever result comes out. We realize that it is not within your authority to have resolution of the issues from the Engineering side and that it requires cooperation from that department. We would ask that whatever meeting is necessary to review both the process necessary to get the answers as well as to get to a hearing held as quickly as possible. We will make ourselves available as necessary, particularly this coming week. With respect to traffic concerns, we have agreed and have completed an analysis that is wholly inconsistent with the traffic standards provided by the Institute for Transportation Analysis, SANDAG, and other jurisdictions, in order to consider an extreme impact analysis of the proposed project. As you are aware, the traffic analysis which has been submitted is based upon an assumption that not only the garden center building but the entire outside nursery area would be treated as a building and traffic 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760)431-5600 (760)431-9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net Armstrong Garden CerHrs/Flower Fields CDP-CUP July 26, 1999 Page 2 of 3 generation based on that. The standard itself as developed by ITA assumes an outside area and therefore is built into the building square footage. Obviously this makes a huge difference in whatever comments are going to come from Traffic and Engineering. We believe that if those comments are ones which suggest that this project is going to generate traffic requiring mitigation, that such comments would be erroneous and flawed, and we would wish to address it as quickly as possible. We recognize the ultimate need for an additional lane on Palomar Airport Road to address traffic largely generated elsewhere than on the Carlsbad Ranch, of which the Flower Fields are a part, and clearly different than the Carlsbad Ranch. We have responded to a condition imposed the last tune we provided a nursery structure by dedicating a lane the entire length of the property. For us to go further to solve traffic concerns that have originated elsewhere is unreasonable. Therefore, rather than wait for that suggestion to be initiated, we would like to set up whatever meeting is necessary to review the issues and to get them to those decision makers who can address the inconsistency in the analysis and the result. Carlsbad has required that the Flower Fields remain in horticultural production. It is Carlsbad's objective to see it be successful as a continuing model of the horticultural character of the community and as a continuing amenity of the community. That can only happen if it is allowed to succeed consistent with these requirements. A garden center supports this business and generates little or no additional traffic. The Flower Fields themselves, because of their very attraction (which is what the City wants to retain) will generate interest and traffic at times when they are in full bloom. If the City chooses to require that this attraction be mitigated, then we believe that they should relieve us from the open space requirement, the requirement for growing flowers, and allow us to enter into a business operation which can economically carry that kind of mitigation. As a supplement to our comments, the following are the characteristics of the Flower Field blooming season: • The fields (and the store) are never open during the morning peak. • From our tracking, ninety percent (90%) of the attendance occurs from 12:00 noon to 4:00 PM. • Seventy-five percent (75 %) of all visitors come on the weekend. • Thirty-five percent (35%) of attendance (during a normal year) occurs during the two weeks and three weekends of Easter vacation. Armstrong Garden CenSs/Flower Fields CDP-CUP July 26, 1999 Page 3 of 3 • Gardens centers are virtually exclusively midday and weekend operations; exactly counter-cyclical to the real traffic on Palomar Airport Road from industrial employers. This letter is longer than I wish to send, but because of the inability to communicate orally, I believe it important to get these issues out and discussed as early as possible. They appear to be the reason that this project has been stalled for nearly six months. There is major sponsorship for some of the floral work that would be done this next year that we will lose if we cannot get to a hearing and have this matter considered before the end of September. I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest convenience. Sincerely yours, ___ristbpher C. Calkins ForCarltas Company CCC:dd cc: Bob Johnson, Traffic Gary Wayne, Planning Clyde Wickham, Engineering Bob Wojick, Engineering JUL-26-99 MON 10:43 AQUATERRP ENGINEERING Co 619 439 2302 P . 0 1 !ng Inc. July 26, 1999 Clyde Wickham, Associate Engineer City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 CMI Engineering. Land Planning 1843 Campesino Place Oceanside, CA 92053 Tel 760.439,2802 Fax760.439.28oS RE: CUP 98-91/ CUP 98-20, Armstrong Garden Center Dear Mr. Wickham, At the request of Mr. Calkins, we have reviewed the processing documents for the above referenced project in relation to the "Completeness & Issues Review" comments dated July 2, 1999. We are providing this narrative in response to two issue descriptions. For convenience we have identified the issues as listed in the July 2 memorandum, Grading & Drainage 1) Drainage Planted (bio-filters) Filters: We understand that it is your recommendation to have enhanced grass lined drainage swales installed in accordance with NPDES Best Management Practice detail TC4. We have reviewed the literature and determined that the proposed site development is not compatible with the installation of the biofilter swales. As indicated on the plan, we recommend Fossil Fuel Filter assembly units be installed in each catch basin accepting runoff from an area used for vehicular parking. We believe that these units, if maintained properly, will satisfy the requirements of the Stormwater Discharge Program. 2) Work exempt from Grading Permit: Based on our review of Section 15.16.060 (Municipal Code), it appears that a Grading Permit should not be a requirement to develop the site as currently proposed. We offer the following statements for clarification. a) The Artist Feature Garden Pad has been deleted from the current design. b) The proposed cuts are less than 3.5' in vertical height. c) The amount of soil moved is less that 100 C.Y. per 8000 s.f. of lot area, d) The proposed grading does not adversely affect the existing drainage patterns. Should you wish further discussion on the above items or have questions, please contact this office at ant time. Sincerely, Aqu,Post-it* Fax Note 7671 .'.QaryLii^a, RCE Phone # Fax* Phone # Fax 8 CARLTAS MEMO DATE: Monday, July 26, 1999 TO: Clyde Wickham - 2 prints Chris DeCerbo - 2 print CC: Chris C. Calkins FROM: John Nabors, Project Manager SUBJECT: Revised Grading Plan - Armstrong Garden Centers Attached are 4 prints of the Grading Plan, Sheet C 1.0 of the application with the revisions to the site east of the garden center. The dirt road at the west end of the flower fields has been relocated to the edge of the garden center, the grading reduced, and the artist areas have been removed. The site plan illustrates the site lines on Paseo del Norte at Palomar Airport Road and the driveway to the site and to the Carlsbad County Stores. There may be existing decorations within the site line area for the driveway which will be removed if a variance can not be obtained. The civil engineer has also submitted a letter to you dated July 26, 1999, that provides substantiation for our position that a grading permit will not be required with the new grading plan. A copy of that letter is attached. O'Rourke Engineering will be submitting an addendum to the traffic report directly to you today or Tuesday, July 27, 1999. A second site plan will be submitted to you that illustrates the location of the artist gardens within the flower fields that will be part of a separate application at a later date. We have submitted a response to each of the staff comments with the exception of the forthcoming comments from traffic. Please assist us in moving this project forward Attachment: Grading Plan plotted 7/25/99 Carltas Company 5600 Avenida Encinas. Suite 100 Carlsbad. CA 92008 (7601 431-5600 Carlsbad Municipal Water District emo To: Chris DeCerbo, Planning From: Kelly Weaver Efimoff, CM 1999 \ MANNING DEPARTMENT Date: July 26, 1999 Re: Armstrong Garden Center (CUP 98-20) CMWD 99-213 NE Corner Paseo Del Norte and Palomar Airport Road The Developer should be aware of the following: a) Verify with the District Project Manager that the improvements will not require increase potable water or recycled Water demands. b) Existing water meter, recycled water meter and sewer lateral shall be shown on an approved plan to be signed by the District Engineer. c) This project is not expected to impact any connection to the public system. If grading and improvements proposed by this project will impact water or sewer connections in any way, then the Developer shall be required to protect such facilities in place and obtain the approval of the Water District prior to commencing any work. • Page 1 MEMORANDUM July 22, 1999 TO: Associate Engineer, Clyde Wickham FROM: Associate Engineer, John Kim CUP 98-20 ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER Attached is the traffic impact analysis prepared by O'Rourke Engineering for the above referenced project and my comments directly thereon. The following are responses to some of your specific concerns as stated in your memo of 7/16/99. 1) The impact study, as presented, does not show the Garden Center having a significant impact upon the surrounding roadway system. However, there is some discrepancy between the existing LOS levels between this study and our 1998 Traffic Monitoring Program, which this study references. Most significantly, the PM LOS/ICU of Palomar Airport Road and I-5 Northbound Ramps is given as C/0.79 in the study when in fact the 1998 Traffic Monitoring Program found this intersection to be significantly worse at D/0.90. 1998 Traffic Monitoring Program traffic counts and ICU calculations should be used as a baseline for analysis. 2) The trip generation as presented in the study looks acceptable for the proposed project but I remain unsure as to whether the trip generation from the existing Flower Fields operation has been accounted for in the buildout scenarios. 3) I believe that analysis of the AM and PM weekday peak periods is sufficient and that they represent the worst case traffic conditions at the study intersections. 4) Mitigation along the property frontage in the form of widening would probably not be sufficient if the improvement did not extend to the I-5 freeway. Due to the extremely short distance between Paseo Del Norte and the I-5 freeway on Palomar Airport Road, congestion at the ramps tends to quickly back up to Paseo Del Norte. FYI, the traffic signals on Palomar Airport Road at Paseo Del Norte and I-5 Ramps are under Caltrans jurisdiction and are currently interconnected. Due to the volume of traffic on Palomar Airport Road and the I-5 freeway and given the proposed project's close proximity to both roadways, it is important that the study address the above comments above and those within the study itself. Associate Engineer, Clyoe Wicknam CUP 98-20 ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER Page 2 If you have any questions regarding this matter, please give me a call at (760) 438- 1161, extension 4500. )HN T. KIM, P.E. Associate Engineer Traffic Operations Section c: Public Works Director Traffic Engineer Mr. John Nabors Carltas Company April 20, 1999 Page 2 Paseo Del Norte is a four lane roadway located directly west of the project site. Paseo Del Norte extends parallel to Interstate 5 along its east side. The roadway extends from Cannon Road to the north to just south of Poinsettia Lane. The roadway provides access to the proposed site. Interstate 5 is the regional north to south facility in the project vicinity. The freeway is located to the west of the project site. •V EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES Peak hour intersection counts for the intersections of Palomar Airport Road at Paseo Del Norte, 15 Northbound Ramps, and 15 Southbound Ramps, were obtained from the Traffic Monitoring Report prepared by VRPA in 1998. Table 1 presents the existing levels of service at these study intersections. The LOS designations for the signalized intersections were based on the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) methodology. With this methodology, a level of service is based on the sum of the critical movements, in terms of volume to capacity, at the intersection. The project driveway (analyzed in the project scenario of the report) was analyzed based on the HCS unsignalized intersection analysis modules. Table 1 Existing Intersection LOS Intersection Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del Norte1 Palomar Airport Road/15 Northbound1 Palomar Airport Road/15 Southbound ] Paseo Del Norte/Project Access : Control Signal Signal Signal Stop Peak Hour AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Existing / B//6 <?•£,& a. 12 C/.76 £^ V/o.?O MJXP-P& UJSfy.&c, N/A N/A 1 Signal controlled (LOS/ICU).' Stop controlled (LOS/Delay). As shown in Table 1, all study intersections currently operate at LOS C or better. The Level of Service worksheets are attached to the end of this report7£ Mr. John Nabors Carltas Company April 20, 1999 Page 3 TRIP GENERATION, DISTRIBUTION, ASSIGNMENT As discussed previously, the proposed project consists of a 6,400 s.f. retail garden center and an additional 27,600 s.f. of outdoor garden area for a total of 34,000 s.f. of retail area. At the direction of the City of Carlsbad, the entire square footage of the proposed project (indoor and outdoor retail space) was considered for trip generation purposes of the project. The number of daily, AM, and PM trips generated by the project was estimated using the San Diego Traffic Generators Manual, December 1996. The project is expected to generate approximately 1,360 daily trips, with 41 trips occurring in the AM peak hour, and 136 trips occurring in the PM peak hour. The trip generation is presented in Table 2. Table 2 Trip Generation Land Use Garden Nursery Size 34 t. s.f.1 Trips Daily 1,360 (40/t.s.f.1) AM 41 (25/16) (3%/6:4)2 PM 136 (68/68) (10%/5:5)2 I Source: San Diego Traffic Generators Manual. December 1996. ' thousand square feet. 2 (percent of daily trafflc/inbound:outbound ratio). The trip distribution of the proposed project was determined using trip characteristics / of the project and knowledge of the local area. Trip distribution refers to the ultimate Z origin or destination of a trip. Assigning directions as general cardinal directions / separated by 45 degree lines with the project in the center, the overall distribution is: L North- 30, South- 45, East- 20, and West 5. Once the trip distribution was established, the trip assignment was made. Trip assignment refers to the travel patterns associated with a vehicle traversing between its originating site and its destining site. The assignment considers the shortest trip length between ultimate origin and destination on the roadway system with its travel and speed characteristics. An estimated 20 percent of the trips would use Palomar Airport Road to acces east of the site. Approximately 30 percent of the trips are eslanatj northbound, of which 25 percent would access Interstate 5, ant! 5percent travel north on Paseo Del Norte. Approximately 45 percent of theTfips ari to travel southbound, of which 30 percent would access Interstate 5, andU^bercent would travel south on Paseo Del Norte. 5 percent of the project trips are estimated to travel west on Palomar Airport Road past the Interstate 5 ramps toward Carlsbad Boulevard. The project trips shown in Table 2 were applied to the roadway network and analyzed in addition to existing traffic volumes. Q Mr. John Nabors Carltas Company April 20, 1999 Page 4 PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS u \, As part of the proposed project, the applicant plans to jwiden Palomar Airport Road along tHe projecTfrontage to provide for an additional westbound through lane. Jfhe existing sidewalk and berm along thejproject frontage would also be shifted and \^reconstructed by the project applicant. EXISTING PLUS PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES be The estimated project trips from above were added to the existing traffic volumes for the existing plus project scenario. This scenario allows the project impacts to be assessed in terms of existing service levels. The peak hour traffic on the study intersections listed above, were again analyzed with the addition of project traffic. Table 3 provides a comparison of the existing and existing plus project conditions. Table 3 Existing plus Project Intersection LOS Intersection Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del None1 Palomar Airport Road/15 Northbound1 Palomar Airport Road/15 Southbound ' Paseo Del Norte/Project Access 2 Control Signal Signal Signal Stop Peak Hour AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Existing B£6fi>.&g C/.72 C/.76 2**vl*#> "•P o-tf UtfQ.Cfy N/A N/A Existing plus Project WM^r- B/.66 C/.77 D/.81j^ A/.51 ^—£- — • A/,46^ A/0.1 A/0.7 1 Signal controlled (LOS/ICU).2 Stop controlled (LOS/Delay). As shown in Table 3, all study intersections will remain at LOS D or better with the addition of project traffic. In addition, the project access is expected to operate at LOS A during both peak hour periods under project conditions. Mr. John Nabors Carltas Company April 20, 1999 PageS BUILDOUT TRAFFIC VOLUMES The buildout intersection volumes (Year 2020) were obtained from the SANDAG regional traffic model. The peak hour intersection volumes were obtained from the model output for the Carlsbad Sub-Area model. As for previous scenarios, the study intersections were analyzed for levels of service for the buildout condition. Table 4 presents the results of the analysis. Table 4 Buildout Intersection LOS Intersection Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del Norte' Palomar Airport Road/15 Northbound' Palomar Airport Road/15 Southbound ' Paseo Del None/Project Access 2 Control Signal Signal Signal Stop Peak Hour AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM Existing B/J66-0.&0 C/.72 C/.76 P*fa*u.yrt*p "<*9tf N/A N/A Existing plus Projee^ plM \ 1 B/.66 /C/.77 D/.81 1 A/.51 / A/.467 A/0.1 \ A/0/7 Buildout / _ j<^75 \ Id. 7 6 j E/.91 / C/.78 / A/. 54 / A/.59 / A/0.2/ A/1.9 I 1 Signal controlled (LOS/ICU).2 Stop controlled (LOS/Delay). \_ The study intersections were again analyzed as in previous scenarios. As presented in Table 4, the study intersections are projected to operate at LOS D or better under buildout conditions with the exception of the Palomar Airport Road/15 Northbound Ramp intersection. This location is expected to operate at LOS E in the buildout AM peak hour. However, this drop in service level is the result of cumulative traffic at this location. The proposed project will add a minimal amount of traffic to this location in the AM peak hour (25 trips). The timing of the intersection and the layout of the lanes to allow a more continual flow could offset this cumulative impact. The buildout LOS shown above reflect the planned long term construction of roadways in the City of Carlsbad, including the completion of east to west corridors such as Cannon Roadand Poinsettia LaneJ It should be noted that as part of thlTproposed "prbjectTtne applicant plans to widen Palomar Airport Road along the project frontage to provide for an additional westbound through lane. The existing sidewalk and berm along the project frontage would also be shifted and reconstructed by the project applicant. Mr. John Nabors Carltas Company April 20, 1999 Page 6 PROJECT ACCESS As previously stated, access to the project will be provided via Paseo Del Norte. The project access is located approximately 550 north of the Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del Norte intersection. This access location provides adequate corner sight distance onto Paseo Del Norte. In addition, the platooning effect of traffic created by the presence of the signal at the Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del Norte intersection, would create the opportunity for vehicles to enter and exit the project site. ROADWAY NEEDS No off-site roadway needs were identified by this analysis. (However, the applicant :s proposed to widen the section of Palomar AirporTKoad adjacent to the project site. This would provide an additional westbound through lane at the Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del Norte intersection. In addition, the existing sidewalk and berm would be shifted and constructed to the north. J ~ CONCLUSION The proposed 6,400 s.f. retail garden center and additional 27,600 s.f. of outdoor, garden area development, located in the City of Carlsbad, was found to have an insignificant impact on the surrounding circulation system. The proposed project site is located at the northeast comer of the Palomar Airport Road/Paseo Del Norte intersection. The intersections of Palomar Airport Road at Paseo Del Norte, 15 Northbound, and 15 Southbound will operate at acceptable service levels with the addition of project traffic and under buildout conditions with the exception of the Palomar Airport Road/15 Northbound Ramp under the buildout AM peak hour. During this time, the intersection is projected to operate at LOS E. This drop in service level is the result of cumulative traffic at the intersection. The proposed project will add a minimal amount of traffic to this location in the AM peak hour (25 trips). The project driveway is also expected to operate acceptably under all conditions as a stop controlled access. It has been a pleasure working with you. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to call. Very truly yours, O'ROURKE ENGINEERING it-; 7__^/ .^r^C^ -)•-) /c /--usan E. OTlourke, P.E. President PAL0MAR AIRPORT ROAD i N A NTS ^ O'ROURKE ENGINEERING ATTACHMENT A PROJECT LOCATION CARLTAS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Facsimile Transmittal SUBJECT: CUP 9820 - CDP 98-91 TO: Clyde Wickham Engineering Department City of Carlsbad FROM: Chris Calkins CC: Chris DeCerbo - City of Carlsbad (Planning & Engineering) Bob Johnson - City of Carlsbad (Traffic) Susan O'Rourke - O'Rourke Engineering Monte Enright - Armstrong Garden Centers DATE: July 19, 1999 Thanks for your call today. I understand the following comments apply with respect to completion of the review of the CUP Application for the Garden Center. 1. ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT / DEDICATION You confirmed you hold the lane dedication on Palomar Airport Road for recording. We will now prepare the Encroachment Agreement and submit for review. You have expressed engineering requirements that the Encroachment Agreement be complete before the Planning Commission hearing. If it is not final, we understand that Engineering, at the hearing, would then indicate that it would not support the permit without the Encroachment Agreement executed. We understand processing the Encroachment Agreement will not hold up or delay completion of the agenda package for the hearing, but completion is a condition of Engineering support at the hearing. 2. TRAFFIC REPORT You asked for a supplement to the O'Rourke Traffic Report showing that the additional lane on Palomar would not be built with the Armstrong Center or that the CUP Application should reflect construction. A supplement will be prepared and provided reflecting the lane as a future City project, not being built with this application. S:\CCC\MEMOS\CUP 9820 - CDP 98-91.doc 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 (760)431-5600 carltas@worldnet.att.net • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 U.S.A. (760)431-9020 Memorandum Re: Flower Fields/Armstrong Garden CUP July 19, 1999 Page 2 3. GRADING A statement from Planning that grading for the garden, etc. purposes in the area covered by the deed restrictions is acceptable, will respond to the expressed concern of Engineering regarding grading generally. With respect to a grading permit, based on our discussion we intend to eliminate the cut into the hill where the garden is shown, and reduce the total to be graded below the permit threshold. By separate application for grading permit, we will address the garden. It is not as time sensitive as the Armstrong Garden Center and can follow a different and slower track. 4. FOR HEARING TIMING We have asked Chris DeCerbo to request a tentative calendar hearing date with the Planning Department in early to mid-September. We understand that any tentative hearing date will only hold if all portions of the review are timely completed. Consequently, we ask that you let us know as soon as any issue arises that will require staff / applicant discussions to resolve. Without a hearing at that time we may lose the opportunity for the nursery, the top associated horticulturists, and retail operations support to the fields in time for the 2000 season. Thanks for your help. S:\CCC\MEMOS\CUP 9820 - CDP 98-91.doc JUL.15.1999 ll:00flM 7604319020 NO.561 P. 1/9 FAX CARLTAS COMPANY 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California Telephone: (760) 431-5600 Fax: (760)431-9020 Date: Attn: July 15, 1999 Chris DeCerbo Total Pages (including cover sheet): 11 Fax Number:(760) 438-0894 Company: City of Carlsbad - Planning & Engineering From: Chris Calkins Copy to: Please comment Re: Completeness in Issues Review/Engineering The following are my comments on Clyde's memorandum. As I said in my telephone call, I would like the opportunity to meet and go over these issues with you and Clyde to see that we are all in agreement on either the solution or where there is a difference that needs to be addressed in a different form. However, the following comments are ways in which I would ask that you consider handling response to each of these conditions: A) Completeness Issues; 1) Dedication of Right of Way. Clyde should have confirmation that the easement has been delivered and recorded. I resigned it after it was returned to me for an additional correction last week, and I confirmed with Melchior that it has been returned for recording. 2) The issue of the "Flower Field Easement" and grading into it is based upon. Clyde's reading of the Deed Restriction shown as Item 4 under "Traffic and Circulation" to note number 9. The Deed Restriction (a copy of which is enclosed) provides the City with the Right of First Refusal as well as describing the intention to generally remain in flower production. It is not an open space easement; rather it is an easement to conduct business in accordance with the Specific Plan, and to give the City the opportunity to purchase the property. We have agreed to an additional restriction on certain area for minimum of a specific character which would be bulb and cut flower growing. But all of the activities we are talking about are specifically permitted under the Specific Plan, Tills communication is ONLY for Che person unmet! above. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains information flint is confidential, privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not die person named above, or responsible for delivering it to that person, be aware diat disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this communication is strictly PROHIBITED. If you have received It in error, or are uncertain as to its proper handling, please immediately notify us by telephone or fax and mail the original to us at die above address, Thank you, \\FS2\WP\CCC\FAX\DeCerbo3.dae JUL.15.1999 11=00PM 7604319020 NO.561 P.2/9 Fax to Chris DeCerbo June 24, 1999 Page 2 of 11 Having said that, I would request approval for the additional grading and the encroachment for the purposes of building a flower garden. One of our overall objectives is to do whatever we can to display the floral products in a way and in an environment which encourages their purchase and their use by visitors. This artists' garden is a temporary structure which will enclose an area of floral plantings, No permanent structures are proposed, and the grading is to ease the physical access in and around the flowers, Alternatively, I am prepared to remove that feature entirely from the application so that the issue of either a grading permit holding up the project or this issue will disappear and address it at a later time through a separate application 3) We need to create an encroachment agreement to permit the landscape and fencing now in place to remain. The encroachment agreement itself had to wait for a final determination of the appropriate legal description and the dedication. It seems to me that if this encroachment agreement has not been finally approved by the City prior to the preparation of the staff report, a condition of approval to the CUP would be that there be an encroachment agreement approved by the City, or we are required to relocate the improvements to the new design. B) Traffic and Circulation: 1) The corner site distances were reviewed at the time the signage plans came into the City, and the issue of completing the dedication of the right of way was addressed. We have to comply with the City standards and can have that done, I would hope that adding those sight lines to the plans would not hold up continued processing, (in part because my civil engineer is not available). I would like to discuss that as a possible interim solution, recognizing that those standards have to be met as a construction matter. 2) We do not believe there will be any issue about controlling the retail nursery during peak flower and tourist season. Normal retail nursery use will diminish as visitors appear and the community members who would look at this site as their primary garden center will not want to compete with visitors. Moreover, the mix of material will be different during the visitor serving period than during the rest of the year. Having said that, we can discuss standards, measurement issues, and other things that can be done if necessary to address the issue if it arises from traffic. Armstrong will in fact advise its customers of alternative locations in Oceanside and Encinitas that can be reached during periods of the peak tourist season, and probably encourage use of those for normal nursery goods. 3) This goes into an assumption about the items in the easement area which, as we discussed, is inconsistent with what is actually going on. The building, the storm drain, the parking lot are all outside of either the easement area or any current farming activities. \\FS2\WP\CCC\F/UIADeCerM .doc JUL.15.1999 l-l:00flM 7604319020 NO. 561 P. 3/9 Fax to Chris DeCerbo June 24, 1999 Page 3 of 11 4) Attached is the Deed Restriction which is referred to in Note 9. I think Clyde is reading it more broadly restrictive manner than the language specifies, C) Grading and Drainage. 1) We understand that we have to comply with NPDES (as shown). I believe that compliance with NPDES guidelines is shown by the note the requirement of a filter adequate for the runoff, Any increases in flow should be minor, and we would consider a planted filter, although I think the space and the proximity to the street may prevent it. Again, (his appears to be a condition that can be imposed as part of your Staff Report rather man as a matter that we need to address before we determine that the project is acceptable, 2) With respect to a grading permit, this is the issue I would specifically like to review with Clyde. I believe there is a provision under which we would not require a grading permit. But if this would hold up the CUP, I would like to look at ways in which we can modify at least this application, remove the proposed plantings by the artist, and go forward, Please feel free to give a copy of this to Clyde as part of any preparation for a meeting. I would very much like to meet with the two of you and make sure I get some guidance on how we can proceed; so that I can in some manner respond to the Armstrong Garden Center people, who are trying to plan for next year, Thank you. CCC:dd \\PS2\Wl'\CCC\FAX\DeCe:bo3.dac JUL.15.1999 ll:01flM 7604319020 NO.561 P. 4/9 NO RECORDING FEES PURSUANT ) TO GOVERNMENT CODE §6103 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: 1790 DOCS 1996-03.,„.10-JUL-1996 10=33 CITY OF CARLSBAD1200 Carlsbad Villaga Drive Carlsbad, CA 82008 i Spaoo above this fine Recorder^ use, Documentary transfer tax: Nona UKeO Ktzb 1 Kl(« I ION CB Ranch Bflerprfeas, a CalBbmla Coipareflnn, landowner, for good and adequate consfderatlon and as a condition of the approval of the Carfetad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment 207(A), agrees to restrict Ha property described and generally Known aa the Rowar FfeWt consisting of approximately 63 acres, and OB mom parUculorty described In Exhibit "A" attached hsroto and Incorporated herein by reference and as ehown on Exhibit *B° attached hereto for reference purpose* only as follows: The Flower Fields shall remain In flower production in perpetuity. Tha landowner will plant an open-field (towarlno crop every year, substantiallyIn tfw araa as ehown hi the Flower Field Figure «W(A). If the landownerdaslres to change or modify this obligation,landawnar win provfci* a five-yaor advance notice to tha City GounaH, accompanied by an alternativeagricultural use proposal which landowner Intends to Initiate at tha end of said five years. Th» city Council shall hold a hearing to review and approve the* proposed alternative. Additionally, tha City and landowner ahall Investigate and may implement any methods available to allow the continuation of flower production in accordance with the General Plan. Thin condition ahall be evidenced by a deed raetriction and Indufllon ofnotica In the CC&R*a restricting Planning Area 7 to agricultural use. "Subject to any Right of First Offer held by Lsgo Park Planning, Inc., Landowner shall grant to Cfty en exdiwfve Riant of Firet Offer ('First Offer Right?) to acquire the Ftowar Fleld» at a purchase price and upon such other fernn and candWona as Landowner would ba willing to accept from any third party. Landowner shall not eell all or any portion of the Flower Flaldo (other than to a party purchasing far purposes of continuing theopen field flower business with a continued ebltaattan to provide this Prat olfer) without (I) first offering the property to City by written notice at a purchase price and upon such other terms and conditions that Landowner f'\ JUL.15.1999 ll:01fiM 7604319020 NO.561 P. 5/9 would be wBBng to accept from any third party, and (H) CH/B failure to•uch terms and condroorw by written inefic* to 1791 to** ownciv tta* not be _. _at thte price usKxi 80- days notice, to purchase the property. TUB foregotno Flrel Offer RJgtt end) survive any transfer by theLandowner to any nffffiate of Landowner and shall be included in a deedrestriction for Planning Area 7.* These rartrfctferw ehall run vrftri the land and be binding upon and Inure to the benefit of the future owners, encumbrances, Euccttssore, hDlre, peraonal rsprssantafives, transforms and asslgm or the respective partn In Interest and shall not bo changed without the written consort of the CHy Council of (he City of Carlsbad. Landowner agrees K> Incorporate these deed restrictions by reference In any future deeds to fte property. However, failure to do BO does not Invalidate this dead restriction or afreet the rights and dutieB of any party, pemon or entity as stated narein. If eHher party (a requiwd to Incur costs to enforce the provisions of tills covenant, the prevailing party shall be entitled to full reimbursement of an costs, Including reasonable attorneys' fees, from Hid other party. Tlia Cfly may assign 10 another public entity or enfity formed by the City of Carlsbad or to eny otter mutually agreed upon entity in m m m m JUL.15.1999 ll:01flM 7604319020 NO.561 P.6/9 1792 an opan apace tlitlj let, lamltmjjainaiMlaiuimediMiicm' cflien>faaL CB RANCH EN I a COY OF CARLSBAD, anwictal I of Bw State of City > AS TO FORM: RONALD R. BALL OTY ATTORNEY STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ;SS On Jute it*. Mb before me,.notary public, personally appeared cn<fsrpersonally known to me ot^ravad-to ma-orvttn .. , ..pereenfa) whose name(e)ij8af9-aubBcrn»d to fte within inetrument and acknowledgedt to be the b ma thattfja/bhofthoy executed Ifie same in ®"wt*ei"r authorized capscftyfies), andthat by<JM!forfMlr sfgnaturi^ «n the hwtrumsnt the peisonM, or the entity uponbehaff ofwttloh the pereonftHioad, executed (he fnstrumenL Witness my hand and official seal. JUL.15.1999 11=01PM 7604319020 NO.561 P. 7/9 1793 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO On Jua« 2Ai 1996 _, before iro, Kiren R. Kundtz, Assistant City Clark, p«rsonilly ippawad Bwatmd B. Ptcehaet. City . personally knmm to me ta-aq on tho-barie-of tatlgfactory BVidanca) to be the person t»> whoso subscribed to tha wltMn Instrumsnt end acknowledged to no that the SIM 1n h1*/h«/*he4r-iuthorfzBd cipac1ty(4**)» and thit by hit/haf/tliely $1gnatur«(«*) on the instrunant th* pursont*}, or tha entity upon behalf of whfcH W»» p6f»onf^ acted, executed the Instrunent. Witness my hind and official seal vconCity of Carlsbad (SEAL) tant city cierfc 7604319020JUL.15.1999 11:02PM 1794 Those portions Of Low I and 2 of Carlsbad Tract No. 98-07 at pet Map No, 13078 in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, died December 28, 1998, described a* follows; Beginning at the Southeast comer of said Lot 3; thence along the boundary of said lots, the following courses; North S7'49'4T' West 1633,23 fret North 2»08'40I Eait 177.57 feet, to the beginning of a tangent curve concave Southwesterly having a radius of 643.00 feet, and North- westerly 495,30 feet along aid curve through a central angle of 44°0o"06'1: thence leaving said boundary, radially from uid curve, North 48°00IS4" East 247.40 feet; thence North 22929'26' Wat 1324,36 feet; thence North GT-SQ'je" Bwt 758,03 feet to the boundary of said Lot 1; thence along nid boundary, the following courses; South SS'afftS" East 789,87 feet. South 20«56-58" But 2U.68 feet, South 2T°00'2(r1 Eait 1126.47 Ml North 63*5030' East 631.28 feet to a point on a non-tangent curve concave Westerly having a radius of 621,00 feet, a radial line to said point bean North 74*13'* I" East, Southerly 380.14 feet along said curve through a central angle of 29*32'14", tangent from said curve, South 1S'45'SS" West 100.00 feet, Southerly 145.69 feet along a tangent curve concave Eaicerly having a radiiu of 719,00 feet through a central ingle cf (1*36*34', and tangent iron raid curve, South 2*09*21" \Veit IC0.20 feet ID die Point of Beginning. AJ more particularly shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and made a part hereof, This legal description \i not to be uied Tor any purpose chat would violate the Subdivision Map Act, NO.561 P. 8/9 Tbm R. McOannon, R.C.E 23956 Regiitration Expires: 18/11/96 May SO, ISM Page 1 of I HfcA Legal No. 4060 Prepared By: H. Fon Ck'd By: B. Eiemadi/b JUL.15.1999 ll:02ftM 7604319020 NO.561 P.9/9 EXHIBIT "B Sktteh to rivcompany Iijal MUMftfl Hwntahrr A Amtaafata*Irvfnt, /no. ftomntny • Surviving • 5-2Q-S6 | S& None... I ff H. Fog EXHIBFT -Q1 CITY OF GMJUa OOIWTY Or MM DIMQ, HWIS Of CUftmA £* BEN L SCALES r-4Qtf 19-90 H&A LEGAL No. -<060 BHEETIOKl T774-2X o CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN - PLANNING AREA 2 - RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT/OFFICE Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Use allocation for Planning Area 2 • Office - 300,000 sq. ft. • R&D - 500,000 sq. ft. Total ADT allocated for Planning Area 2 by the Zone 13 LFMP & Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment EIR (94-01) DEVELOPMENT Office R&D Total LAND USE 300,000 sq. ft. 500,000 sq. ft. GENERATION RATE 20 per 1,000 sq.ft. 8 per 1,000 sq.ft. DAILY TRIPS 6,000 4,000 10,000 Planning Area 2 Development Status LOT NUMBER 6 NAI 7 (Denso) 8 (NAMM) 9 Koll OFFICE AREA & ADT RATE APPLIED 42,000 sq. ft. (10/1000) = 420 ADT 55,000 sq. ft. (10/1000) = 550 ADT 34,000 sq. ft. (10/1000) = 340 ADT 60,000 sq. ft. (20/1000) = 1,200 ADT R&D/WAREHOUSE/ OTHER AREA & ADT RATE APPLIED 30,000 sq. ft. mfg. (4/1000) = 120 ADT 10,000 sq. ft. warehouse (5/1 000) = 50 ADT 20,000 sq. ft. Mfg. (4/1000) = 80 ADT 2,500 sq. ft. Warehouse (5/1 000) = 13 ADT 20,000 sq. ft. R&D (8/1 000) = 160 ADT 4,000 sq. ft. WAREHOUSE TOTAL ADT 590 643 340 1,380 10 Koll 1 1 Spieker Prop. 12 14 Spieker Prop. 15 DCM Properties 68,000 sq. ft. (20/100*0) = 1,360 ADT 6 1,964 sq.ft. (20/1 000) = 1,239 ADT 61,964 sq. ft. (20/1000) = 1,239 ADT 42,960 sq. ft. (20/1000) = 859 (5/1 000)= 20 ADT 20,000 sq.ft. R&D (8/1 000) = 160 ADT 12,000 sq. ft. warehouse (5/1000) = 60 ADT 1,580 1,239 1,239 859 BLDG. SQ. FT.425,888 OFFICE 118,500 R&D/WAREHOUSE/OTHER TOTAL BLDG. SQ. FT.544,388 TOTAL 7,870 ADT REMAINING BALANCE FOR PLANNING AREA 2 =2,130 ADT Memorandum TO: Principal Planner, Chris Decerbo FROM: Associate Engineer, Clyde Wickham DATE: July 2, 1999 CDP 98-91 / CUP 98-20: ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW Engineering Department staff has completed another review of the above-referenced project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this proposed project are still considered incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following incomplete items: 1. The site plan should show all Right of Way along Palomar Airport Road. The previous project at this location was conditioned for additional dedication that appears different than that shown. Possibly, the dedication was never offered as required and should be completed prior to the approval of this application. The applicant is working on this dedication and should complete the process in a few weeks depending on Engineers, surveyors and plancheck comments. We will continue to hold this application in the "incomplete mode" until Carltas complies with previous conditions of approval. 2. Please submit the applicable section of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan that allows for grading into the flower field easement as proposed. This issue could become a problem in the process and support of the concept of additional grading and encroachment into the flower field. Either the applicant can clarify this or Planning Department can provide the support in writing that allows this application. 3. Please indicate on the site plan, the document or encroachment agreement that permits landscaping fencing and grading within the public right of way. Similar to item #1 above the applicant is working on this agreement and has not completed the agreement, although the encroachment, landscaping and irrigation is complete. Additionally, staff has conducted a review of the project for engineering issues of concern. Engineering issues which need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project are as follows: Traffic and Circulation: 1. Please indicate Corner Sight Distance (sight lines), in accordance with CalTrans criteria, and the City's 25' corner cut-off at Paseo Del Norte and the proposed entrance to this project. (Both Directions) The site plan C-1 and Landscape plans, specifically L-2.1 should show and agree with this area to be kept clear. 2. The project's traffic report is still under review by our Traffic Division. From my cursory review I noticed Susan O'Rourke included and evaluated the additional improvement on Palomar Airport Road. The report also left out the impact of the proposed use and the flower field operation in full season as an impact. I may have overlooked this but it didn't jump out as a clear analysis for an acceptable level of service. Please consider what type of mitigation could be used to control the retail nursery during peak flower and tourist season at this site. 3. As mentioned above as an incomplete item, a portion of the parking lot, the realigned dirt farm road, the grading and storm drain, and the proposed building are pushed into the "existing flower field". Either remove these encroachments or submit proof that the location has support or approval. As shown, this plan is subsidized by land encumbered with a public easement. 4. Similar to issue #3 the Architect, on drawing L1.0 easement note #9 has been correct yet there is still the issue of proposed encroachment. Please clarify what allowed under existing approved specific plan and what the application is intended by note #9. It appears that there have been multiple easements for open space and note #9 is the most recent and the most restrictive. Grading & Drainage: 1. The proposed site generally drains to the northwest corner. The City has requirements for NPDES systems or filters to control pollution before it enters the public storm drain. We would rather see a planted filter as opposed to clip on "fossil filters". Please show compliance with NPDES guidelines. Consider the present and developed increase in run off, try to mitigate any impacts. 2. The note on sheet C1.0 .... "A grading permit is not required is wrong. The proposed 8' Of cut, the redesign of site drainage, and the proposed structure on an existing slope all require a grading permit. Please remove or revise the comment to comply with 15.16.060 of the Municipal Code. Attached is a red-lined check print of the proposed project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned with the project revisions to facilitate continued staff review. If you or the applicant have any questions, please contact me at extension 4353. Associate Engineer Land Development Division c: Bob Wojcik Principal Civil Engineer, Land Development Division JUN.24.1999 12:42PM 7604319020 NO.142 P. 1/3 FAX CARLTAS COMPANY 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California Telephone: (760) 431-5600 Fax: (760)431-9020 Date: Attn: 6/24/99 Total Pages (including cover sheet): Chris DeCerbo Fax Number:(760) 438-0894 Company: City of Carlsbad Chris Calkins Rejply AS Re: Revised Assumption Tables Enclosed are revised tables that reflect the corrections from the sheet of assumptions that the City is using for the Planning Area 2 development, but also reflecting the reduction in hotel spaces and the remaining 4,000 sq. ft, area whici could be used as a restaurant in the other planning area. As you can see, virtually the sarie result, although at a lower level than had been predicted under the earlier tables I sent to you will occur when the hotel reduction is taken into account, A modest increase in overall ADT (79 out of 69,376 total), even on a worst-case basis with significant reductions in peak hour traffic on Palomar Airport Road. I believe that the conclusions are still the same. ; ijI have included NAMM expansion at the same trip generation rate (10 per thousand) that was used in the uses which Don Neu has included in the report. If it were treated as general office, and the trips were doubled (which seems like an excessive assumption given the current configuration of NAMM), the total ADT would jpcrease by approximately 340, but the peak hour impacts would be marginal and mere would still be a net positive impact on peak hour traffic, even under the worst case scenario. ! I hope this responds to the concerns mat you concepts. , but I am glad to talk about any further As noted, this does not even challenge the excessively conservative assumption that the outside garden area should be treated as building square |ootages. ii Please give me a call if you have any questions regarding the enclosed. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This communication is ONLY for the person named above. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains Information that is confidential, privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the person named above, or responsible for delivering it to that person, be aware that disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this communication if strictly PROHIBITED. If you have received ii in error, or are uncertain as to its proper handling, please immediately notify us by telephone or fax and mall die original to us at the above address, Thank you, j S:\CCC\PAX\DeCerbo2.dOe Using SAND AG Standard For A Garden Center Flower FieWs Accessory Use OFFICE EIR/SPA Possibfe(lot 12,lot15> Possible(NAMM) Approved Net Change R&DWRHSE/Other EIR/SPA Approved Net Changs Retail EIR/SPA (Retail) (Hofel. Rms) Approved/possible Hotel, Rms RestaurantfpossiWe} Conference Center Nursery Net Change Cumulative Change Land Trips Total Use(sqft) perTSF/Rms ADT [_ 300,000 20 6,000 92,960 20 1,859 34,000- 10 340 «382#28'<J(C 17 6,348 nnn noo f -y gi-J^-VU,UUU ^ £.jijrT1 \7$$t& ^r-^o/<^ 500,000 a '-* 4,oo(i 118,500 6 663 -381,500 -3,337 20,000 40 800 280 10 f 2.800 251 10 2,510 4,000 40 160 10,9BO 40 439 6.400 40 256 1,380 -235<?(<-, -170,232 -1,025 AM In Out Total 756 84 840 246 14 260 ^43 5 4B ^) 770 119 8SS | ( 303 54 357 ^ 576 64 640 95 11 106 -481 -53 -534 ^ 10 14 24 f 101 67 168 63 88 151 235 5 8 13 448 -36 22 -16 -214 22 -193 PM In Out Total 156 624 780 48 193 242 5 35 44 165 660 825 62 265 331 56 504 560 9 84 93 -47 -420 -467 36 36 72 134 90 224 120 81 201 7 7 14 20 20 40 13 13 26 -10 -5 -15 6 -161 -151 Assumptions: 1. El R/SPA in accordance with 8/95 E!R Technical Appendices, KAKU Report page 22, table 6 2. As approved reflects approved site plans for all but Jot 12 (assumed as 50,000 s.f. office) and NAMM expansion (assumed as 35000 s.f. office), and traffic Is prorated using KAKU am/pm split. 3. As proposed Nursery reflects (JRourke Report, page S.Note: including outside area as buitding area is inconsistent with SANOAG standard, but included at request of City of Carlsbad t o ry CL> Arnisttrafxls 6/24/9912:43 PM Including 27,000 square feet outdoor space as if it were a building Flower Fields Accessory Use OFFICE EIR/SPA Possible(lot 12,lot15) Possibfe(NAMM) Approved Net Change R&D/WRHSE/Other EIR/SPA Approved Net Cnange Retail EIR/SPA (Retail) (Hotel, Rms) Approved/possible Hotel. Rms Resfaurant(possible) Conference Center Nursery Net Change Cumulative Change Land Trips Total LFse(sqft) perTSF/Rms ADT 300,000 20 6.000 92,960 20 1,859 34,000 10 34D 382,928 17 6,346 209.888 2,547 500.000 8 4,000 118,500 6 663 -381,500 -3,337 20,000 40 800 280 10 2,800 251 10 2,510 4,000 40 160 10,980 40 439 34,000 40 1,360 28,980 869 -142,632 79 AM In Out Total 756 84 840 246 14 260 43 5 48 770 119 889 303 54 357 576 64 640 95 11 106 -481 -53 -534 10 14 24 101 67 168 63 88 151 235 5 8 13 25 16 41 -16 33 18 -193 34 -160 PM In Out Total 156 624 780 48 193 242 5 35 44 185 660 825 62 265 331 56 504 560 9 84 93 -47 -420 -467 36 36 72 134 90 224 120 81 201 7 7 14 20 20 40 68 68 136 45 50 95 61 -106 -41 0) ro Icr> CO Assumptions: 1. EIR/SPA in accordance with 8/95 EIR Technical Appendices. KAKU Report page 22, table 6 2. As approved reflects approved site plans for all but lot 12 (assumed as 50,000 s.f. office) and NAMM expansion (assumed as 35000 s.f. office], and traffic is prorated using KAKU am/p/n split. 3. As proposed Nursery reflects CXRourke Report, page 3.Note: including outside area as building area is inconsistent with SAN DAG standard, but included at request of City of Carlsbad t .r\) CO Armsttraf.xls 6/24/9912:42 PM JUN.14.1999 10:l5flM 7604319020 NO.917 P. 1/1 FAX Date June 14, 1999 Number of pages including cover sheet 1 CARLTAS COMPANY 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California Telephone; (760)431-5600 Fax; (760)431-9020 To: Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad Re: Flower Fields - Armstrong From: Chris Calkins Carltas Phone: Fax Phone; (760) 438-0894 cc: KtCIMAKKS p Urgent D For your review D Reply ASAP X Please comment Retail adjacent to Grand Pacific Resort is beinjj: built out at nearly 10,000 square feet less than approved in the Specific Plan (and studied in the EIR), Call me with any comments. i; :. '^'^'"I'^SW .', ^'Tl^pi", ?i Actual ' Conference Center ! Restaurant Total Carlsbad Ranch Soecific Plan (Fisure 11. Retail '! ( Net Reductibn WiSiS; I1;;;'':'!1,'";' jK§y!!fc^l:'ll;i''r .- r " '• ;, T ; :;':',' ; 4,379 6,178 10,557 square feet 20,000 square feet (9,443) square feet COWTDENTIALnjy NOTICE This communication is ONLY for the person named above. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains information that is confidential, privileged or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you atlf not the person named above, or responsible for delivering it to that person, be aware that disclosure, copying, distribution or use jsf this communication is strictly PROHIBITED. If you have received it in error, ot are uncertain us to its proper handling, pleasa immediately notify us by telephone or fax and mail the original ro us at die above address. Thank you, CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN - PLANNING AREA 2 - RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT/OFFICE Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Use allocation for Planning Area 2 • Office - 300,000 sq. ft. • R&D - 500,000 sq. ft. Total ADT allocated for Planning Area 2 by the Zone 13 LFMP & Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Amendment EIR (94-01) DEVELOPMENT Office R&D Total LAND USE 300,000 sq. ft. 500,000 sq. ft. GENERATION RATE 20 per 1,000 sq.ft. 8 per 1,000 sq.ft. DAILY TRIPS 6,000 4,000 10,000 Planning Area 2 Development Status LOT NUMBER 6 NAI 7 (Denso) 8 (NAMM) 9 Koll OFFICE AREA & ADT RATE APPLIED 42,000 sq. ft. (10/1 000) = 420 ADT 55,000 sq. ft. (10/1000) = 550 ADT 34,000 sq. ft. (10/1 000) = 340 ADT 60,000 sq. ft. (20/1000) = 1,200 ADT R&D/WAREHOUSE/ OTHER AREA & ADT RATE APPLIED 30,000 sq. ft. mfg. (4/1 000) = 120 ADT 10,000 sq. ft. warehouse (5/1000) = 50 ADT 20,000 sq. ft. Mfg. (4/1000) = 120 ADT 2,500 sq. ft. Warehouse (5/1 000) = 12.5 ADT 20,000 sq. ft. R&D (8/1 000) = 160 ADT 4,000 sq. ft. WAREHOUSE TOTAL ADT 590 ~ 643 -^ 340 1,380 0°h 10 Koll 1 1 Spieker Prop. 12 14 Spieker Prop. 15 / 68,000 sq. ft. (20/1 000) = 1,360 ADT 61,964 sq. ft. (20/1 000) =1,239 ADT £-.f ./ftftn *^i C~ //^~i*i iTTllnJ&iffWU ;Tf^ fa ^)Oj (56U9 6 1,964 sq.ft. (20/1 000) = 1,239 AB.T~_~_^X '^2^0 jj&o/pcj (5/1000)= 20 ADT 20,000 sq. ft. R&D (8/1000) = 160 ADT 12,000 sq. ft. warehouse (5/1 000) = 60 ADT ') 1,580 1,239 ljcn/£> 1,239 *S°( BLDG. SQ. FT. TOTAL BLDG. SQ. FT OFFICE /Tl8,500)R&D/WAREHOUSE/OTHER 501,428 TOTAL REMAINING BALANCE FOR PLANNING AREA 2 =2,989 ADT NO.S52 P. 2/3 CARLTAS DEVELOPMENT COIvlPAN T Facsimile Transmittal SUBJECT? CUP 9820 - CDP 98-91 TO: Clyde Wickham Engineering Department City of Carlsbad FROM: Chris Calkins CC: Chris DeCerbo ~ City of Carlsbad (Planning & Engineering) Bob Johnson - City of Carlsbad (Traffic) Susan O'Rourke - O'Rourke Engineering Monte Enright - Armstrong Garden Centers DATE: July 19, 1999 Thanks for your call today. I understand the following comments apply with respect to completion of the review of the CUP Application for the Garden Center, 1, ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT / DEDICATION You confirmed you hold the lane dedication on Palomar Airport Road for recording. We will now prepare the Encroachment Agreement and submit for review. You have expressed engineering requirements that the Encroachment Agreement be complete before the Planning Commission hearing. If it is not final, we understand that Engineering, at the hearing, would theft indicate that it would not support the permit without the Encroachment Agreement executed, We understand processing the Encroachment Agreement will not hold up or delay completion of the agenda package for the hearing, but completion is a condition of Engineering support at the hearing. 2, TRAFFIC REPORT You asked for a supplement to the O'Rourice Traffic Report showing that the additional lane on Palomar would not be built wim the Armstrong Center QI that the CUP Application should reflect construction. A supplement will be prepared and provided reflecting the lane as a future City project, not being built with tin's application. S;\CCC\MEMOS\CUP 9x20 - CDP ss-ei.doo 5600AVENIDAENCINAS 'SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 U.S.A. (760) A31 ^15600 (760) 431 -9020 car|tas <8wortdnet.att.net 76043 190Z0 NO. 652 P. 3/3 Memorandum wPBrower Fields/ Armstrong Garden CUP July 19, 1999 Page 2 3 GRADING A statement from Planning that grading for the garden, etc, purposes in the area covered by the deed restrictions is acceptable, will respond to the expressed concern of Engineering regarding grading generally. With respect to a grading permit, based on our discussion we intend to eliminate the cut into the hill where the garden is shown, and reduce the total to be graded below the permit threshold, By separate application for grading permit, we will address the garden. It is not as time sensitive as the Armstrong Garden Center and can follow a different and slower track. 4. FOR HEARING TIMING We have asked Chris DeCerbp to request a tentative calendar hearing date with the Planning Department in early to mid-September. We understand that any tentative hearing date will only hold if all portions of the review are timely completed, Consequently, we ask that you let us know as soon as any issue arises that will require staff / applicant discussions to resolve. Without a bearing at that time we may lose the opportunity for the nursery, the top associated horticulturists, and retail operations support to the fields in time for the 2000 season, Thanks for your help, S:\Cgq\MBMOS\CUP 9820 - CPP 98-91,doe OFCARICITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMEWMEMO DATE: 5/26/99 REVISED PLAN TO: ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 'POLICE DEPARTMENT - J. SASWAY *FIRE DEPARTMENT - MIKE SMITH *BUILDING DEPARTMENT - PAT KELLEY COMMUNITY SERVICES/RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT *PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - VIRGINIA McCOY * CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK SCHOOL DISTRICT *NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - Planning Department SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC - BICH TRAN (Memo Only) HOUSING & REDEVELOPMENT - LORI ROSENSTEIN 'ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON APPLICATION NO. CUP 98-7n NOTE: Please use this number on all correspondence. PROJECT TITLE: ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER APPLICANT: C B RANCH ENTERPRISES PROPOSAL: 6400 SF RETAIL GARDEN CENTER Please review and submit written comments to Chris DeCerbo the Project Planner in the Planning Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, by 6/8/99 . (If you have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact C. DeCerbo at 438-1161, extension mms The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: £W*- /£>-<?. ±o PL AN S ATTAC H E D FRM0020 3/99 City of Carisbad Planning Department May 20, 1999 Mr. Christopher Calkins CB Ranch Enterprises, A California Corporation 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 106 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Conditional Use Permit/Coastal Development Permit, application no. CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91, as to its completeness for processing. The items requested from you earlier to make your Conditional Use Permit/Coastal Development Permit, application no. CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 complete have been received and reviewed by the Planning Department. It has been determined that the application is now complete for processing. Although the initial processing of your application may have already begun, the technical acceptance date is acknowledged by the date of this communication. Please note that although the application is now considered complete, there may be issues that could be discovered during project review and/or environmental review. Any issues should be resolved prior to scheduling the project for public hearing. In addition, the City may request, in the course of processing the application, that you clarify, amplify, correct, or otherwise, supplement the basic information required for the application. Please contact your staff planner, Chris DeCerbo at 438-1161, extension 4445, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:CD:eh c: Gary Wayne Clyde Wickham Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-O894 LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 Planning: 1. None. Engineering: 1. None. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. None. Engineering: 1. Engineering Department comments will follow under separate cover. Cfl RITAScompany May 4, 1999 Chris De Cerbo v City of Carlsbad '"'— 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859 Dear Chris: Enclosed is a draft of comments on the relationship of the proposed accessory nursery/garden center to the farming operation. Please give me your comments so I can make any changes that are appropriate. Very truly yours, Christopher C. Calkins For darltas Company CCC:dd cc: John Nabors 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760)431-5600 (760)431-9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net REASONS SUPPORTING FLOWER FIELDS NURSERY/GARDEN CENTER 1. Summary of support to bulb/cut flower crop farming by proposed accessory nursery/garden center. The addition of a year-round garden center nursery to the Flower Fields will substantially improve the economic viability of the cut flower/bulb growing business. • Rent will provide a revenue stream that is not dependent on weather and growing conditions (unlike farming and visitor services). • Urban farming costs such as street and edge landscaping, detention and storm drain systems and security and safety, can be absorbed in part directly by the accessory nursery. • Direct sales of bulbs and flowers can occur without the operational complexity and financial risk of a retail operation, which is limited to a six-week season. • Regional marketing from the 44-store Armstrong Southern California group will enhance the farm product sales without cost to the farming operation. Based on the garden center enhancement, the continuation of the cut flower and bulb operation will have a margin of economic support to permit a continuing commitment. In light of the past six years of experience and needs for crop rotation/soil issues, the minimum annual area will be 20 gross acres (approximately the ranunculus area in 1999). For purposes of any condition imposed with the permit compliance should reflect such production in two out of three consecutive years. 2. Review of operational characteristics of farming business. During the past 6 years, a variety of initiatives have been undertaken, including the introduction of direct sales to the public of cut and potted ranunculus, bulbs, and related material. Direct public sales have made a significant difference in the flower field revenues at a time that the direct costs of production have increased. Increases in minimum wage rate, water rates, and supplies, as well as significant investment in research, selection, and field growing practices have resulted in nearly a 250% increase in costs from 1993. The bulb crop is better and the cut flower business has been created. However, competitive foreign pressure has kept \\FS2\WP\CCC\Reasons Supporting Nursery-Garden Center.doc Reasons Supporting Fleuelds Nursery/Garden Center May 4, 1999 Page 2 of 2 bulb prices at 1991 levels, and given the continuing competitive domestic pressures in the spring cut flower business, more costs and risks will occur. During the same period it has become evident that the direct costs and systems required to successfully manage a floral product-oriented retail operation during just the peak blooming season period, or to contemplate a year-round retail operation, would create a risk that could unreasonably burden the primary farm operation. The cost of operating direct sales to the public, managing inventory, and developing knowledgeable plant people with a limited season has exceeded the financial return. We have also determined that there are other requirements of an urban farm, such as street landscaping, detention systems and drainage systems, security and safety, which also create additional costs to the operation. Finally, we need a revenue source that helps pay these costs, and is not susceptible to the vagaries of weather. Both the direct farming revenue and visitor admissions are directly affected by the weather, while the costs for such are generally "sunk". For example, in 1998, the El Nino weather reduced the days for visitor attendance by nearly 25% and the extended moisture reduced miscellaneous bulb yield, and increased harvest costs by 22%. In 1999, the cold nights delayed blooming by 30 days (10 days past Easter), reducing visitor attendance by nearly 30%, and reducing cut flowers by 20% in March. An ongoing nursery/garden center provides a constant presence, which adds some security to field operations while providing an income base that supports the non- direct farming costs. It adds value to the crop by directly linking the visible farm activity to income and garden usage of the farm crop. Therefore, isolating the risk of sales operations while retaining the basic benefits is important to long-term viability of the Flower Field operation. CCC:dd \\FS2\WP\CCC\Reasons Supporting Nursery-Garden Center.doc company April 22, 1999 Mr. Chris DeCerbo QCity of Carlsbad ^ 'I 'i Vtf^ Planning Department "^ -»IkRUSB ^^ 2075 La Palmas Dr. /»\'T>f O t+ nPPT Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 ^ » KlAltt^pw** Re: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - Armstrong Garden Center Dear Chris: Attached are six sets of plans that have been revised from the set submitted in December, 1998. The changes in the plans reflect many of the comments that we received in a letter dated January 25, 1999, from the Planning Director. The principal changes are the additional right-of-way for Palomar Airport Road, the movement of the garden center forward approximately 65 feet, and additional paving of the parking lot and driving lanes. I am attaching a response for each staff comment, photographs, and a traffic analysis prepared by O'Rourke Engineering. It would be a pleasure to meet with you to verify that this is an adequate response and fulfills our application requirements. Sincerely, /JohnH. Nabors,t Project Manager Attachments: Response to Staff Comments Photographs 1,2 & 3 Six sets of site plan, landscaping plans and architectural plans Red-lined plans from first submittal Palomar Airport Road Cross-sections Traffic Analysis 5600 AVENIDA ENCINAS • SUITE 100 • CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-4452 U.S.A. (760) 431 -5600 (760) 431 -9020 carltas@worldnet.att.net ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER CUP 98-20 Response to Staff Comments of January 25, 1999 April 20, 1999 The following comments are provided to the initial staff review of the application for the CUP dated December 30,1998. The underlined text refers to the staff comments. Planning: 1. Please Provide the site plan details.... The farming and display areas will vary from year to year due to crop rotation and responses to visitor interests. Areas will be planted seasonally and will be modified and refined each season. Many non- permanent areas will be created and the areas will be returned to an unplanted condition at the end of a flower fields season. An temporary Artist Display Garden will be created for the flower field season and will be removed after the season ends in May of each year. 2. Please add the following information to the landscape plan: Agree. The landscape architect has prepared a list of the plant species and these are shown on Sheet L 2.1. The estimated annual quantity of irrigation required will be 8,000 units of water. Engineering: 1. The Site Plan should show the Right of Way along Palomar Airport Road.... Agree. The Site Plan has been revised to show new right-of-way being dedicated by a separate application to the City submitted on or about February 26, 1999. The right of way dedication will amount to 12 feet almost the entire length of the property adjacent to Palomar Airport Road. The Site Plan Enlargement Drawing Ll.l and the Grading Plan Drawing Cl.O and the Landscape Plan Drawing No. L 2.1 all reflect this proposed right of way dedication. A separate exhibit is attached that illustrates the existing and proposed right-of-way cross sections. 2. Please submit the applicable section of the Carlsbad Specific Plan. . .. The Carlsbad Specific Plan describes the grading in the flower field to comply with Objective 6, page 40. "The grading for the site should reflect and, where appropriate, enhance the site's topography." There is no specific grading standard. The site plan, as currently revised and submitted, requires minimal grading of the existing topography at the toe of the major flower fields and should be in compliance with the intent of the specific plan. 3. Please indicate on the site plan, the document or encroachment agreement... The new site plan illustrates the new right-of-way easement dedication. The encroachment agreement and the right of way easement is being processed by the City. Applications were submitted on or about February 26, 1999, to Clyde Wickham. 4. The grading and "existing improvements .. . The existing 4,000 square foot facility was permitted under Coastal Development Permit No. 98-91. The sign and corner trellis were permitted under City of Carlsbad permit numbers 984191 and 984385. Upon completion of the conditional use process and at the end of the flower field season, approximately July 1, the existing buildings will be demolished or removed. The seasonal structures will be removed and stored for use in the 2000 flower field season. Page 1 of 4 ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. Please revise Sheet A 3.1 to lower building height from 26' 11" to 25'. Agreed: Building height have been lowered to 25 feet excluding the cupola feature. The architectural plans are resubmitted herewith for review by the City. 2. Please redesign the site plan to setback all parking ... A buffer area will be designed within the 50 foot setback from Palomar Airport Road right-of-way line that will contain a landscaped berm with 24 inch box sized California Sycamore, and 24 inch box Coast Live Oak, and red fescue groundcover. In addition the berm will be capped with a white railed fencing with flowering vines. The berm exists now within the area to be dedicated a right-of-way. The plants, fencing and trees will be replanted in the relocated berm. We request that the 50 foot buffer be permitted to contain seasonal parking that will be permitted only during the peak tourist season at the flower fields from Mai-ch 1 through May 31 or at special seasonal events in the flower fields. This setback and buffer area is shown on Drawing C 1.0, the Grading Plan, and on Drawing L 1.1, the Site Plan Enlargement. The use of this buffer for twelve to fifteen weekends each year will alleviate off-site parking problems in the neighborhood of the flower fields. The landscaped berm details are shown on Drawing L 2.1 the Landscape Plan. This berm will partially block the view of the automobiles parked in the parking lot without blocking the view of the Armstrong Retail Store and the Flower Fields. The existing temporary berm will be removed and rebuilt as shown on the attached Cross-section A. An encroachment permit that is being processed will allow this berm to be located partially within the right-of-way. Pictures are attached that illustrate an early season parking situation and the visual effect of the fencing and the berm. 3. Please redesign the site plan to reduce project encroachment into the existing flower fields. Agree. The site plan has been modified to eliminate most of the grading in flower fields and in the open space easement area. The building was moved forward approximately 65 feet southwest in line with the parking rows. The location of the open space easement is shown on Drawing C 1.0, the Grading Plan, and on Drawing L 1.1, the Site Plan Enlargement Plan. All of the permanent improvements are located .outside of this easement. 4. Please identify the location of the flower fields maintenance equipment. Disagree: Flower field maintenance equipment storage is not a part of this site plan and its accommodation is a function of the overall farming on the site. The equipment is storied Vz mile north of the site and its location is unrelated to this application. 5. The proposed retail nursery includes a 6,400 square foot building. .. . The site plan has been revised to provide 125 paved parking spaces. The proposed 125 paved spaces exceed the peak requirements of the retail store. However, the paved areas have been increased from the prior submittal to include loading, delivery and primary public circulation areas. The balance of the area will remain as a gravel base to reflect the less formal character of the entire farm operations. Page 2 of 4 6. Please add additional notations to the site plan... Agreed: Site plan will note that unpaved portion of parking lot will be Class 2 gravel base. This is note 9 on Drawing L 1.1, the Site Plan Enlargement and is indicated repeatedly on Drawing Cl.O, the Grading Plan. 7. Please redesign the site plan to incorporated enhanced pavement treatments into the parking area. We believe that large amounts of enhanced paving in the parking area would not be compatible with the working farm environment and the less formal character of the entire farm operations. However, we have added an enhanced pavement section at the crosswalk location at the entry to the garden center. This paving is shown on Drawing No. Ll.l as note 7. 8. Please submit a draft plan proposal for the maintenance of current use.... We propose that the operation of the nursery be conditional upon the continuation of the cut flower and bulb operations since its accessory character specifically reflects that operation. Engineering: 1. Please indicate Corner Sight Distances .. Sight lines have been added to the Drawing Ll.l, the Site Plan Enlargement and to Drawing C 1.0, the Grading Plan. The plans for the corner trellis were specifically approved outside of the corner sight line requirements by Clyde Wickham on February 18, 1999. 2. The project should submit a traffic report... A traffic report is being prepared and will address the need, if any, for mitigation for the proposed site plan. 3. The proposed onsite pavement Paved parking and circulation has been added to the site plan to allow delivery and truck traffic to use the paved areas. Drawing LI.2 has been added to this set to reflect this routing per City standards. 4. As mentioned above as an incomplete item, a portion of the parking lot.... The site plan has been revised to remove structure and other permanent, above grotind encroachments into the open space easement. 5. Similar to issue # 4 the Architect.... This note has been corrected on Drawing LI.0 to reflect a deed dedication recorded as File No. 1996-0343957. This note is shown on the site plan near the title "FLOWER FIELDS." Note 7 on the same plan indicates the location of the open space easement. Water: Please show the complete water system including Offsite looped or connecting systems. All water system improvements are shown on Drawing Cl.O, the Grading Plan. Grading £ Drainage 1. The proposed site generally drains to the northwest corner. The site plan has been revised and compliance is shown with NPDES guidelines. A Oil and Grease Interceptor has been added as Detail "A" on Drawing Cl.O, the Grading Plan. Page 3 of 4 t 2. The note on sheet Cl .0.... Much grading has been eliminated with the revised Grading Plan. The grading plan reflects grading of less than 550 CY and cuts are less than 4 feet, therefore a grading permit is not required under 15.16.060 of the Municipal Code. Additional Issues by Applicant Tents: The applicant wishes to modify its application to allow tents to be erected within the "Flower Fields" open space area on a seasonal basis. These temporary tents provide a shaded area for visitors during their visit to the fields. Page 4 of 4 P.L P.L EX. BERM EX. CURB EX. PARKING LOT 11' /D 4'6'12' R.T. 5' UJ s 12' THRU ' 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' 2' LT. 8' -EXIST. MEDIAN EX. SIDEWALK EX STING PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD NEW EXIST. P.L P.L HORIZ.: 1" = 20 VERT.: N.T.S. P.L NEW BERM - NEW CURB EX. PARKING LOT m,v\ y. 12' 4' r-? 6' A / '/ /t> 12' R.T. \ \ 5' LU s 12' THRU 12' THRU 12' THRU 12' THRU 10' 2' LT. 10' NEW SIDEWALK 10 L.T. fl EXIST. MEDIAN EX. SIDEWALK PROPOSED PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD HORIZ.: 1" = 20' VERT.: N.T.S. FLOWEXH.DWG 3/23/99 ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER CUP 98-20 Response to Staff Comments of January 25, 1999 Planning: 1. The farming and display areas will vary from year to year due to crop rotation and responses to and requirements of visitors. Areas will be planted seasonally and will be modified and refined each season. Many non-permanent areas will be created and the areas will be returned to an unplanted condition at the end of a flower fields season. 2. Agree. The landscape architect will prepare a list of each plant species and estimated annual quantity of irrigation required. Engineering: 1. Agree. Site Plan is being revised to show new right-of-way being dedicated by a separate application to the City submitted on or about February 26, 1999. 2. The Carlsbad Specific Plan describes the grading in the flower field to comply with Objective 6, page 40. "The grading for the site should reflect and, where appropriate, enhance the site's topography." There is no specific grading standard. The site plan requires minimal grading of the existing topography at the toe of the major flower fields and should be in compliance with the intent of the specific plan. 3. The new site plan will illustrate the new right-of-way dedication and the encroachment agreements being processed by the City. Applications were submitted on or about February 26, 1999. 4. The existing 4,000 square foot facility was permitted under Coastal Development Permit No. 98-91. The sign and corner trellis were permitted under City of Carlsbad permit numbers 984191 and 984385. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. Agreed: Building height will be lowered to 25 feet excluding the cupola feature and will be resubmitted for review by the City. 2. Disagree. A buffer area will be designed within the 50 foot setback from Palomar Airport Road right-of-way line that will contain a landscaped berm with 24 inch box sized California Sycamore, and 24 inch box Coast Live Oak, and red fescue groundcover. In addition the berm will be capped with a white railed fencing with ^ / « flowering vines. We request tha the northern 20 feet of the 50 foot buffer be permitted l^(t -I-" [•>, to contain seasonal parking that will be permitted only during the peak tourist season at 4 ,-. • > > the flower fields from March 1 through May 31. • '•. ff -^ The City has required additional right-of-way to accommodate other traffic issues in the community. The use of this buffer for twelve to fifteen weekends each year will alleviate off-site parking problems in the neighborhood of the flower fields. 3. Agree. Site plan will be modified to eliminate the encroachment into the flower fields open space easement area. 4. Disagree: Flower field maintenance equipment storage is not a part of this site plan and its accommodation is a function of the overall farming on the site. ; 5. Disagree: Site plan will be revised to provide 75 paved parking spaces. Nursery retail generates significantly lower vehicular traffic than normal commercial retail. Armstrong Nursery has experience with over 30 stores in urban and suburban environments. The proposed 75 paved spaces exceed it peak experience in all of its s .-..• stores. The paved areas are being minimized to enhance the informal, farming ; environment. The paved areas have been increased to include loading, delivery and public circulation areas. 6. Agreed: Site plan will note that unpaved portion of parking lot will be Class 2 gravel. 7-r Disagree: We believe that enhanced paving in the parking area would not be compatible with the the working farm environment and the less formal character of the i i,. J- entire farm operations. ,„'-*r &r We propose that the operation of the nursery be conditional upon the continuation of cut flower and bulb operations since its accessory character specifically reflects that operation. Engineering: 1. Agree: Site lines have been added to the Site Plan. The plans for the corner trellis were specifically approved outside of the corner sight line requirements. 2. Agree: A traffic report is being prepared and will address the need, if any, for mitigation for the proposed site plan. 3. Agree: Paved parking and circulation has been added to the site plan to allow delivery and truck traffic to use the paved areas. 4. Agree: The site plan will be revised to remove structure and other permanent, above ground encroachments into the open space easement. 5. Agree: This note has been deleted. Water: Agreed: All water system improvements will be shown on the site plan. Grading & Drainage 1. Agreed. The site plan will be revised and compliance will be shown with NPDES guidelines. 2. Agree. Grading has been eliminated with the revised site plan, however, a grading plan will be submitted to determine if a grading permit is required under 15.16.060 of the Municipal Code. City of Carlsbad Planning Department January 25, 1999 Mr. Christopher Calkins CB Ranch Enterprises, A California Corporation 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 106 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 - ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Conditional Use Permit/Coastal Development Permit, application no. CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91, as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is information which must be submitted to complete your application. This list of items must be submitted directly to your staff planner by appointment. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. The second list is issues of concern to staff. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, December 30, 1998, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Chris DeCerbo, at (760) 438-1161, extension 4445, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL JrHOLZMtLLER Planning Director MJH:CD:eh Gary Wayne Clyde Wickham Project Engineer Bobbie Hoder File Copy Data Entry Planning Aide 2075 La Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (76O) 438-0894 LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION No. CUP 98-20/CDP 98-91 Planning: 1. Please provide the site plan details for the proposed farming and display gardens. 2. Please add the following information to the landscape plan: a. the quantity of each plant species; and b. an estimate of the yearly amount of irrigation required. Engineering: 1. The site plan should show all Right of Way along Palomar Airport Road. The previous project at this location was conditioned for additional dedication that appears different than that shown. Possibly, the dedication was never offered as required and should be completed prior to the approval of this application. 2. Please submit the applicable section of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan that allows for grading into the flower field easement as proposed. 3. Please indicate on the site plan, the document or encroachment agreement that permits landscaping fencing and grading within the public right of way. 4. The grading and "existing" improvements shown on the site plan appear to be a violation of approved site plans for this property. The "existing 4,000 sq. ft. facility should be identified with the Existing" site plan number. Conditions of approval for that site plan should be submitted to verify previous decisions and findings. If a violation from approved plans exist, processing should wait until proper permits and repair if required has occurred. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. Please revise sheet A-3.1 to lower the building height from 26"! 1" to 25'. The proposed cupola architectural feature may extend above this 25' building height limit. 2. Please redesign the site plan to setback all parking and structures a minimum of 50 feet from the Palomar Airport Road right-of-way. This setback should be landscaped to achieve the following objectives: a) provide an enhanced visual statement along one of the City's major entryways, b) screen views of the proposed parking lot, and c) provide views through the site to the flower fields. 3. Please redesign the site plan to reduce project encroachment (i.e.; grading, building and parking lot) into the existing flower fields. 4. Please identify the location of the flower fields maintenance equipment storage area. 5. The proposed retail nursery includes a 6,400 square foot building and associated retail sales yard (27,600 square feet). Please revise the site plan and parking calculations to provide additional asphalt paved parking spaces for the retail sales yard (27,600 square feet). The total required parking for the retail nursery shall be 114 spaces. 6. Please add additional notations to site plan to clarify that the balance of the parking lot which isn't asphalt paved will be paved with class 2 gravel. 7. Please redesign the site plan to incorporate enhanced pavement treatment(s) into the parking area. 8. Please submit a draft plan proposal for the maintenance of current use flower bulb, cut flower production at the "Flower Fields". Engineering: 1. Please indicate Corner Sight Distance (sight lines), in accordance with CalTrans criteria, and the City's 25' corner cut-off at Paseo Del North and Palomar Airport Road. The criteria also applies for both directions at the proposed entrance to this project. 2. The project should submit a traffic report or if one has been prepared, an addendum that covers the impacts of this project on the surrounding intersections. Additional mitigation, right turn lanes on westbound Palomar Airport Road, cost sharing of traffic signals, and payment of traffic fees will be resolved as part of this project review. 3. The proposed onsite pavement is inadequate for truck circulation. As shown, delivery and semi-trucks must drive off pavement to turn around. 4. As mentioned above as an incomplete item, a portion of the parking lot, the realigned dirt farm road, the grading and storm drain, and the proposed building are pushed into the "existing flower field". Either remove these encroachments or submit proof that the location has support of approval. As shown, this plan is subsidized by land encumbered with a public easement. 5. Similar to issue #4 the Architect, on drawing L1.0 easement not #9 has said "Open Space Easement dedicated hereon". Is this dedication over an existing easement or is there an application or encroachment request not applied for? Please clarify what is intended by not #9. Water: Please show the complete water system including Offsite looped or connecting systems. Contact CMWD for design details and specifics. Grading & Drainage: 1. The proposed site generally drains to the northwest corner. The City has requirements for NPDES systems or filters to control pollution before it enters the public storm drain. Please show compliance with NPDES guidelines. Consider the present and developed increase in run off, try to mitigate any impacts. 2. The note on sheet C1.0.... "A grading permit is not required is wrong. The proposed 8' Of cut, the redesign of site drainage, and the proposed structure on an existing slope all require a grading permit. Please remove or revise the comment to comply with 15.16.060 of the Municipal Code. Memorandum TO: Principal Planner, Chris Decerbo FROM: Associate Engineer, Clyde Wickham DATE: January 18,1999 CDP 98-91 / CUP 98-20: ARMSTRONG GARDEN CENTER COMPLETENESS & ISSUES REVIEW Engineering Department staff has completed a review of the above-referenced project for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this proposed project are currently incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following incomplete items: 1. The site plan should show all Right of Way along Palomar Airport Road. The previous project at this location was conditioned for additional dedication that appears different than that shown. Possibly, the dedication was never offered as required and should be completed prior to the approval of this application. 2. Please submit the applicable section of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan that allows for grading into the flower field easement as proposed. 3. Please indicate on the site plan, the document or encroachment agreement that permits landscaping fencing and grading within the public right of way. 4. The grading and "existing" improvements shown on the site plan appear to be a violation of approved site plans for this property. The "existing 4,000 sq. ft. facility should be identified with and Existing" site plan number. Conditions of approval for that site plan should be submitted to verify previous decisions and findings. If a violation from approved plans exist, processing should wait until proper permits and repair if required has occurred. Additionally, staff has conducted a review of the project for engineering issues of concern. Engineering issues which need to be resolved or adequately addressed prior to staff making a determination on the proposed project are as follows: Traffic and Circulation: 1. Please indicate Corner Sight Distance (sight lines), in accordance with CalTrans criteria, and the City's 25' corner cut-off at Paseo Del Norte and Palomar Airport Road. The criteria also applies for both directions at the proposed entrance to this project. 2. The project should submit a traffic report or if one has been prepared, an addendum that covers the impacts of this project on the surrounding intersections. Additional mitigation, right turn lanes on westbound Palomar Airport Road, cost sharing of traffic signals, and payment of traffic fees will be resolved as part of this project review. 3. The proposed onsite pavement is inadequate for truck circulation. As shown, delivery and semi-trucks must drive off pavement to turn around. 4. As mentioned above as an incomplete item, a portion of the parking lot, the realigned dirt farm road, the grading and storm drain, and the proposed building are pushed into the "existing flower field". Either remove these encroachments or submit proof that the location has support or approval. As shown, this plan is subsidized by land encumbered with a public easement. 5. Similar to issue #4 the Architect, on drawing L1.0 easement note #9 has said "Open Space Easement dedicated hereon". Is this dedication over an existing easement or is there an application or encroachment request not applied for? Please clarify what is intended by note #9. Water: Please show the complete water system including Offsite looped or connecting systems. Contact CMWD for design details and specifics. Grading & Drainage: 1. The proposed site generally drains to the northwest corner. The City has requirements for NPDES systems or filters to control pollution before it enters the public storm drain. Please show compliance with NPDES guidelines. Consider the present and developed increase in run off, try to mitigate any impacts. 2. The note on sheet C1.0 .... "A grading permit is not required is wrong. The proposed 8' Of cut, the redesign of site drainage, and the proposed structure on an existing slope all require a grading permit. Please remove or revise the comment to comply with 15.16.060 of the Municipal Code. Attached is a red-lined check print of the proposed project for the applicants use in making the requested revisions. This check print must be returned with the project revisions to facilitate continued staff review. If you or the applicant have any questions, please contact me at extension 4353. CHAM Associate Engineer Land Development Division c: Bob Wojcik Principal Civil Engineer, Land Development Division h-t of CaYfebad Planning Department November 12, 1998 Chris Calkins Carltas Company 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 SUBJECT: FLOWER FIELDS RETAIL NURSERY Dear Chris: Your proposal to develop a retail nursery in Planning Area 7 (Flower Fields) of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan has been reviewed by the Planning Director and the Assistant Planning Director. It has been determined that the use can be classified as one of the accessory uses provided for in the specific plan. To have the project considered further, you will need to submit an application for a Conditional Use Permit as required by the Williamson Act Land Conservation Contract. In addition a Coastal Development Permit is required. As we have previously discussed the granting of any permits for the project would be conditioned on the nursery/garden center operation being accessory to the continuation of a bulb growing and cut flower farming operation for which the nursery would also function as the retail service operator. Should you have any questions concerning this determination, please contact me at 438-1161, extension 4446. Sincerely, DON NEU Senior Planner DN:mh 2075 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1 576 • (760) 438-1161 • FAX (760) 438-O894 CARLTAS COMPANY TELEFAX 5600 Avenida Encinas, Suite 100 Carlsbad, California 92008-4452 U.S.A. Telephone: (760) 431-5600 Fax No.: (760)431-9020 Page Iof3 TO: Don Neu COMPANY: City of Carlsbad FAX NUMBER: (760) 438-0894 FROM: Chris Calkins DATE: November 3, 1998 Don, after reflection on our discussion, I have the following thoughts on process. I also include a narrative summary of our ideas for the operation. , , ,,.- Consider these two options: S /s A. SPA OPTION _ 1. Recognizing that the "accessory use" language and Figure 49 showing a a^?n / fait retail area, taken together with the language of the WUUamsoa Act Contract permitted uses could be interpreted to permit a retail nursery under a conditional use permit, staff recommends that a minor amendment to the Carlsbad Ranch SPA zoning be added that permits a retail nursery subject to a conditional use permit as contemplated under the Williamson Act Contract. 2. While the zoning designation under the citywide code is OS, the specific uses of this area are unique and are related to its specified character as a continuing agricultural area with a public face. "OS" in this case is a substitute for an agricultural land use designation not otherwise available. 3, The use of a conditional use permit avoids the risk of extended additional environmental review as a pan of the SPA or LCPA, since such analysis can be conducted incident to the CUP process as a part of the findings for issuance of the permit. 4, The SPA, LCPA, CDP and CUP are all processed concurrently. S:\1-CC\PAX\NEU.DOC reROTSUMMARY OreROTQSED FLOWER FIELD 11/3/98 We propose to enhance the Flower Field operation through a series of actions. 1. Increased Flower Growing. A portion of the fields will be planted with new flowering products which will continue to bloom through summer. These products, and the breeding necessary to develop and patent new varieties will enhance both the experience of visitors to the field and economic returns from floral sales, Beginning in 1999, visual artists will be commissioned to develop "gardens" using a plant palette provided by the Flower Fields. The melding of art and flowers, like the new gardens at the Getty Museum, should stimulate new ways of looking at flowers by consumers. The integration of appearances, lectures and other events using breeders and other horticultural experts will reinforce the value of flowering color. 2. Integration of a Garden Center to Handle Detail Activities. We will add to our partners at the field (Mellano Company, growing and wholesale cut flowers; Davids & Royston, wholesale bulb sales) Armstrong Garden Centers to run the retail. It will emphasize the focus on the garden applications of the fields, provide knowledgeable support for buyers, and, as a year round garden center, offer all of the products from the fields at the appropriate times. Through a cooperative relationship, sales of Flower Fields products will be carried at all 40 Armstrong regional centers. It also will permit year round maintenance and enhancement of the highly visible non-field areas which are now in disarray 10 months each year. By bringing an operator experienced with retail, it will reduce the cost/risk burden now borne by operating a retail business only six weeks per year. 3, Enhanced Buildings. Landscaping, and Sigtiage. The parking area, perimeter landscaping and the fields themselves will be enhanced and maintained with the new signage for the Flower Fields to tell the story of the flower growing. S:\UCCaBNERAUPnOPOSED FLOWER. FIELD BNHANCBMBNT.DOC B. ACCESSORY USE OPTION 1. The staff recommends a determination that is "accessory" provided the nursery/garden center operation is specifically conditioned upon, and incident to (as the retail service operator) the continuation of a bulb growing and cut flower farming operation. Among the findings is the value to long term preservation of the Flower Fields from maintaining a complementary direct retail and marketing outlet for products of the fields, on a basis which economically supports an on site retail outlet. The year round presence of the garden center accomplishes this result. 2. A CUP and CDP are processed concurrently with appropriate environmental analysis for the garden center use. The conditionlinking the garden center to the cut flower/bulb growing provides the justification for the accessory use finding by the Planning Director. The context of the accessory use is illustrated by the overall operation, summarized in the "Summary of Proposed Flower Field Enhancement," attached hereto. I believe the "accessory use" finding with the linked conditions may be the less complicated option, but I will go either way. Please let me know as soon as possible what path to follow. CCC/jp S:\LCnFAX\NEU.DOC