The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCUP 215; Van Voorhis/Shorter; Conditional Use Permit (CUP)REQUEST DZone Change DGeneral Plan Amendment D Tentative Tract Map D Planned Unit Development D Major Condominium Permit D Minor Condominium Permit DMaster Plan EH Major Condominium Conversion DPrecise Development Plan DSpecific Plan DSite Development Plan Biconditional Use Permit D Variance D Planning Commission Determination D Special Use Permit :O Administrative Variance Complete Description of project (attach additional sheets if necessary) Location of Project ••f-2.6 Legal Description (complete) *f C*Assessors Parcel Number Zone General Plan Existing Land Use Proposed Zone Proposed General Plan Site Acreage Cvmer Applicant Name (Print or Type) L krfft. wU&lJM PACIFIC WESTERN H9LDING COMPANY Mailing Address ?40 Lomas Santa Fe Driye, Suite 206 Name (Print or Type) Mailing Address City and State iolana Beach, CA Zip Telephone 92075 481-2210 City and State Zip Telephone I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUEAND CORRECT"^) THE BEST OF MY KNOW I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE OWNER'S REPRE3ENTIVE AND TFIAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Date Application Received 'PLEMEOTAL INFORMATION FORM VARIANCE 1) Gross Acres (or square footage, if less than acre) 2,£>(& AC., 2) Zone /^^i> : ' 3) General Plan Land Use Designation 4) By law a Variance may be approved only if certain facts are found to exist- Please read these requirements carefully and explain how the proposed. project meets each of these facts. Use additional sheets if necessary. a) Explain why there are exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applicable to the property or to the intended use that do not apply generally to the other property or class" of use in the same vicinity . . and zone: •• • ' '•• - • • ...... ...• b) Explain why such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same vicinity and zone but which is denied to the property in. gaesticru c) Explain why the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements ±n such vicinity and zone in which the property is located d) Explain why the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the comprehensive general plan: T~/i'^ /J A)A^ fo/t "that further information is required, you will be so advised. y&<f><eAt'£APPLICANT: AGENT: __ ____ _ .----- •• 'I- " . -.jrrj-j-n ___ - - ____ -- Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication) ^^4 I XX* vk 7***AeAf. ^& ds*<f4. £s4- &z/z 9 Business Address Telephone Number Name Business Address MEMBERS: Telephone Number Name -(individual, partner, joint venture, corporation, syndication) Business Address Eome Address Telephone Number Telephone Number _ Home Addre Business Address .»Jt f. i.. Telephone Number (r/4) Telephone N (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this dis- closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and nay be' relied upon as being true and correct until amended. ' - Ag pi t, Cf.-.T.e r, Partner CASE NO.: APPLICANT: REQUEST: gjP-215 DATE RECEIVED:May 6, 1982 VAN VOORHIS/SHORTER DELI/sandwich shop on Las Palmas EXEMPT OP. EXCEPTED: Posted: Filed: Prior Compliance:Published: Filed: NEGATIVE DECLARATION: Posted:Published: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT: Notice of Preparation: -5-p Notice of Completion: Notice of Determination: (n -£$ - Notice of Determination: PLANNING COMMISSION 1. Date of Hearing; (j> - 2 . Publication : _ ^ _y 3. Notice to Property Owners: 4. Resolution No. JQ ^ | (Continued to: __ ' ' ' 5. Appeal : ' ' ' Date:ACTION: CITY COUNCIL Date of Hearing: 2. Notices to City Clerk: 3, Agenda Bill: Resolution No. Ordinance No. Date: Date: ACTION: CORRESPONDENCE Staff Report to Applicant: (p.- { % - Resolution to Applicant: ' H'-"'~ REQUESTED E INSURANCE AND TRUST \ AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO ["PACIFIC WESTERN HOLDING PALOMAR "1 PROPERTIES I, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP ATTN: MR. PHILIP HOFFMAN , 215 SO. HIGHWAY 101, SUITE #206 iSOLANA BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92075 » r MAIL TAB STATEMENTS TO Stroat Addrcai SAME AS ABOVE Cily fi Sloto I ~l J FILE/PAGE WO... BOO;? 1980 EECORDEB REQUEST OP TiTL£ IHSIJfcttiSg fi jflUSF COL 8:00 WI SCORE !MW, L ii/lii OFFICIAL ilSCORD SAN DIEGO -SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE- TO 1921 ('.A ( I 2-741 THIS FORM FURNISHED BY TICOR TITLE INSURERS The undersigned grantor(s) declare(s): Documentary transfer tax is $ TRANSITS TAX PAID SAN DIEGO CO.UIMTY RECORDER ( ) computed on full value of property conveyed, or ( ) computed on full value less value of liens and encumbrances remaining at time of sale. ( ) Unincorporated area: ( ) City of , and FOR A VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged MITSUI FUDOSAN (U.S.A.), INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION a corporation organized under the laws of the State of CALIFORNIA PACIFIC WESTERN HOLDING PALOMAR PROPERTIES I, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP hereby GRANTS to the following described real property in the CITY OF CARLSBAD County of SAN DIEGO , State of California: AS LOT 7 OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 79-1, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 9389, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1979. THIS DEED IS MADE AND ACCEPTED SUBJECT TO: CURRENT TAXES: ALL OF THE COVENANTS, CONDTIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND OTHER MATTERS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS RECORDED ON OCTOBER 1, 1974 AS FILED/PAGE NO. 74-263897, OFFICIAL RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA: ANY COVENANTS, CONDITIONS, RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATION RIGHTS, RIGHTS OF WAY AND EASEMENTS OF RECORD AFFECTING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. In Witness Whereof, said corporation has caused its corporate name and seal to be affixed hereto and this instru- ment to be executed by its VXGE= President and VICE PRESTDKNT thereunto duly authorized. Dated: DECEMBER 26. 1980 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANfiKT.'RS On DFnEK^E^ ?^u 1.9^0 MITSUI FUDOSAN (U.S.A.), INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION: . ' SS.ByiJ before me, the under- signed, a Notary Public in and for said State, personally appeared MASATOSHT NF7.TTMTYA known 5residenJ// Secretary to me to be the SETZD TSHTRASHT J/XCJE^-President, and known to me lo be VICF.-PRF.STnRNT of the Corporation that executed the within Instrument, known to me to je the persons who executed the within Instrument on behalf of the Corporation therein named, and acknowledged to me that such Corporation executed the within Instru mem pursuant to its by-laws or a resolution of its board of directors. WITNESS my hand- and official seal. Signature- "v,.;-^r ;.,-.„ ',''< iff')*.t i:lv..- JU!H. I.*/, v-t.'I (This area for official notarial j>,eal) Title Order No. 1075924 -O/.Escrow or Loan No 78 82 719 EA:cd REVIEW 0F CUP'S FOR DELIS - 3/23/90 CUP 88-19 CUP 88-18 CUP 88-17 CUP 88-10 CUP 88-3 CUP 87-8 CUP 270 CUP 250 i.\bt> is,y> CUP 226 P 224 CUP 215 Mission West**. Place Deli) Calif. Cafe & Deli «E1 Fuerte Deli Scruffys Deli Julian Aaron teway Deli ^ ,Choi-Sandwich-Shop" (Faraday Deli) im-Lloyd Barbie's Lunch Depot (Ginger's Deli) tVanVoorhis/Shorter (Quality Deli) S^parking. spaces req'd and removal of tables & seating. Violation letter 3/28/90 Conforming to CUP on 3/23/90 "5— parking spaces and •removal of tables and ~ chairs req'd - reviewed 2/15/90 Withdrawn Deli closed - still some furniture inside F--4 parking spaces req'd - reviewed 11/7/89. Noticed 2~~- parking—spaces—,- and .""removal"" of tables'" and chaifs~req'd "eviewed 3/23/90 2 /—parking spaces removal " of ' tables hairs req'd - Reviewed 3/23/90 and and 3— -parking . spaces . . and removal of tables and chairs req'd - reviewed 3/30/90 2 parking spaces req'd Reviewed 3/23/90 ,5 parking spaces removal of tables •'chairs req'd Reviewed 3/23/90 and and PROJECT REVIEW On March 23. 1990. CUP 215 VanVoorhis/Shorter (Now named Quality Deli) . was (date) (project number) (project name) reviewed for compliance with the conditions contained therein. The project was found to be in violation of Condition 7 & 8 of Resolution No. 1981 and the following actions have been taken: COMMENTS: The permitee has been notified that five parking spaces need to be reserved for deli use only, and indicated with pavement graphics. Also, no tables or seating is allowed inside, the service is for take-out service only and no tables or seating is allowed. Signed Mike Grim. Plamiing/Technician I c: Erin Letsch MG:kd project.frm •z? MEMORANDUM FROM: SUBJECT: Proposal Engineering, Fire Department, Building, and Parks and Recreation Planning Department Request for Review and Comment on Application No. (Dfi.U*»/v>a A; Project Planner This item has been tentatively scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of C\j/Je. 3,3 l^Fl, . Please _ review and submit written comments and/or conditions to the Planning Department by fltfiy -2.fr /?gi. - If not_ received by that date, it will be assumed that you have no comment and that the proposal has your endorsement as sub- mitted. Thank you. Comment c^ /\ Q o l*-/"^ ?y t/t*ff x ATTACHMENTS Location Map Project map or plans (if any) Mil: j t J (t\ MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Engineering, Fire Department, Building, and Parks and Recreation Planning Department Request for Review and Comment on Application No. Proposal ~fci KQlCQlCQ<>)'a!?1- . Project Planner This item has been tentatively scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of o^e ^j\ l^ffl- . Please_ review and submit written comments and/or conditions to the Planning Department by /}My -2.fr 1181. _ - If not received by that date, it \vill be assumed that you have no comment and that the proposal has your endorsement as sub- mitted. Thank you. Comment av f*JLi£lo "Q JtyA*\ /Aft jpt^AMnM?*^ ™' ' • •• -|> ATTACHMENTS Location Map Project map or plans (if any) Mil: jt DEVELOPMENTAL. SERVICES D Assistant City Manaaar (714) 438-5R06 D Building Department (714) 438-5525 D Engineering Department (714j43«-554t D Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714)438-5611 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Cttp of Cartebafc B^PiS n^Planning Department (714) 438-5591 NOTICE OF DETERMINATION County Clerk County of San Diego Attn: Mail Drop C-11 220 West Broadway San Diego, CA 92101 This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad on June 23, 1982, approved the following project: Project Description: Conditional Use Permit for a sandwich shop to be located in an existing industrial building at Palomar Airport Business Park. Project Address/Location: Suite B, 2151 Las Palmas Drive The City made the following determinations regarding the environmental impact of the above described project: 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. Mitigation measures were not made a condition of the approval of this project. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supporting document is available for public review at the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. DATE: June 25, 1982 CASE NO: OJP-215 APPLICANT: VAN VOORHIS/SHORTER MICHAEL J>-HOLZMILLER Land Use Planning Manager DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES D Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5696 D Building Department (714)438-5525 O Engineering Department '(714)438-5541 <D Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714)438-5611 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Citp of Cartebab ZT PI' nPlanning Department (714)438-5591 PUBLIC NOTICE OF PREPARATION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: The Planning Department of the City of Carlsbad intends to prepare a Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Description: Sandwich shop to be located in an existing industrial building at Palomar Airport Business Park. Project address/Location: Suite B, 2151 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad/ Palomar Airport Business Park. Anticipated significant impacts: None. We need to know your ideas about the effect this project might have on the environment and your suggestions for ways the project could be revised to reduce or avoid any significant environmental damage. Your ideas will help us decide what issues to analyze in the environ- mental review of this project. Your comments on the environmental impact of the proposed project may be submitted in writing to the Planning Department, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008, no later than June/>l-t^ 1982 DATED: May 20, 1982 CASE NO: CUP-215 APPLICANT: Van Hoorhis/Shorter PUBLISH DATE: May 26, 1982 JAMES C. Planning Dire Carlsbad Journal Decreed a Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County 3138 ROOSEVELT ST. • P.O. BOX 248 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • 729-2345 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the Cdflsbdd JOUmdl a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the - .,.. -• notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: PUBLIC NOTICE OF PREPARATION PLEASE,J^AKE NOTICE: The ; Planning Department of the City of Carlsbad intends to prepare a Negative Declaration for the fol- lowing project:Project Description: Sandwich shop to be located in an existing industrial building at^alomaf Air- port Business-Park. Project' Address/Locatio*n':*Suite , B, 2151 Las Palmas Drive, Cfarls-bad/Palomar Airport Business "'•,-»• • "•'* • •» • <*¥%' ' •i /iipticjp.ajed Signlficant'Impacts:Niffie^/'v . •SJfx' We rieedToknow your ideas about the effect th)s project mighthave ori the environment arid your sugges- tions for waysithe jprojecl, could be revised to reduge o^ ayojdYah'y tsi°g- nificant envirohmSntajtdamage. Your ideas will help us decide what issues to analyze in 'the.erivirb.n- mental review of this project. < Your comments on the environ- mental impact of the proposed project may be submitted in writing to the Planning Department, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008, no lateflhan June 11,1982. Dated: May 20,1982 " ?•'«•* Case No: CUP-215 Applicant: Van Hoo|his/Shorter JAMES C. HAGAMAN Planning Director CJ W275: May 26,1982 •M-ay-26---- 1982- • 19, 19 19, 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad. County of San Diego, State of California on the 26th day of May 1Q82 1M-10/81 Clerk of the Printer DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES D Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5596 D Building Department (714)438-5525 D Engineering Department (714) 438-5541 D Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714)438-5611 D Planning Department (714) 438-5591 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Cttp of Cartebab NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Suite B, 2151 Las Palmas Drive PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conditional use permit to allow a sandwich shop in an existing building at the Palomar Airport Business Park. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the PlanninoDepartment within ten (10) days of date of issuance. ( / /"~Y' ^^—^ DATED: June 7, 1982 CASE NO: OJP-215 APPLICANT: VAN VOORHIS/SHORTER PUBLISH DATE: June 9, 1982 JAMES C. HAGAMAN Planning Director ND-4 5/81 Carlsbad Journal Decreed a Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County 3138 ROOSEVELT ST. • P.O. BOX 248 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • 729-2345 Proof of Publication : o STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the CdMsbdd Joiimdl a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of Son Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCA- TION: Suite B, 2151 Las .PalmasDrive. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Con- ditional Use- permit to allow a sand- wich shop in an existing building at the Palomar Airport Business Park. The City of Carlsbad has con- ducted an .environmental review of the above Described project pur- suant to the Guidelines for Imple- mentation of the California En- vironmenta-lifSuaiity Act and the Envir.onnTehtSl'<Pro'tection Ordi-nancej.qf the City of C.arlsbad. As aresult of said' r'eview(-a>Negative Degfioiatton.^claration that theproject will! not have a significant impact on the environment) is here'b'y'isSUed fo'fth'e subject proj- ect. Justification, for,- this 'action is on file ilri the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declara- tion with- supportive documents is on file in tire Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carls- bad, CA. 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comme'nts in writing to the Planning Department within ten(10)'days of date of issuance. Dated1: June 7,1§82 Case No: CUP-215 Applicant: VAN VOORHIS/SHORTER JAMES C. HAGAMAN Planning Director CJ W287: June 9,1982 June. 9.. 19.82. 19 19. 19 19 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California on thf?-dav of June 1982 1M-10/81 Clerk of the Printer ICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 23, 1982, to consider approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a sandwich shop to be located in an existing industrial building at Palomar Airport Business Park on property generally located on 2151 Las Palmas Drive, Palomar Airport Business Park and more particularly described as: Lot 7 of Carlsbad Tract 79-1 according to Map thereof No. 9389 filed September 26, 1979 Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. If you have any questions please call the Planning Department at 438-5591. CASE PILE: APPLICANT: PUBLISH: CUP-215 VANHCORHIS/SHORTER JUNE 12, 1982 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION L O C A1 CASE A P P L. IC A M T VICINITY MAP Carlsbad Journal Decreed a Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County 3138 ROOSEVELT ST. • P.O. BOX 248 • CARLSBAD, CA 92008 • 729-2345 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general circulation, published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, and which newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general character, and which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list of paying subscribers, and which newspaper has been established and published at regular intervals in the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one year next preceding the date of publication of the notice hereinafter referred to; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of theCity of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the City Council Cham- bers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad,California, at 7.00 p.m. on Wednes- day, June 23, 1982, to consider approval of a Conditional Use Per- mit to allow a sandwich shop to be located in an existing industrial building at Palomar Airport Busi-ness Park on property generally lo- cated on 2151 Las Palmas Drive,-—^..owwsv/z-poi-t-Boyiness Park and ' more particularly described as; Lot 7 of Carlsbad Tract 79-1 according to Map thereof No. 9389filed September 26, 1979. /Those persons wishing to speakon this proposal are cordially in-vited to attend the public hearing.If you have any questions please call the Planning "Department at438-5591.' Case File: CUP-215 , Applicant: VANHOORHIS/SHORTER CJTY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSIONCJ S120; June 12, 1982 June 12 19 1M-10/81 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Diego,State of California on the 12th day of .Tnnp 1 QR? Clerk of the Printer PLICATION SUBMETTAL DATE: MAY 6, 1982 STAFF REPORT DATE: June 23, 1982 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: CUP-215 VAN VOORHIS/SHORTER - Request for approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow a sandwich shop in a portion of Suite B at 2151 Las Palmas Drive in the Palomar Airport Business Park in the P-M zone. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit for a take out sandwich shop located as described above. The applicant is renting a 2303 square foot suite, of which 773 square feet will be used for the sandwich shop and the remaining 1530 square feet will be sub-leased for warehouse purposes. The property to the south of this site is vacant, while the properties to the north, east and west are occupied or will be occupied in the near future by industrial-office buildings. The property is zoned P-M (Planned Industrial), requiring a Conditional Use Permit for "... uses limited to the sales of goods and services required for the convenience of occupants of the P-M zone." A Conditional Use Permit, therefore, is necessary for a take-out sandwich shop at this location. II. ANALYSIS Planning Issues 1. Can the four findings, required for approval of a Conditional Use Permit, be made? Specifically, a. That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community; is essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the general plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located; b. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use; c. That all of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the requestted use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained; d. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use. Discussion The city's zoning ordinance is fairly restrictive with regard to both permitted and conditional uses in the P-M zone. As previously discussed, retail and service businesses are permitted by Conditional Use Permit, only if limited to goods and services required for occupants of the zone. The proposed sandwich shop complies with this requirement since it provides a much-needed service for the Palomar Airport Business Park. At the present time, employees of the Palomar Airport Business Park must drive approximately 1.5 miles to the nearest eating establishment. The conditions of approval will limit the hours and days of operation of this business so that it coincides with the general hours of business at the Palomar Airport Business Park. As proposed, this project meets all of the requirements necessary for granting a Conditional Use Permit. The proposed sandwich shop is in harmony with the goals of the general plan and will not be detrimental to the existing or future uses within the area. Staff had some concerns that there might not be enough parking to handle the demand generated by this use; however, the applicant has informed staff that four requirements will be incorporated into the operation of the use that would alleviate the parking problems: 1. there will be no tables or chairs for the consumption of food on-premise; 2. the shop will sell "cold sandwiches" only, there will be no on-premise cooking of food; 3. five>parking spaces will be reserved for this use immediately adjacent to the entrance; and 4. the applicant will attempt to get as many people as possible to call in their orders ahead of time. These requirements have been incorporated into the conditions of approval for this CUP. In addition, this site has slightly more parking than required by the P-M zone. Staff feels that the extra two parking spaces, along with the conditions of approval for this CUP should prevent this use from creating any parking problems. As shown by Exhibits "B" and "D", the portion of the suite proposed for the sandwich shop is adequate in size and shape to handle the proposed use. All of the yards, setbacks, fences, landscaping and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained. The proposed use will have no effect on the physical aspects of the site since all activity will take place within an existing building. It appears that the existing street and driveway system is adequate to handle all traffic generated by the proposed use. As conditioned, this sandwich shop will provide a much needed service and not adversely affect the other users within the building in which it is located. Overall, staff is satisfied that all required findings for a Conditional Use Permit can be made. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that this project will not have a significant impact on the environment and therefore has issued a Negative Declaration on June 7, 1982. V. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and adopt Resolution No. 1981 APPROVING CUP-215 based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 1981 2. Location Map 3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Form 5. Letter from applicant, dated June 10, 1982 6. Environmental Documents 7. Exhibits "A" - "D", dated May 10, 1982 MH:jp 6/16/82 LOCATIO CUP-215 SHORTER VICINITY MAP BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: CUP-215 APPLICANT: VAN VOORHIS/SHORTER REQUEST AND LOCATION: Conditional Use Permit to allow a sandwich shop in the Palomar Airport Business Park at 2151 Las Palmas Drive in Suite *B'. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Suite B of Parcel No. 7 of Carlsbad Tract 79-1 in Map 9389 filed September 26, 1979. APN; 213-050-32 Acres 206 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 1 GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation PI Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed N/A Existing Zone P-M Proposed Zone N/A Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Land Use Site P-I North P-M Industrial South County, E-1-A Vacant East P-M Industrial West P-M Industrial PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's — Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated May 6, 1982 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT X Negative Declaration, issued June 17, 1982 E.I.R. Certified, dated Other, • LilC-lL, * APPLICANT: AGENT: Alll.VJiltltlU4.VJH .._ _. . _ _ . . Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation. Syndication) y/& J# Business Address 414 Telephone Number Name Business Address MEMBERS s Telephone Nunher Name -(individual, partner, joint venture, corporation, syndication) Business Address Home Address Telephone Nustber Telephone Xumber Z. Name _ gome Addr Business Address ,.<ij <r, i.. Telephone Nuaber Telephone Jiui fi*> &' (Attach more sheets if necessary) I/We declare under psr.alty of perjury that the information contained in this dis- closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and nay be" rcliccl upon as being true and correct until amended. Agent, Ch-;r.er, Partner June 10, 1982 City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 To: City of Carlsbad I would like to give you a little run down on what we plan to do at the Deli/Sandwich Shop at 2151 Las Palmas Dr., Ste. B, Carlsbad. First of all, we will be a take out shop. We will be making fresh sandwiches daily. The only hot food we may have is soup cooked in a crock pot. Our business will not be using any stoves or grills of any kind. We feel that this shop has been and is needed in this area. There is no place to eat within 1.8 miles of the corner of Palomar Airport Rd. and Camino Real. The next closest is nearly five miles going north, west, and east. Sincerely, Bill VanVoorhis •"." &• *.*• : "••'•'• •" . •"J"' ''•.'. .'". • ••• • '.•'•' ' "• "\':-•'-•'"•-'*;'• •'"..";'•; '•/••• •'••T'':-:"'- " _J——••-"•' •' • ..'•-. . •• • • • At-*' "•'— : ' •. ' ' ' •-. • -••••• ^——•—• • - ' .'•' ' —-—•*—•^^" • : • ' __ — - \ > 1 PAi- M A«~." •••• r••:• 'y •••••. ••1 j-r. " X^ UNIT "B" UMMARY OF PROPOSED USE :APPLICANT-Bill VanVoorhis/ -r\ Ken Shorter '•.''•9541 Vista Tercera •\>..San Diego, CA 92129 /'"USE-"DELI "/Sandwiches- Take-Out :;'UNIT SIZE-2 30 3 sf = ?/773sf Deli, 1530 sf Whse. PARKING SPACES-5 required 3Deli, 2 Whse. 5 provided SIGNAGE-In accordance with CC & R's LLT CDolat! yi .<> >-., ,; » -^ :-~..- / a'_^.--.; s -•\9'* 12' LE.YA —- i i I' /' ULM/T £ JV^JA 2* »& / o o L ir •4s r \ I 8 £ £ 3 J d gl UNIT : A ' .' T~ ~7~"r«-A >- / / <-• DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES D Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5596 D Building Department (714) 438-5525 D Engineering Department (714) 438-5541 D Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714)438-5611 D Planning Department (714) 438-5591 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Citp of Carlstfmb NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Suite B, 2151 Las Palmas Drive PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Conditional use permit to allow a sandwich shop in an existing building at the Palomar Airport Business Park. The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for £he subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the Planning Department. A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA. 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planninojlepartment within ten (10) days of date of issuance. DATED: June 7, 1982 CASE NO: CUP-215 APPLICANT: VAN VOORHIS/SHORTER PUBLISH DATE: June 9, 1982 JAMES C. HAGAMAN Planning Director ND-4 5/81 DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES D Assistant City Manager (714) 438-5596 D Building Department (714) 438-5525 D Engineering Department (714) 438-5541 Q Housing & Redevelopment Department 3096 Harding St. (714)438-5611 Planning Department (714) 438-5591 1200 ELM AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008 Citp of Cartefcab PUBLIC NOTICE OF PREPARATION PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: The Planning Department of the City of Carlsbad intends to prepare a Negative Declaration for the following project: Project Description: Sandwich shop to be located in an existing industrial building at Palomar Airport Business Park. Project address/Location: Suite B, 2151 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad/ Palomar Airport Business Park. Anticipated significant impacts: None. We need to know your ideas about the effect this project might have on the environment and your suggestions for ways the project could be revised to reduce or avoid any significant environmental damage. Your ideas will help us decide what issues to analyze in the environ- mental review of this project. Your comments on the environmental impact of the proposed project may be submitted in writing to the Planning Department, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008, no later than June^-tp 1982 —^ DATED: May 20, 1982 CASE NO: CUP-215 APPLICANT: Van Hoorhis/Shorter PUBLISH DATE: May 26, 1982 ND 3 5/81 JAMES C. Planning Dire RECEIPT NO: "ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - Part I (To be Completed by APPLICANT) CASE NO: DATE: Applicant: Address of Applicant: ^^4/ ^' Phone Number: (7/4'} /***>. Name, address and phone number of person to be contacted (if other than Applicant) GENERAL INFORMATION: Description of Project: Project Location/Address: •Assessor Parcel Number: 2/_3_ Zone of Subject Property: Proposed Use of Site: List all other applicable applications related to this project: ND 1 EIR 1 2. Describe the. activity area, including distinguishing natural and marmvade characteristics;, also provide precise slope analysis when appropriate. : 3. Describe energy conservation measures incorporated into the design and/or operation of the project. (For a more specific discussion of" energy conservation requirements see ' of the City's-EIR Guidelines). 4. If residential, include the number of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents,, and type of household size expected. y / ' 5. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, . . c.ad loading facilities „ ./. 6. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities. 7. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project. , . 1- ' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ' : Ansv;er the following questions by placing a check in the appropriate space. (Discuss all items checked yes. Attach additional sheets as necessary).. YES NO x 1) Could the project significantly change present "land uses in the vicinity of the activity? )/ 2) Could the activity affect the,use of a rec- . reational area, or area of important • ' aesthetic value? X _ 3) Could the activity affect the functioning of an established community or neighborhood? X 4) Could the activity result in the displacement • of community residents? . • - ___)^_ 5) Could the activity increase the number of low •and moderate cost housing units in the city? V 6) Could the activity decrease the number of low and modest cost housing units in the city? 7) Are any of the natural or man-made features in the activity area unique, that is, not', found in other parts of the County, State, or Nation? . . 8) Could the activity significantly affect a historical or archaeological site or its settings? 10) Does the activity area serve as a habitat, food source nesting place, source of water, etc. for rare or endangered wildlife on fish species? 11) Could the acti.v5.ty significantly affect fish, wildlife or plant life? •12) Are there any rare or endangered plant species in the activity area? 13) Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's lagoons, bays, or tidelands? 9) Could the activity significantly affect the potential use, extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural resource? V. 14) Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's beaches? _ '_. X 15) Could- the activity result in the erosion or elimination of agricultural lands? • _ y 16) Could the activity serve to encourage develop- ment of presently undeveloped areas or intesify development of already developed areas? 17) Will the activity require a variance from established environmental standards (air, water, ' ' ' X noise, etc) ? • 18) Will the activity require certification, . • . •• authorization or issuance of a permit by any .local, state or federal environmental control agency? ' ' ' j 19) Will the activity require issuance of a variance or conditional use permit by the city? 20) Will the activity involve the application,, use, f or disposal of potentially hazardous materials? __ _ _X 21) . Will the activity involve construction of facilities in a flood plain? . 22) Will the activity involve construction of . facilities on a slope of 25 percent or greater? 23) Will the activity involve construction of facilities in the area of an active fault? . . _ ; ___£ 24)' Could the activity result in the generation . of significant amounts of noise? • ' ________ _>_: 25) Could the activity result in the generation of significant amounts of dust? ' ' ' .' ' ' ' __ __ X 26) Will the activity involve the burning of brush, trees, or other materials? \' ' ' X 27) Could the activity result in a significant change in the quality of any portion of the .region's air or water resources? (Should note, surface, ground water , off-shore) . , ' '_ •;_ ;j ' ' ' ' 28) Will the project substantially increase fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas,etc.)? _____ __ x 29) Will there be a .significant change to existing land form? ••••)(. •'••••1 (a) indicate estimated grading to be done in cubic yards ' ""' (b) percentage of alteration to the present land form . (c) maximum height of cut or fill slopes 30) Will the activity result in substantial increases in the use of utilities, sewers, drains , or streets? _'-•'.'.'. .X 31) Is the activity carried out as part of a larger' project or series of projects? X J ''* J') Axe '///*- 0 II. STATEMENT OF NON-SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS If you have answered yes to one or more of the questions in Section I but you think the activity will have no significant environmental effects, indicate your reasons below: III. COMMENTS OR ELABORATIONS TO ANY OF 'THE QUESTIONS IN SECTION I (If additional space is needed for answering any questions attach additional sheets as may be needed). Signature (Person completing report) Date Signed -6- 9 ) 0 o ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - Part II (To Be Completed By The PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE N0._ DATE: I. BACKGROUND 1. APPLICANT: \fftiJ #60 2. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: . CA 3. DATE CHECKLIST SUBMITTED:__ II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (EXPLANATIONS OF ALL AFFIRMATIVE ANSWERS ARE TO BE WRITTEN UNDER Section III - DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION) Yes Maybe No 1. Earth Will the proposal have signi- ficant results in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in N^, changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, com- paction or overcovering of the soil? c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? '__' X d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or ero- sion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? ND 2 o Yes Maybe No 2. Air: Will the proposal have signi- results in: a. Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? )\ b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, mositure or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? ' X 3. Water: Will the proposal have sigi- ficant results in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water move- ments, in either marine or fresh • ' Y" waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and . amount of surface water runoff? X c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? ' ' ' ' \ d. Change in the amount of sur- face water in any water body? ' ' sc e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? '''' X f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? ' ' ' ' ' S£ g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? '_" ' ' ' ' ' ' V h. Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? -2- o Yes Maybe No 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal have signi- ficant results in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of plants (Deluding trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? K b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? ___ Y c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenish- ment of existing species? r d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal have signi- ficant results in: a. Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shell- fish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? ' ' ; Vl c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise. Will the proposal signi- ficantly increase existing noise levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the pro- posal significantly produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Yes Mavbe No 9. Natural Resources. Will the pro- posal have significant results in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? b. Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of haz- ardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset . - conditions? ' '•' ' '_'_X 11. Population. Will the proposal significantly alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal signi- ficantly affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal have significant re- sults in: a. Generation of additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new t, parking? • _____ X c. Impact upon existing trans- portation systems? _____ _____ ' ' ' V d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or move- ment of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? -4- o Yes Maybe No 14. Public Services. Will the pro- posal have a significant effect upon, or have significant results in the need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facili- /• ties, including roads? . \ f. Other governmental services? X 15. Energy. Will the proposal have significant results in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? '•'..-. ' X b. Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the develop- ment of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal have significant results in the need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b.,. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? '''' '''' V e.. Storm water drainage? f, Solid waste and disposal? 17, ' Human Health. Will the proposal have signigicant results in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? ____ X -5- o Yes Maybe No 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal have significant results in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the pro- posal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the proposal have significant results in the impact upon the quality or quantity of . existing recreational opportunities? X 20. Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal have significant results in the alteration of a significant ' archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? _____ 21. ANALYZE VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO TOE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: a) PHASED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT; b) ALTERNATE SITE DESIGNS; c) ALTERNATE SCALE OF DEVELOPMENT; d) ALTERNATE USES FOR THE SITE; e) DEVELOPMENT AT SOME FUTURE TIME RATHER THAN NOW; f) ALTERNATE SITES FOR THE PROPOSED USE; g) NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE. -6- o Yes Maybe No JL 22. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE THE POTEN- TIAL TO DEGRADE THE QUALITY OF THE ENVIRONMENT, OR CURTAIL THE DIVERSITY IN THE ENVIRONMENT? b) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE THE POTEN- TIAL TO ACHIEVE SHORT-TERM, TO THE DISADVANTAGE OF LONG-TERM, • ENVIRONMENTAL GOALS? (A SHORT- TERM IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT IS ONE WHICH OCCURS IN A RE- LATIVELY BRIEF, DEFINITIVE PERIOD OF TIME WHILE LONG-TERM IMPACTS WILL ENDURE WELL INTO THE FUTURE.) c) DOES THE PROJECT HAVE IMPACTS WHICH ARE INDIVIDUALLY LIMITED, BUT CUMULATIVELY CONSIDERABLE? (A PROJECT MAY IMPACT ON TWO OR MORE SEPARATE RESOURCES WHERE THE IMPACT ON EACH RE- SOURCE IS RELATIVELY SMALL, - BUT WHERE THE EFFECT OF THE TOTAL OF THOSE IMPACTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT IS SIGNIFICANT.) d) - DOES THE PROJECT HAVE ENVIRON- MENTAL EFFECTS WHICH WILL CAUSE SUBSTANTIAL ADVERSE EFFECTS ON HUMAN BEINGS, r EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY? _/A III.- DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUTION o DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Continued) r — ) • t* O IV. DETERMINATION. (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A conditional negative declaration will will be prepared. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: Signature V. MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) -9-