Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP 126; Colonial Mall Ltd.; Specific Plan (SP) (2)V Affi(davit of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA \ County of San Diego ^ Patricia Manning .i j. i • .i n • • t r-i i „ , says TiiaT she is tho Principal Cisric of Tho Carlsbad Journal, a weekly newspaper of general circulafion, printed and published in •list- City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, and Stato of California, and that the notice of v/hicli ihe annexed is a true copy, was published i!.?- times in said newspaper, commencing on tl!e...f.:^- tlay of Sept* - , A.D. 19 namely on the following dates: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, Cali- forni, will bold a Public Hear- ing on September 13,1973, at 7:30 P.M., in the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, Califomia, to con- sider the following: IP*liitOLONIAL application filed by Robert L. Watson requesting Adoption of a Specific Plan to allowaCom- mercial/professional develop- ment on property generally lo- cated on tbe south side of Elm Avenue between Pio Pico Drive and Highland Drive, and more particularly described as: That portion of Lots 17 to 24 inclusive, in Block 86 ofthe Town of Carlsbad, in the County of San Diego, State of Califomia, according to map thereof No. 535, filed in the office of the County Re- corder of San Diego County, May 2, 1888: TOGETHER WITH a portion of Tract 115 of the Town of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Califomia, according to map thereof No. 775, filed in the Office of the County Re- corder of San Diego County, February 15,1894. Those persons desiring to comment on the proposed Spe- cific Plan are cordially invit- ed to attend the Public Hearing. CARLSBAD CITY PLANNING COM- MISSION Sept. 13,1973 13 Signed at Carlsbad, California this „ day of _ , 19 ...1? I hereby doclare under penalty of pcviury that tho foregoing is true and con ect. ^U.:.C.y:!^...^22l.a-:2i::.21zy:^ir, MEMORANDUM 4 August 29, 1973 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: PLANNINR COMMISSION SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ON APPLICATIONS OF THE MALONE CO. (RICK ENGINEERING CO.) CASE NO.ZC-122 & ROBERT L. WATSON (COLONIAL MALL LTD.) CASE NO.ZC-121 The Planning Commission heard the subject applications July 10,1973 and continued their decision to August 14, 1973 after a motion to table the applications,until the General Plan revision was presented to the City,had ended in a tie vote of the six commissioners nresent. Motions to deny the Change of Zone requests were approved by a 4-3 vote and the two Specific Plans were tabled by a 4-3 vote. The decisions to deny the applications were based upon the incomoatibi1ity of the land uses proposed to the General Plan, and inadequate circu- lation. The discussion had as a basis the following prior actions orpriorstudies: 1. The City Council and Planning Commission Resolutions 606 and 607 in 1959 denied an application on Elm Avenue for rezoning from R-l to C-1 and Adoption of a Specific Plan (Oceanside National Bank). The basis for denial was - a. That the proposed reclassification would zoninq of commercial in a residential area. constitute soot b. That the pronosed use may generate a severe traffic problem on Elm Avenue, which is a major boulevard in the City and will carry increased traffic in the future. 2, The Pio Pico Land Use Amendment initiated by the Staff in late 1971, early 1972, recommended a Specific Area Plan for the area generally between Elm Avenue and Tamarack Avenue, and between Pio Pico Drive and Adams Street. The proposed plan would have - a. Limited residential densities to 20 du/ac. or less. b. Specified land uses which could have been employed adjacent to a freeway, and which would be compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhoods. This program was never taken to public hearing because the Planning Commission felt it should be incorporated into the existing General Plan revision^program. 3. The City Council in May of 1972 imposed a 3 months mori- torium on any reclassification in the vicinity of City Hall until such time as a "Civic Center Overlay" Study and accompanying zoning recommendations could be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council. The purpose of the Overlay Study was to assess the Malone & Watson Memo August 29, 1973 Page 2 requirements of City Hall expansion and at the same time recommend land uses and zoning for the surrounding properties. To date, that study has not been accomplished, and the Planning Commission was of the opinion again that the decision on the Malone-Rick and Watson applications should be held in abeyance, or denied, until such time as a viable Civic Center Study can be accomplished. This study would, of necessity, be a portion of the General Plan Land Use Amendment recommendations. An additional concern addressed the City's existing commercial commitment to the downtown, and the impact of the proposed commercial applications to that commitment. The Commission was in basic agreement that land uses other than residential should be employed adjacent to City Hall (i.e.professional) However, because of the lack of a defined Civic Center Circulation and Land Use Plan, and the inability of existing zoning ordinances to curb the development of unplanned commercial activities in the Civic Center area, denial was an appropriate course of action. Until such Dlans, programs and ordinances are developed, any activity east of the freeway, and adjacent to the Civic Center Complex, should not be considered. Respectfully submitted. DONALD A. AGATEP, Planning Director CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT FOR SEPTEMBER 25,' 1973 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT ON: CONSIDERATION OF CHANGE OF ZONE CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIC PLAN CASE NO: ZC - 121 SP - 126 APPLICANT: COLONIAL MALL^ LTD. Robert L. Watson, General Partner P.O. Box 275 Carlsbad, California 92008 I. GENERAL INFORMATION A. - Background: The -Plann ing Oammiss tori did consider these matters at a public hearing on July 10, 1973 and again on August 14, 1973. The final action taken by the Planninq Commission on August 14, 1973 was to deny the Change of Zone request and to table the specific plan. The applicant did subsequently appeal the Planning Commission denial of the Change of Zone to the City Council. On September 4, 1973 the City Council did consider the appeal and did overturn the Planning Commission denial of a Change of Zone from R-l and C-1 to C-2 by a 4 to 1 vote and referred the matter back to the Planning Commission for a study and report. As a part of the City Council referral to the Planning Commission, the City Council did Indicate that the Civic Center overlay concept should be initiated by the Planning Commission. It seemed to be the feeling of a majority of the City Council that this area would be appropriate for other than residential -2- uses. A majority of the City Council indicated that the proposed commercial and professional building is an appropriate use, but there Is no zone other than the C-2 Zone designation that would allow the proposed development. It seemed to be the City Council's opinion that the specific plan approved on this project should Include conditions that limit the potential uses in the subject building to those indicated by the applicant. The subject property is generally Tocated at the southeast corner of the Intersection of Pio Pico Drive and Elm Avenue. Said property has a frontage on Pio Pico Drive of approximately 132 feet and 102 feet on Elm Avenue. B. Additional Information: Refer to attached staff report, dated August 14, 1973, for additional information. II. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: A. Regarding the Change of Zone: The City .Council at Its meeting of September 4, 1973 did approve an appeal of the Planning Commission denial of a change of zone request from R-l and C-1 to C-2 on the subject property.- This action has been referred back to the Planning Commission for study and report. It is staff's recommendation that the Planning Commission take the following actions; 1. That it be moved that the Planninq Commission report back to the City Council that the final action of approval of the Change of Zone from R-3 to C-2 BE TAKEN. Justification Is based upon: a. The influence of the Civic Center development could reasonably extend along Pio Pico southerly to Oak Avenue. In addition, the impact of the freeway and the estimated traffic on Pio Pico could effect the subject parcel to the degree that the site would not be considered appropriate for a residential activity. A profess 1onal/commerc1al activity, on the other hand, would be less affected. b. As a pa.rt of the upcoming General Plan Revision and Zoning Ordinance Revision, staff envisions the establishment of a civic center overlay zone concept on all the property surrounding the civic center area. A majority of the restrictions of this zone will deal with design and such an application on the subject property will further gua^r-an-tee the compatibility of any deveTopment to the sur- rounding development. c. The existence of commercial zoning and uses to the west of the subject parcel and its location adjacent to a frontage road of a state freeway and a collector street (Elm Avenue) are considered to be sufficient reasons for a finding that the present General Plan commitment for the area is not realistic. In that this Incompatibility Is part of a larg-er area of tnGompatibi 1 ity whlch^ Includes the Civic Center area and the full length of Pio Pico Drive, Staff would not recommend a General Plan amendment for just the subject site at this time. Rather, as a part of the pending total general plan revision, all these inconsistencies will be eliminated. d. The uses permitted under the proposed C-2 zone district is considered to be a suitable transition from the ex 1sting^s1ngle-fami 1y development to the southeast and the freeway activity to the west. E. That the Planning Commission initiate proceedings to begin the implementation of a Civic Center Overlay Zone for that property between Highland Drive and the Freeway and between the property, one lot north of Laguna Drive to one lot south of Elm Avenue. B. Regarding the Specific Plan: The Planning Commission did on August 14, 1973 consider and table a specific plan on the subject -4- property. Along with the reconsideration of the rezoning request, staff has brought the specific plan back for the Planning Commission review. Staff's recommendation is outlined in the attached staff report dated August 14, 1973 (starting on Page 2). Staff would suggest that the approximate square footage allocations for professional and commercial uses could be changed to place more emphasis on professional use. Other than that, staff's recommendation would not change. ATTACHMENT: •Staff analysis to the Planning Commission, dated August 14, 1973 concerning ZC-121 and SP-126. -Letter from Robert L. Watson (2) -Memorandum to the Planning Commission from the Planning Department. -Resolution No. 942. - Letter from Robert L. Watson dated August 20, 1973. - Memorandum to the City Council from the Planning Commission. -Minutes from the City Council meeting of September 4, 1973. ^ CITY OF CARLSDAD PLANiUNG DEPARTMENT ANALYSI-S FOR JULY 10, T973 CONTINUED TO AUGUST 14, 1973 i 7 / TO: PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT ON: CONSIDERATION OF ZONE CHANGE CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIC PLAN -CASE NO: ZONE CHANGE NO. 121 SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 126 APPLICANT: COLONIAL MALL LTD. Robert L. Watson, General Partner P.O.Box 275 Carlsbad, California, 92008 GENERAL INFORMATION: A. Request: The applicant is requesting approval of a zone change from R-l and C-'l, to C-2", adoption of a Specific Plan and amendment to the City's General Plan on property generally located on the southeast corner of Elm Avenue and Pio Pico Drive. B. Background: The proposed development is related to the recently approved (May, 1977rwayside Inn Restaurant by location and developer. Circumstances confronting this application are similar to those experienced by the applications for the restaurant (i.e. General Plan amendment, 'land-use, circulation, etc). The vicinity map shows the relationship betv/een the proposed development and the existing restaurant. C. Zoning and General Plan; 1. Zoning: Existing: R-l Proposed: C-2 Adjacent: East: R-l South: R-l West: C-1 & C-2 North: R-l (Civic Center) 2- General Plan: The adopted General Plan designates the area as "Low Density" residential T3-7 d.u./acre). There is some question as to whether or not this development falls within the definition of "freev/ay service facility". If it does, then the project v/ould be in basic confonr.ity to the text of the General Plan. ^' Publ ic Notification: Tiie required public notices have been published and mailed regarding these items. ^• Environmental Impact Considerations: The applicant has submitted en environmental impact assessment per City requirements; and t-ie project has been declared to have a "non-significant"' impact on the environment. Justification was- based on the adequacy of services circulation and adjoining' land-uses. _ .- •• CONSIDER.ATJON OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 121 1\. Description of Project: The proposed zone change from R-l to C-2 is on tv.'o parcels of land, consisting of approximately .64 acres, at the southeast corner of Pio Pico Drive and Elm Avenue. Surrounding land uses include: West (across Pio Pico): service station South: restaurant and single-family house East: single-family house .. North: City Hall. ^- Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Cominission recommend to the City Council that Zone Change No. 121 BE APPROVED . Justification is based upon, staff's interpretation that: 1, The site and proposed develo.pment,,partially falls within the definition -Of a "freev.'ay service faci 1 i ty". 2. The proposed zoning is the only appropriate zoning that v/ould permit those uses normally associated with civic centersand their environs. If the Planning Commission disagrees with Staff's interpretation of the project, the logical alternative v/ould be to continue (table) this application until the adoption of the new General Plan expected sometime in 1974.-- CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 126 * A. Description of Project: The enclosed plot plan shows a tv/o-story complex consisting of approximately 15,000 sq. ft. The Proposed uses include a mixture of commercial and professional activities. The attached letter from the applicant defines the types of tenants he will be seeking. Tn addition to the 52 parking spaces shown on-site, i:he applicant requests that the Planning Commission "consider a joint use as it relates to ingress and egress and parking" with the Wayside Inn Restaurant and Cocktail Lounge (letter attached). The parking area on tlie east side of the lot will be approximately 8 ft, above the elevation of the first story of the structures along Pio Pico. There are a total of four stairways end ramps to the second story. Ingress end Egress is proposed from Elm Avenue end through an existing drive off Pio Pico. STAFF RECOMMENDATIO!!: Staff recom:r;finds that the Planning Co.mmission re- coinmend to the City Council that Specific Plan No. 126 BE APPROVED. Obviously this recommendation is predicated upon an approval of the Zone Change. Justification is based upon: 1. The development would be consistent with uses thought to be appropriate within a civic center overlay zone. 2. The proposed uses v.'ould be computable with existing uses in the area. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Any approval should be subject to the following conditions: 1. The Specific Plan is granted for the land as described in the application and any attachments thereto, as shown on the plot plan submitted, labeled Exhibit ''"A". ... 2. Unless the construction of the structure or facility is commenced not later than one year after the date the approval is granted and is diligently pursued thereafter, this approval will automatically become null and void. 3. All requiroinents of any law, ordinance or regulation of the State of California, City of.Carlsbad, and any other governmental entity shall be complied with. " --4. -Ho'-signs-or-^odvertisiTig-of any "type v/hatso ever sliall te'erected or installed until plans therefore have been approved by the City of Carlsbad. 5. Prior to obtaining a building permit and within 30 days hereof, the applicant shall file with the Secretary of the Planning Commission written acceptance of-the conditions stated herein. 6. Compliance v.'ith and execution of all conditions listed hereon shall be necessary (unless otherwise specified) prior to obtaining final building inspection clearance. Deviation from this requirement shall be permitted only by v.ritten consent of the Planning Director. 7. Any mechanical and/or electrical equipment to be located on the roof of the structure shall be screened in a manner acceptable to the Planning Director. Detailed plans for said screening shall be submitted, in triplicate, to the Planning Director. 8. All lighting shall be arranged to reflect away from adjoining properties and streets. of 9. An incombustible trash enclosure shall be provided/a size and location acceptable to the Planning Director, and said area shall be enclosed witli a fence and/or wall of sufficient fieight to adequately shield the area. Said fence end/or wall shall include a solid gate. • 10. Interior landscaping of perking areas shell be provided in a manner acceptable to the Planning Director. Said minimum area of landscaping siiall bo equivalent to 3'a of the area of the lot, excluding required perimeter landscaping. 11. A detaileo landscape and sprinkler plan prepared by a landscape architect shall be submitted to the Planning Director for consideration and approval. 12. Prior to final building inspection clearance, all landscaping shall be installed. Said landscaping shall-, at all times, be maintained in a manner , acceptable to ttie Planning Director. 13. Full street improvements shall be installed along Pio Pico. 14. A parcel map shall be recorded in accordance with the State Map Act. 15. The building shall be provided with underground utility service. 16. A grading plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to the issuance of an^y building permits. 17. A six-foot high vievz-obscuring fence shall be installed along the east and south property lines. 18. The letter dated May 29, 1973-from Colonial Mall, Ltd. and signed by Robert L. Watson, that refers to proposed uses and expected tenants shall be included ss a part of this Specific Plan. The Planning Director shall be responsible for the enforcement of this condition. 19. Prior to the issuance of eny permits, the City shall duly process the request for a General Plan Amend;nent. ^20. Proper signing shall be installed to restrict "right-turn only" ingress •and egress along Elm Avenue if the Public 'Works Director determines there is a need for such a restriction. Respectfully submitted. MI CHAEt^CTZAi'fDER; Assistant Plann'gr CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPAF.TMENT ANALYSIS FOR JULY 10, 1973 TO: PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT ON: CONSIDERATION OF ZONE CHANGE CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIC PLAN CASE NO: ZONE CHANGE NO. 121 SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 126 APPLICANT: COLONIAL MALL LTD. Robert L. Watson, General Partem P.O.Box 275 Carlsbad, California, 92008 GENERAL INFORMATION: 1^' Request: The applicant is requesting approval of a zone change from R-l and C-1, to C-2, adoption of a Specific Plan and amendment to the City's General Plan on property generally located on the southeast corner of Elm Avenue and Pio Pico Drive. B. Background: The proposed development is related to the recently approved (May, 1972) Wayside Inn Restaurant by location and developer. Circumstances confronting this application are similar to those experienced by the applications for the restaurant (i.e. General Plan amendment, land-use, circulation, etc). The vicinity map shows the relationship between the proposed development and the existing restaurant. C. Zoning and General Plan: ^- Zoning: Existing: R-l Proposed: C-2 Adjacent: East: South West: North R-l R-l C-1 & C-2 R-l (Civic Center) 2' General Plan: The adopted General Plan designates the area as "Low Density" residential (3-7 d.u./acre). There is some question as to whether or not this development falls within the definition of "freeway service facility". If It does, then the project would be in basic conformity to the text of the General Plan. •1- D. Public Notification: The required public notices have been published and mailed regarding these items. E. Environmental Impact Considerations: The applicant has submitted an environmental Impact assessment per City requirements, and the project has been declared to have a "non-significant" Impact on the environment. Justification was based on the adequacy of services, circulation and adjoining land-uses. CONSIDERATION OF ZONE CHANGE NO. 121 ^' Description of Project: . The proposed zone change from R-l to C-2 is on two parcels of land, consisting of approximately .64 acres, at the southeast corner of Pio Pico Drive and Elm Avenue. Surrounding land uses include: West (across Pio Pico): service station South: restaurant and single-family house East: single-family house North: City Hall. B. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that Zone Change No. 121 BE APPROVED . Justification is based upon staff's interpretation that: 1. The site and .proposed development partially falls within the definition of a "freeway service facility". 2. The proposed zoning is the only appropriate zoning that would permit those uses normally associated with civic centersand their environs. If the Planning Commission disagrees with Staff's interpretation of the project, the logical alternative would be to continue (table) this application until the adoption of the new General Plan expected sometime in 1974. CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 126 A. Description of Project: The enclosed plot plan shows a two-story complex consisting of approximately 15,000 sq. ft. The Proposed uses include a mixture of commercial and professional activities. The attached letter from the applicant defines the types of tenants he will be seeking. In addition to the 52 parking spaces shown on-site, the applicant requests that the Planning Commission "consider a joint use as it relates to Ingress and egress and parking" with the Wayside Inn Restaurant and Cocktail Lounge (letter attached), The parking area on the east side of the lot will be approximately 8 ft. above the elevation of the first story of the structures along Pio Pico. There are a total of four stairways and ramps to the second story. Ingress and Egress is proposed from Elm Avenue and through an existing drive off Pio Pico. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission re- commend to the City Council that Specific Plan No. 126 BE APPROVED. Obviously this recommendation is predicated upon an approval of the Zone Change. Justification is based upon: 1. The development would be consistent with uses thought to be appropriate within a civic center overlay zone. 2. The proposed uses would be compatable with existing uses In the area. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Any approval should be subject to the following conditions: 1. The Specific Plan is granted for the land as described in the application and any attachments thereto, as shown on the plot plan submitted, labeled Exhibit "A". 2. Unless the construction of the structure or facility is commenced not later than one year after the date the approval is granted and is diligently pursued thereafter, this approval will automatically become null and void. 3. All requirements of any law, ordinance or regulation of the State of California, City of Carlsbad, and any other governmental entity shall be complied with. 4. No signs or advertising of any type whatsoever shall be erected or Installed until plans therefore have been approved by the City of Carlsbad. 5. Prior to obtaining a building permit and within 30 days hereof, the applicant shall file with the Secretary of the Planning Commission written acceptance of the conditions stated herein. 6. Compliance with and execution of all conditions listed hereon shall be necessary (unless otherwise specified) prior to obtaining final building inspection clearance. Deviation from this requirement shall be permitted only by written consent of the Planning Director. 7. Any mechanical and/or electrical equipment to be located oji the roof of the structure shall be screened in a manner acceptable to the Planning Director. Detailed plans for said screening shall be submitted, in triplicate, to the Planning Director. 8. All lighting shall be arranged to reflect away from adjoining properties and streets. of 9. An Incombustible trash enclosure shall be provided/a size and location acceptable to the Planning Director, and said area shall be enclosed with a fence and/or wall of sufficient height to adequately shield the area. Said fence and/or wall shall include a solid gate. 10. Interior landscaping of parking areas shall be provided in a manner acceptable to the Planning Director. Said minimum area of landscaping shall be equivalent to 3% of the area of the lot, excluding required perimeter landscaping. n. A detailed landscape and sprinkler plan prepared by a landscape architect, shall be submitted to the Planning Director for consideration and approval. 12. Prior to final building inspection clearance, all landscaping shall be Installed. Said landscaping shall, at all times, be maintained in a manner acceptable to the Planning Director. 13. Full street improvements shall be Installed along Pio Pico. 14. A parcel map shall be recorded in accordance with the State Map Act. 15. The building shall be provided with underground utility service. 16. A grading plan shall be submitted and approved by the City prior to the Issuance of any building permits. 17. A six-foot high view - obscuring fence shall be Installed along the east and south property lines. 18. The letter dated May 29, 1973 from Colonial Mall, Ltd. and signed by Robert L. Watson, shall be included as a part of this Specific Plan. The Planning Director shall be responsible for the enforcement of this condition. 19. Prior to tbe issuance .of any permits^ the City shall duly process the request for a General Plan Amendment. Respectfully submitted. MICHAEL C. ZANLp/ Assistant Planner -4- [ CITY OF CARLSBAD APPLICATION FOR ADOPTION OF SPECIFIC OR MASTER PL/AN DATE:M^y ?Q, 197-^ FILING FEE RECEIPT NO SPECIFIC PLAN NO (for official use) • « 1» te 1» « « * « « « « « « « « * * * « « « ir I. A REQUEST IS HEREBY MADE TO ADOPT A Specific (Specific or Master Plan) FOR PROPERTY DESCRIBED AS: (exact legal description) Intersection of Elm and Pio Pico bv address 1217 Elm Avenue (see attached) II. THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN IS ADDRESSED Aa217 Elm Avenue AND IS LOCATED ON THE South SIDE OF Elm Avenue (Name of Street) Highland (Name of Street) We ( I, We) (North, South, East, West) BETWEEN Pio Pico AND (Name of Street) The undersigned state that we are the Owners (Owner/Owners) ( I AM, WE ARE ) _of the property described herein and hereby give Our (My, Our) Name : Colonial/l^ll. L (Typed br/^r^'niled( as shown on Recorded Deed) Signature: <^ VyTXA^ ^ JHfr^^?^ ^.ft Name: Rober6\L, Watson, General Partner authorization to the filing of this application; "Hubert L. VJatson, General Partner ( Typed or)Printed as shown on Recorded Deed) Signature: Name: (Typed or Printed as shown on Recorded Deed) Signature: Name: (Typed or Printed as shown on Recorded Deed) Signature: Specific/Master Plan An^ncation Page Two III. EXISTING ZONE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY 7,500 - C-1 HAS A MASTER PLAN BEEN APPROVED? Yes, No. DATE: OWNER AND/OR OWNER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) SS CITY OF (?^^^yiJ> ) I, (we), (3c/-oA/,^i, (name) declare to the best of (my, our ) and correct under the penalty of purjury: being duly sworn depose and EXECUTED AT DATE (City) _knowledge that the foregoing is true (State) /97yf (Month)(Day) APPLICANT, OWNER AND/OR OWNER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT: (Year) ijal M^ll, Ltd. ](Pr/irvt^Nante) Post Office Box 275 (Mailing Address) Carlsbad, California 92068 (City and State) (Zip) ( 714) 729-4901 SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME THIS (Notary Public) (Area Code) DAY OF (Telephone Number) OFFICIAL SEAL ? LAILY G. SCHRADER 5 NOlAiiV PUiCJO • CALII-OliNIA jj ['Ki^iCir'hL OiriCE IN I SArt Uii'iO GJUMIY 5 My Ccmmisslon Expi.es Octslisr 16, 1.976 J •»k^.--x^...rH} y^yy/