Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2004-09-01; Planning Commission; ; SP 207E|LCPA 90-08|CT 03-02|SDP 03-02|CDP 03-04|PUD 03-01|CUP 03-01|HDP 03-01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5
A o . The City of Carlsbad Planning Department A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No. 0) Application complete date: January 14, 2004 P.C. AGENDA OF: September 1, 2004 Project Planner: Saima Qureshy Project Engineer: Clyde Wickham SUBJECT: SP 207(E/LCPA 90-08/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03- 01/HDP 03-01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE - Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Pennit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Permit, Conditional Use Permit and Hillside Development Permit for the development of a full service hotel/timeshare resort. At buildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms, 350 timeshare units, two restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants, and recreational amenities including pools, tennis courts and a sports center. The subject site is 56.52 acres in area and is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 13. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 5685, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5693, 5692, 5686, 5687, 5688, 5689, 5690 and 5691 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of Specific Plan Amendment (SP 207(E)), Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 90-08(D)), Tentative Tract Map (CT 03-02), Site Development Plan (SDP 03-02), Coastal Development Plan (CDP 03-04), Non-Residential Planned Unit Development Plan (PUD 03-01), Conditional Use Permit (CUP 03-01) and Hillside Development Permit (HDP 03-01) based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The applicant proposes to develop Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan with a full service hotel/timeshare resort. At buildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms, 350 timeshare units, two restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2,000 occupants, and recreational amenities including swimming pools, tennis courts and a sports center. The subject site, Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, is currently used for farming. The subject site is 56.52 acres in area and is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday Avenue within Local Facilities Management Zone 13. The development of the proposed resort project requires the processing and approval of a Specific Plan Amendment, Local Coastal Program Amendment, Tentative Tract Map, Site Development Plan, Coastal Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Unit Development, Conditional Use Permit and Hillside Development Permit. The Conditional Use Permit for the OW SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-03(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04/BUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/ED? 03- .. - 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING-AREA 5—RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 project is being requested pursuant to Municipal Code Section 21.44.050(a)(5) to allow the provision of common parking facilities resulting in a 9% parking reduction from the sum of the various uses computed separately. This section of the zoning ordinance-contains provisions for a maximum parking reduction of 15%. An analysis of the hourly parking demand for all the uses proposed for the site has been prepared. The ptoposed land uses of hotel, timeshares and other associated amenities are included in the list of permitted uses for Planning Area 5 in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The project as designed and conditioned is in compliance with all City standards including the General Plan, Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, Local Coastal Program and The Zoning Ordinance. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project. Environmental impacts for the proposed project were also previously analyzed in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EJIR 94-01, SCH #95051001). The project conforms to all applicable standards, there are no outstanding project issues, and findings can be made for approval of the project. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan requires that the City Council make the final decision to approve or disapprove the Site Development Plan. M. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Prolect Site: The subject site, Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, is 56.52 acres in size and is located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and vest of Faraday Avenue. Land uses surrounding the subject site include open space, a water reservoir and the future City of Carlsbad Municipal Golf Course to the east, Cannon Road and agricultural uses to the north, LEGOLAND to the south, and a vacant property -to the west. The site is currently being used for agricultural purposes. Primary access to the site will be taken from Cannon Road and a second access will be provided from Hidden Valley Road. Topographically the site is characterized by gently sloping land, increasing in steepness towards the eastern side of the site. The highest elevation of the site is on The easterly side, towards the middle of the property. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan: The City Council adopted the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan in 1995 to provide a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations and an implementation program to ensure the orderly development of the Carlsbad Ranch in accordance with the General Plan. The Specific Plan defines the allowable type and intensity of land uses, provides development and design standards and criteria, and describes implementation methods. The permitted land uses in the Specific Plan area are a mix of non-residential uses which include the LEGOLAND theme park, the Gemological Institute of America campus, a hotel, a destination resort, flower fields, golf course and light manufacturing/offices. The subject site, described as "Planning Area —5 (PA 5)" in the Specific Plan, was designated for a fill service destination resort. Permitted uses for the site are hotels and timeshares, which may be permitted by the City Council in conjunction with a hotel. Lfl C SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08DjCT 03-02/SDP 03-02C13P 03-04/PTJD 03-01 /CUP 03-0ld-OP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5— RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 Proposed ame,zdzncnt to the Specific Plan: At the time of the approval of the Specific Plan, it was anticipated that PA 5 would develop concurrently with a private golf course on PA S. It was assumed, for purposes of the Specific Plan description, that the golf course would be developed concurrently with the hotel project on PA 5 and by the same developer. The golf course was intended to be 18 holes in size and golf holes were to be located within PA S and a portion of the SDG&E property located north of Cannon Road. At the time, a lease arrangement was being negotiated by SDG&E and the original owner to provide for the golf course holes on the SDG&E property. Since that time, the prospective developer of PA 5 (Pointe Resorts) abandoned its plans for development of PA 5 and the lease arrangement with SDG&E. Today, PA 5 and PA S are under separate ownerships and the SDG&E land is not available for golf course use. Because of the change of circumstances, it became necessary for the applicant to amend the Specific Plan to develop PA 5 as a stand-alone project without concurrently developing PA S as a golf course. Proposed Project: The proposed project is for the development of a thU service hotel/timeshare resort. At huildout, the project will have a total of 350 hotel rooms, 350 timeshare units, two restaurants, meeting rooms and conference facilities for 2.000 occupants, and various recreational amenities including pools, tennis courts and a sports center. The project will be directly accessible from Cannon Road and also from Hidden Valley Road. Internal circulation for the project is provided by a number of private streets. The project Will generate 7,167 avenge daily trips (ADT), which corresponds to the ADT projected in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Program E]R for this planning area. The required circulation improvements identified in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan will therefore still be adequate to accommodate the vehicle trips generated by this project. The following table summarizes various uses proposed and their square footage. Table 1: PROJECT AREA SUTSfl\IARY Resort and Conference Facilities Unit Quantities Approximate Square Footage Resort Administration and Support N/A 26.000 S.F. Restaurant 42 and Support 120 seats 9,500 S.F. Meeting Rooms and Support 2,000 seats 33.000 S.F. Guest Service and Buildings 2 buildings 2,000 S.F. Utility and Storage Buildings 3 buildings 3,000 S.F. Total 73,500 S.F. Commercial Building Pads Restaurant #1 1 7,000 S.F. Sports Center 1 3,000 S.F. Total 10.000 S.F. SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02ISDP 03-021CDP 03-04WUD 03-01/COP 03-01IHDP -03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5—RESORT SITE - September 1, 2004 Page -- Table 1: PRO;WCT AREA SuMMARY CONTINUED Hotel Hotel Building 1 - 125 units 78,800 S.F. Hotel Building 2 125 units 69,420 S.F. - Hotel Building 3 100ixnits 64,010 S.F. Underground Parking Structure - Hotel Building I N/A 34,400 S.F. Underground Parking Structure - Hotel Building 2 N/A 17,600 S.F. Total - - 264,230 S.F. -- - Timeshare Villa Buildings ___________ _____________ Total -Villa Buildings 91 througli#27 1350units 357,3009F. AFFR OXJ A4 T.E TOTAL FROJECTBTJILDINGAEEA - 705,030SF. Following is a description of each of the components of the resort. -Conference Facilities: The main conference facility/resort building is proposed to be located along the eastern property line, in the central portion of the site. The building will be one story high and will be able to accommodate up to 2,000 people in 33,000 square feet ofmeetingroom space. An additional 26000 Square feet will be utilized for resort administration and support. The main entrance to the resort will be through the porte cochere, which will be enhanced with lighting features and landscaping. The hotel buildings and amenities of the resort will be easily accessible from the conference facility. The conference facilities will be a valuable resource for businesses in the surrounding areas in need oflarge meeting spaces. - Restaurant: The applicant is proposing two restaurants to be developed on the subject site. A 7,000 square foot stand-alone restaurant is proposed adjacent to Cannon Road, which will service hotel guests as well as the general public due to its accessible and prominent position. The second restaurant is proposed to be located in the main conference/resort building. The location of this 3,000 square foot restaurant provides a close and convenient restaurant option for hotel guests and conference attendees and will also be open to the general public. Hotel Buildings: Three separate hotel buildings are proposed for a total of 350 hotel rooms. These three buildings will be located along the eastern side of The project site, in the central portion of the property. All three buildings will be a maximum of 35 feet high and will have three stories. The hotel buildings will consist of standard one-bedroom hotels units, approximately 430 square feet in size. Hotel buildings 1 and 2 will contain 125 rooms, while hotel building 3 will contain 100 rooms. All hotel units will have exterior decks to take advantage of surrounding views. Low patio walls will be located at poolside ground level units to provide an added sense of privacy for hotel guests. Palm trees, small shrubs and turf areas will be located around all sides of each building. Timeshare Villas: The project is proposed to be developed with 350 timeshare units, located in 27 different villa buildings. Seven buildings are clustered at the northeastern corner of the property, near the Cannon Road entrance. Twelve additional buildings are clustered on the northwestern side of the property, while the remaining eight buildings are clustered in the southern portion of the project site, near the entrance from Hidden Valley Road. Twenty-two of the Villa buildings are three stories and a maximum of 35 feet high, while five of the Villa 71 LI SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04 1PTJD 03-01/CLIP 03-01/IWP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5— RESORT SHE September 1, 2004 buildings are two stories and a maximum of 27 feet high. The number of timeshare units contained in each building ranges from S to 22 units. Five different timeshare villa building layouts are proposed, ranging in size from 8,400 square feet to 25,610 square feet. All villa units will have exterior patios or balconies to take advantage of surrounding views. Palm trees, small shrubs and other ground cover are proposed to be planted on all sides of the buildings. Approximately 50' b of the units (178 units) will be lock-off units. Lock-off units allow a portion (typically one bedroom and one bathroom) of each unit to be completely locked off from the remainder of the unit. This allows two groups to stay in the same unit while still maintaining some privacy. According to the applicant, lock off units are typically used by the same family with friends or relatives. However, it is possible that two separate groups can use these spaces. The parking requirement for lock off units is 1.5 parking spaces per unit while regular units require 1.2 spaces per unit. Villa building 1 will be used as a temporary sales office. It will be converted into 12 habitable timeshare units when all the units have been sold. Sales uses will include guest areas, personal offices, presentation area, administrative functions, sales activities and unit models. Recreation Areas: Four recreation areas are proposed on the subject site at various locations throughout the project. All recreation areas are easily accessible by foot and are connected to the hotel and timeshare buildings by a pedestrian walkway system. The recreation areas include amenities such as swimming pools, spas, tennis courts, barbeque areas, bathroom/changing rooms, play equipment and sunning decks. A family poolside area will be located in the northeastern corner of the project site and includes a swimming pool and sunning areas. A sports center will be located on the western edge of the project and will be open to both resort guests and the general public. The sports center will be approximately 3,000 square feet in size and will be 23 feet high. The sports center will include a fitness center, a sports and tennis retail outlet, locker rooms, refreshments and arcade games. Also included in this recreation area will be four tennis courts, half court basketball, a swimming pool, elevated sunning terraces, a guest recreation and service building, and multiuse turf areas for family recreation. On the eastern edge of the project, a recreation area will be geared toward adult activities and will include a lap swimming pool, pool deck with various levels and secluded decks for sunning, an outdoor exercise area, and a workout gym. At the southern end of the property, just east of the adult recreation area, hotel guests vill utilize a play area with barbeque facilities, open turf areas for light recreation and a safe "splash toys" for children. In addition to the above mentioned recreation areas, passive recreational open space has been set aside as part of the archeological mitigation. This open space area is located on the eastern side of the property. This open space area will include a decomposed granite pathway. sitting/viewing area and informational plaques. Parking: The project is proposed with both surface and underground parking. A total of 1,293 spaces will be provided throughout the project site. A total of 1,212 spaces (94") are located throughout the site as surface parking and Si parking spaces (6°,) are located in a 52,000 square foot underground parking structure, located below hotel buildings 1 and 2. The applicant is • SP 207(ELCPA 90M8(D)/CT 03-02/SD? 03-02/CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-0ILHDP 03- 01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5—RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 - requesting a 9% (214 space) parking reduction as provided in section 21.44.050(a)(5) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The proposed parking reduction will be covered farther in the analysis section of this report. - Architecture: The architectural theme for the project is proposed to be a Mediterranean style. Building materials include-stucco walls, S-tile roofs, simulated stone-columns and trim, split face masonry block, black metal railings, trellis and clear glass window. The architectural façade will be varied to add to the -building appeal and will provide opportunities for color and texture changes. The architectural style and design is in conformance with the requirement of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Wherever possible, buildings have been oriented to take advantage ofviews overlooking the Pacific Ocean. Phasing: The applicant is proposing to develop the project in multiple construction and grading phases as shown on Exhibit PH--i. Generally, the applicant is proposing to build the hotel in three phases, each building being one phase. The first phase will include 125 hotçl units and 64 timeshare units. The applicant is proposing and will be conditioned to build one third of the conference facilities concurrent with the first hotel phase and the completion of the conference facilities concurrent with the last hotel phase. The following table shows proposed phases of the project: Table 2: PHASING Proposed Phases Proposed Facilities - Phase A Hotel 1 (125 units) - Restaurant #2 - - Meeting Rooms (Phase 1) - Villas 1-5 (64 units) -- - - Phase B Villas 6-8 (40 units) Phase C Hotel 2 (125 units) Phase D Additional Parking Phase B Hotel 3 (100 units) Phase F Villas 9, 10, 14, 15 (48 units) Phase G Meeting Rooms (Phase 2) Phase Villas 11, 12,13 (40 units) Villas 24-27 (52 units) Phase J Villas 16-23 (72 units) Phase K Restaurant #1 The project is conditioned to provide parking, landscaping and recreational amenities as needed for each construction phase. The applicant is proposing these construction phases to ensure financial sustainability throughout the construction life of the project. Commencement of each phase will be partially dictated by market conditions; however, staff has added a condition requiring that the entire project be completed within five years from the date of the first building permit. fl Economic and Market Analysis: The project, as proposed by the applicant will be a 3 star facility. Two economic and market feasibility studies were conducted by the applicant to . SP 207(E)'LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02iSDP 03-02/CD? 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/J-WP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5— RESORT SITE September 1. 2004 ascertain feasibility of the site for the proposed resort. The City retained Keyser Marston Associate, Inc. (IKMA) in March, 2004 to conduct a third party review of the two market studies conducted by the applicant. The report by KMA concludes that methods applied by the applicant's studies were thorough and consistent and that the subject site's potential for development as a 4 or 5 star lodging property is adversely impacted by United View corridors, incompatible adjacent uses and existing competitive supply of rooms in 4 and 5 star level resorts. The report by KMA is attached to the staff report. IV. ANALYSIS The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements: A. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (SP 207(D)); B. General Plan T-R (Travel/Recreation Commercial) designation; C. C-T-Q Zone (Commercial-Tourist/Qualified Development Overlay) Chapters 21.29 and 21.06 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; D. Hillside Development Regulations (Chapter 21.95 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); E. Site Development Plan findings required by the Qualified Development Overlay Zone (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Section 21.06.020); F. Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); G. Non-residential Planned Development Ordinance (Chapter 21.47 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code); H. Common Parking Facilities (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Section 2I.44.050(a)(5)); I. Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan—Palomar Airport; J. Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Plan; and K. Growth Management Regulations (Zone 13 Local Facilities Management Plan. The recommendation for approval for this project was developed by analyzing the project's consistency with the applicable regulations and policies. The project's compliance with each of the above regulations is discussed in detail in the sections below. A. Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan The subject site is Planning Area 5 of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The proposed project meets the development standards and design guidelines, as contained in the Specific Plan. The following table demonstrates compliance with the Specific Plan: Table 3: COMPLIANCE WITH CARLSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED Permitted Uses Hotels; Timeshares (maybe 350 hotel units, 350 timeshare units, permitted by City Council); accessory uses (conference facility. Accessory Uses restaurants, sports center, recreational amenities) . 46 SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/DF03-02/CDP 03-04/PtJD-03-011CUP 03-01-/HIP 03.. 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING RA5 —RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 Table 3 COMPLIANCE WITH CA1LSBAD RANCH SPECIFIC PLAN CONTINUED STANDARD REQUIRED - PROPOSED Building Height 35 ft max./3 stories 15 ft. nix./3 stories Allowed architecture 55 ft. max. projections 55 ft. max. - Building Coverage 50% of the lot area - - 1-5.6% Parking Standard 1,424 spaces for all the 1,293 spaces with a proposed 9% proposed used parking reduction (214 spaces) per - CUP section allowing for joint use of parking facilities (CUP section of this report has further details) Signage Sign program required to be Sign Program pioposed is in approved with the SDP conformance with Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Service/Loading Areas Architecturally detailed & Located in the parking structure or screened screened-with landscaping Trash Enclosures 6 ft. high masonrywall with 6 ft high masonry wall with gates. gates. Color and/or materials Color & finish similar to the project - - similar to the project Building Setbacks and Front Yard on Cannon Road 50 ft. & greater Landscape Setbacks —SOIL Front Yard on Hidden Valley 20 ft. & greater Road-20 ft. Rear, Side Yard from PA-8 50 ft. & greater and LEGOLAND Carlsbad - 50 ft. 20 ft. & greater Rear or Side Yard from Open Space —20ft. - - The Specific Plan also contains specific design guidelines which are applicable only to Planning Area 5. The guidelines address building orientation, architectural character, building materials, roofs and access. The project design complies with the design guidelines of the Specific Plan. Table 4: COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN GUIDELINES Design Guidelines Compliance Orientation: provide views of Carlsbad Ranch and Yes the ocean beyond from a maximum number of suites Architectural Character: Mediterranean style with Yes courtyard, arcades, balconies, terraces, arches . SP 207(E)LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04JPUD 03-01/CUP 03-0IIBDP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5— RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 Table 4: COMPLIANCE WITH DESIGN GUIDELINES CONTINUED Design Guidelines Compliance Building Form and Massing: provide changes in Yes planes to reduce appearance of bulk. Include balconies, window and entry recesses to provide visual interest and detail. Buildings Materials: use earth tones for exterior Yes wall and roof colors, stucco walls and sloping tile roofs Roof Tops: Varying roof heights, mechanical Yes equipment shall be screened, enclosed and architecturally incorporated into visually interesting building tops. Proposed Specific Plan Amendment: The applicant is requesting an amendment to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. When the Specific Plan was approved, it was anticipated that PA 5 would develop concurrently with a private golf course on PA 8. It was assumed, for purposes of the Specific Plan description., that the golf course would be developed concurrently with the hotel project on PA 5 and by the same developer. The golf course was intended to be 18 holes in size and golf holes were to be located within PA 8 and a portion of the SDG&E property located north of Cannon Road. At the time, a lease arrangement was being negotiated by SDG&E and the original owner to provide for the golf course holes on the SDG&E property. Since that time, the prospective developer of PA 5 (Pointe Resorts) abandoned its plans for development of PA 5 and the lease arrangement with SDG&E. Today, PA 5 and PA 8 are under separate ownership and the SDG&E land is not available for golf course use. Because of the change of circumstances, it is necessary for the applicant to amend the Specific Plan to develop PA 5 as a stand-alone project without concurrently developing PA 8 as a golf course. The applicant is proposing that three sections of the Specific Plan be amended. The wording changes are relatively minor in nature and are intended to remove obligations from the developer of PA 5 to build a private golf course on PA 8. The exact changes are shown on "Proposed Specific Plan Amendments" attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 5693. It should be noted that it is still possible that a golf course could be located on PA 8 in the future. Because of the significance of the remaining undeveloped land in this general area, the City Council has directed staff to review the planned land uses for those properties located along the Cannon Road corridor. This review has recently been initiated and staff will be reporting its findings to the City Council over the current fiscal year. Any land use changes proposed for PA 8 will require a future amendment to the Specific Plan. Staff is recommending approval of the requested amendment to the Specific Plan to allow the proposed hotel/timeshare resort be developed independent of a golf course on PA S. Staff believes that the resort proposed on PA 5 ill ultimately be consistent with future land uses on PA S. SP 207W/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-021SDP 03-02/DP 03-04./PIJD 03-01/CUP 03-OIJHDP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5—RESORT SITE - September 1, 2004 Page 10 B. General Plan The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan. The existing General Plan Land Use designation for the site was adopted concurrently with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan to achieve consistency. The property has a General Plan designation of Travel-Recreation, TR which allows the development of commercial uses that provide for-Visitor attractions and commercial uses which serve the travel and recreational needs of tourists and residents. The proposed project complies with all of the elements of the General Plan as outlined in Table 1 below: Table 5: GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE USE, - ELEMENT CLASSIFICATION, PROPOSED USES•& COMPLY GOAL OBJECTIVE IMPROVEMENTS OR PRO GRAM Land Use Site is designated for 350 hotel units, 350 timeshare villas, 2 Yes Travel/Recreation restaurants, conference and Commercial recreational facilities. Housing I N/A N/A N/A Public Safety Provide project review Project improvements will not Yes that allows significantly impact or be impacteciby consideration of seismic geologic or seismic conditions. and geologic hazards. Noise Interior noise standards The project is conditioned to comply - Yes of 45 dBA CNIEL. with the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard. Open Space Minimize environmental The project is conditioned to mitigate Yes & impacts to sensitive impacts to 1.98 acres of non-native Conservation resources within the grassland. city. Preserve areas of unique Mitigation measures are incorporated Yes scenic, historic, to set aside 5,000 square feet of archaeological and culturally significant area into an cultural value. Open Space easement and to conduct Data recovery on the rest of the archeologically significant site. Utilize Best The project will conform to all Management Practices NPDES requirements. for control of storm water and to protect water quality. SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 0 3 )-O-",'SDP03-02/CDP 03-04P1.JD 0' :I-0l,'CUP 03-01/ImP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5—RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 Tnhle CVNFRAI PLAN COMPLIANCE USE, ELEMENT CLASSIFICATION, PROPOSED USES & COMPLY GOAL OBJECTIVE IMPROVEMENTS OR PROGRAM Circulation Requires new All circulation improvements Yes development to including an internal private street construct improvements providing access to all the uses will be needed to serve j constructed concurrent with the proposed development. I_project phases. C. Zoning The proposed project is subject to the C-T-Q Zone regulations. The zoning designation permits the use subject to approval of a site development plan. Similar to the General Plan Land Use designation, the Zoning designation for the site was adopted concurrently with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan to achieve consistency. The Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan specifies that development of each site requires approval of a site development plan and the zoning reflects this criteria. D. Hillside Development Regulations (Chapter 21.95 of the CMC) A Hillside Development Permit is required for the project since the subject site contains slopes of 15 percent or greater and has an elevation differential greater than 15 feet. The constraints map associated with this project properly identifies existing and proposed hillside conditions and slope percentages. The geotechnical study prepared for this project revealed that the project site is located in an area of stable soil conditions and the risk of seismic- related ground failure or liquefaction is very minimal. In addition, the project is consistent with the previously certified Final Program Environmental Impact Report for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (fIR 94-01). Pursuant to CMC Section 21.195.120, proposed grading quantifies are within "acceptable" levels, less than 8,000 cubic yards per acre. E. Site Development Plan - Q-Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.06 of the CMC) The Qualified Development Overlay Zone (Q-Overlay) which is part of the zoning designation for the property requires that a site development plan be approved for the proposed use prior to the issuance of any building permit. Four findings are required by the Q-Overlay Zone. The required findings with justification for each are contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5687. This section summarizes the necessary findings and supports each. The requested use is properly related to the site, surrounding and environmental settings as the project design complies with the requirements of the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan as demonstrated in Section "A" of this report. -Varying building setbacks, in addition to required landscape setbacks, have been incorporated into the project design. A pedestrian connection from the site to LEC3OLAND has been provided to encourage pedestrian usage. The site is also adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use as 2 applicable code requirements have 0 46 SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(1))/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP -03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01P 03- 01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5— RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 been met. The building coverage is proposed to bç 15.6% with 36% of the total site area landscaped. All features necessary to adjust the use to existing and permitted fixture uses will be provided. Varying building setbacks have been provided to reduce the amount of building mass along the perimeter setback areas. Adequate vehicle circulation has been provided with internal private streets. The Troiect i proposed to be developed in phases and staff 'has conditioned: the future phase building areas to be landscaped concurrently with the developnient. Furthermore, staff has conditioned all building areas to be landscaped as required by the City Landscape Guidelines since the site has been identified as being highly visible to the public and therefore warranting immediate treatment (Landscape Manual Section E.3-1.2-2.1c). - The project will generate 7,167 ADT which corresponds to The niaxhnuni AOT projected in the previously certified Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Program BIR for this site. The required circulation improvements identified for the Carlsbad -Ranch are still adequate to accommodate the vehicle trips generated by This project. F. Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20 of the CMC) The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed tentative map and has concluded that the subdivision, as conditioned complies with all the applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant is requesting approval of a 164ot subdivision on this 56 acre site in addition to the creation of 354 condominiums to provide for individual ownership of 350 timeshare units. The use proposed for each of the 16 lots is as follows: - Table 6: PROPOSED LOTS Lots Acreage Airspace C'ondo,niniuin Units 1 12.30 acres 4 Units: Hotel 1, 2 and 3, Conference Facilities 2 0.77 acres 30 3 1.14 acres 28 4 2.50 acres 40 5 2.40 acres Restaurant 6 5.46 acres 96 7 2.84 acres Recreational Amenities 8 1.85 acres - 52 - 9 3.63 acres 40 10 257 acres 52 11 0.47 acres 12 A 6.40 acres Main Driveway/Parking lB 2.94 acres Parking C 3.77 acres Parking D 6.26 acres Parking E 1.12 acres Parking - Total Airspace Condominium Units 354 S SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-0S(D)'CT 03-02/SDP 03-02íCDP 03-04PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01}WP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5— RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 The map will be recorded in one phase. However. construction is planned to occur in a maximum of 10 phases. The project as conditioned will provide all necessary improvements and all required Title 20 findings can be made. The other infrastructure improvements (sewer, water, drainage, etc.) are currently in place to serve the project and no off-site improvements are required. The project is served by Cannon Road and Hidden Valley Road and has direct access to public streets. The streets adjacent to the project site are adequate to serve the 7,167 average daily trips (ADT) generated by this project. The proposed building setbacks and structure separation vill allow for adequate air circulation and the opportunity for passive heating and cooling. G. Non-Residential Planned Development Ordinance (Chapter 21.47 of the Zoning Ordinance The intent of the non-residential planned development regulations are to: 1. Ensure projects develop in accordance with the General Plan and applicable specific plans; 2. Provide for non-residential projects which are compatible with surrounding development; and 3. Provide a method to approve separate ownership of planned development lots. The proposal to create individual ownership lots which do not have direct access from a publicly dedicated street necessitates that a Non-Residential Planned Development Permit be processed to supplement the proposed tentative map (CT 03-02). The applicant is proposing to create 16 separate lots and 354 airspace condominiums. The project will have shared driveways, access, landscaping and parking. The project complies with the General Plan and Zoning standards as addressed in the discussion above. The hotel/timeshare resort, by nature of the use, will not be detrimental to the health, safety or welfare of the surrounding occupants of the area and the proposed use is similar to the adjacent uses. No modifications to the development standards are required to protect public health, safety, and general welfare. There are no size nor configuration standards for non-residential planned development lots beyond those imposed as a part of the permit, but shall be reasonable as to the intended use and relation to the project. H. Common Parking Facilities (CIVIC Section 21.44.050(a)(5)) The project is proposing a 9% (214 space) reduction in required parking as provided in Section 21.44.050(a)(5) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. This section of the Zoning Ordinance provides that when a common parking facility is to occupy a site of 5.000 square feet or more, then the parking requirements as specified in the code for each of the two or more participating buildings or uses may be reduced not more than 15% upon approval of development plans. The proposed common (shared) parking program allows for the parking needs of the various uses taking into consideration the peak parking demands of the uses conducted on the project site. The following table summarizes the parking requirements for various uses proposed on-site. SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SIP 0302/CDP 0304/PUD 03-01/CUP 0301IEIDP 03 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5—RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 Table 7: PARKING Facilities Unit Quantities Parking Per Unit Required Parking Restaurant #2 3,000 S.F. @ 1 space/100 S.. 30-spaces Meeting Rooms/ Conference facilities 2,000seats @ - 5 seats/space 400 spaces Restaurant #1 7,000 S.F. @ 40 spaces + 1 spa&e/50 S.F. loOipácès - - Hotel 1 125 units @ 1.2 spacesfunit. - - 150 spaces - - Hotel 125 units @ 1.2 spaces/unit - 150 spaces - Hotel 3 - 100 units-@ 1.2 spaces/unit 120 spàces - Timeshare units 172 units @ 1.2 spaces/unit 206 spaces - Timeshare lock-off units 178 units-@ 1.5 spaces/unit 267 spaces - - - Total Required Parking 1,42-3 spaces - Total Parking Provided on-site (with 9% reduction) 1,293 spaces - - A parking analysis, dated May 28, 2004, was prepared for the project by Urban Systems Associates,- Inc. The parking analysis is attached to this staff report. The study concludes That the types of uses planned for the site should not be evaluated as entirely separate uses since shared parking between facilities is expected to occur and this shared parking can be accounted for in planning for the project. The conference facilities will be utilized by out of town guests staying in the hotel as well as by local businesses in need of large meeting space. In addition, the two quality restaurant sites planned for the project will serve timeshare and hotel guests as well as conference attendees and the general public, thereby further reducing the parking demand. The hotel and timeshare areas would primarily be used by hotel and timeshare guests. Outside use of the public area generally occurs during early morning and afternoon hours when the restaurant and hotel guest parking demand is at a minimum. The parking analysis includes a table which shows parking occupancy for each use by hour which accounts for both shared parking and hours of operation. The table shows that the peak parking demand is in the early evening at 6:00 p.m. and is for 1,142 spaces. The greatest demand comes in the early evening when people are returning to the hotel from their daily off- site activities, heading to the restaurants to eat dinner, and conferences are wrapping up for the day. Therefore, the proposed 1,293 spaces for the project should be more than adequate to meet the peak parking demand of 1,142 spaces, considering shared parking and the hours of operation for the proposed uses. I. Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport (CLUP) The project site is located within the Airport Influence Area for the McClellan-Palomar Airport and within the 60 CNEL noise contour. As stated in the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport (CLIfF), hotels are conditionally compatible uses in 60-65 CNEL noise contours. The interior noise level must be attenuated to 45 decibels CNEL, however the outdoor noise level is acceptable for associated outdoor activities, pursuant to the CLUE'. The project is conditioned to comply with this requirement. SP 207(E)'LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02:CDP 03-04'PLID 03-01CUP 03-01i}DP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5— RESORT SITE September 1. 2004 An Acoustical Analysis report was prepared for the proposed project by Acoustech Consultants in December 2002. The report indicates that the principal noise source impacting the southern portion of the site is McClellan-Palomar Airport, with additional noise contribution from Palomar Airport Road. The project site will be subject to exterior noise levels of up to 66 dB CNEL in the southern portion of the project site. Future noise levels predicted for the northern portion of the site are 66.7 CNEL due to traffic volumes on Cannon Road. An avigation easement for noise is required to be recorded with the County Recorder as a condition of approval of the project. This requirement is listed in the CLUP as well as the previously certified Program ER for the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. The project is deemed compatible with the Airport Land Use Plan with imposition of these two conditions. The project has been reviewed and deemed conditionally consistent with the CLUP by the Airport Land Use Commission at theft hearing on July 8, 2004. J. Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Plan The project is located in the Mello II Local Coastal Program Segment. The proposed project is for the development of a hotel/timeshare resort. The project complies with the applicable Local Coastal Program provisions. The LCP Land Use Plan designates the subject site for T-R (Tourist/Recreation Commercial), which allows for hotels, timeshares and other accessory uses. The project is consistent with the surrounding development of hotel, LEGOLAND theme park and future golf course. The proposed project will not obstruct view's of the coastline as seen from public lands or the public right-of-way, nor otherwise damage the visual beauty of the coastal zone. The conversion of agricultural uses which currently exist on the site, to the proposed development was addressed in the previously certified Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program ER. The Specific Plan requested an early cancellation of Williamson Act contracts, which was approved as part of the Specific Plan. The proposed project is not located on an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard. No public opportunities for coastal shoreline access are available from the subject site since it is not located between the first public road and the ocean, and no public access requirements are conditioned for the project. The site is not suited for water-oriented recreation activities. Coastal Resources Protection Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.203 of the CMC) The subject site is located in the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone, however, due to its location and the absence of native vegetation, additional submittals, standards or requirements do not apply. Construction of the project will adhere to the City's Master Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SIJSMP) and Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program (YURMP) to avoid increased urban run off, pollutants and soil erosion. Construction of the project will adhere to the City's Master Drainage and Storm Water Quality Management Plan and Grading Ordinance to avoid increased runoff and soil erosion. The proposed amendment to the Local Coastal Program is required because of the changes proposed to the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan to allow the development of PA 5, independent of development of PA 8 with a golf course. SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 0304/PUD-03-01-/CUP 03-0l/HDP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5—RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 K. Growth Management The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 13 in the Northwest quadrant of the City. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance with the adopted performance standards, are summarized in the following table: Table 8— Growth-Mananthent Ordinance Compliance STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE City Administration N/A Yes - Library - N/A Yes Waste Water Treatment NIA Yes - -- Parks - N/A Y€ -- Drainage - - - Yes Circulation - - 7,167 ADT - Yes Fire - Station No.4 Yes Open Space N/A Yes Schools - - N/A Yes Sewer Collection System - 637 EDU Yes Water 140,140 GPD 1 Yes V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, staff has conducted an environmental impact assessment to determine if the project could have any potentially significant impact on the environment. Environmental impacts associated with implementation of the Planning Area 5 resort project have been previously evaluated in the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan Final Program EIR 94-01, certified in 1995 by the City of Carlsbad. This EIR included various mitigation measures designed to reduce potential adverse impacts associated with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan and related development including the development of Planning Area 5 as a resort. All mitigation measures have been incorporated into the overall project design or will be included as conditions of approval of the project. The initial study, Environmental Impact Assessment Form - Part H. conducted for the proposed project focused on the changes from the approved Specific Plan and PA-5 as it was contemplated in HR 94-01. The subject site is not identified by any habitat conservation plan as containing a protected, rare or endangered plant or animal community. A Biological Survey and Report was prepared for the proposed project by Merkel & Associates, Inc. in January 2003. The report was based upon surveys of the site conducted in September and October 2002. The report identifies four plant communities on the 56.52 acre site. Impacts to 41.23 acres of agriculture and 8.13 acres of disturbed habitat will not be considered significant. The project will have no direct impacts on 0.16 acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub, located along the northeastern property boundary. . . SP 207(E)1CPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02'SDP 03-02/CDP 03-04'PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03- 01 - CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5— RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 Impacts to 1.98 acres of Non-native grassland will require mitigation at a 0.5:1 ratio or by paying a mitigation in-lieu fee to the City. The previously certified FIR 94-01 identified site CA-SDI-8797, which is located partially on the project site, as significant/important Archeologically under City of Carlsbad and CEQA criteria. Per the Program FIR 94-01, a part of this site was to be placed in open space and capped. However the site design is such that about 5,000 square feet of this area will have to be mitigated through data recovery. A data recovery plan for the site was prepared by Gallegos & Associates in April 2003. The data recovery plan states that mitigation of impacts can be achieved through avoidance, capping or through completion of a data recovery program. A portion of the site will be set-aside as an open space reflection/view area. This area will contain only native plants, will be assisted in design by Native American representatives and will be posted with a plaque discussing Native American history. Waterlines and other utilities will be placed outside of the open space easement or within the fill soil to avoid impacts to cultural resources. The remaining portion of the site cannot be avoided and thus mitigation of impacts will be achieved through the completion of a data recovery program. The project is located within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Influence Area. The influence area encompasses those areas adjacent to the airport which could be impaired by noise levels exceeding the California State Noise Standards. The proposed project lies within the 60-65 CNEL contours of the airport. An Acoustical Analysis report was prepared for the proposed project by Acoustech Consultants in December 2002. The report indicates that the principal noise source impacting the southern portion of the site is McClellan-Palomar Airport, with additional noise contribution from Palomar Airport Road. An impact to the northern portion of the site is traffic noise due to Cannon Road. The project site will be subject to exterior noise levels of up to 66 dB CNEL in the southern portion of the project site. Future noise levels as high as 66.7 dB CNEL are predicted for the northern portion of the site. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport developed by SANDAG dated April 1994 states that CNEL levels of 60-70 are conditionally compatible for Hotels, therefore, it has been determined that noise is a less than significant impact. The necessary mitigation measures have been agreed to by the developer and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared. Consequently, a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was published in the newspaper and sent to the State Clearinghouse for public agency review. During the 30-day public review and comment period letters were received from California Department of Transportation, Native American Heritage Commission and a joint letter from the Wildlife Agencies. The letters and staffs responses are attached to this report. An Addendum to the FIA and revised mitigation measures are also attached to the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration which are in response to the letter from the wildlife agencies. 0 SP 207(E)/LCPA90-08(D)JCT 03-02/SDP 0302/CDP 03-04/PU]) 03-01/CUP 03-01IHDP 03- 01- CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5—RESORT SITE September 1, 2004 Pafle 18 - ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5685 (MN])) 2. Planning-Commission Resolution No. 5693 (SP) 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5692 CPA) 4. Planning-Commission Resolution N 9 . 5686 (CT) 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5687 (SD?) 6. - Planning Commission Resolution No. 5688 (CD?) 7. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5689 (PU])) 8. - Planning Commission Rósolution No 5690-(CUP) 9. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5691 (HDP) 10. Location Map 11. - Background Data Sheet - - 12. Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form 13. Disclosure Statement - 14. Parking Study dated May 6, 2004 15. Review Of Economic Feasibility Studies, dated March 18, 2004 16. Letters received from different-agencies and staffs responses 17. Reduced Exhibits (previously distributed 18. - Exhibits "A 1" - "A 44" dated September 1, 2004 19. Exhibits "C 1"— "C 33" dated September 1, 2004 20. Exhibits "L 1"— "L 23" dated September 1, 2004 21. Exhibits "H 1" - "H 9" dated September 1, 2004 Exhibit Key: A = Architecture, C = Engineering, L = Landscape, H = Hillside Development Permit . CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5- RESORT SITE SP 207(E)/LCPA 90-08(D)/CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/ CDP 03-04/PUD 03-01/CUP 03-01/HDP 03-01 and sports center. - - LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Being all of Lot 17 of City of Carlsbad Tract 94-09 Carlsbad BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: SP 207(E)/LA 90-08a 03-02/SDP 03-02IcDP 03-04/PUD 03-01-/CUR 03-01/IThP CASE NAME: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5-Resort Site APPLICANT: Timothy Stripe; GrandPacific kesorts : - REQUEST AND LOCATION: Permit to allow for the development of a full service destination hotel/timeshare resort. The APN: 211-100-14 Acres: 56.52 Proposed No. ofLotsfUnits: GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation: T-R - Travel/Recreation-Commercial Density Allowed: n/a Density Proposed: n/a Existing Zone: C-T-O (Commercial-Tourist) Proposed Zone: n/a Surrounding Zoning andLand Use: Li Zoning Site C-T-Q North 0-5, P-U South C-T-Q East 0-S West 0-S General Plan T-R 0-S T-R 0-S 0-s Current Land Use Agriculture - Agriculture LEGOLAND theme park Open space, water tank, future Municipal Golf Course Vacant . . PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: Carlsbad Unified Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent elling Units (Sewer Capacity): Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated: N/A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT 0 Negative Declaration, issued__________________________________________________ fl Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated____________________________________ Other. Miti2ated Negative Declaration U CITY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: SP 207(E)ILCPA 90-08W! CT 03-02/SDP 03-02/CDP 03-041PUD 03- 01/CUR 03-01/HDP 03-0Th— CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREA 5-RESORT SITE LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: 13 GENERAL PLAN: TR (Travel/Recreation) ZONING: CT-0 (CornmereiahTourist/ Oualified Overlay Zone) - - DEVELOPER'S NAME: Timothy Stiiye, Grand Pacific Resorts ADDRESS: 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200, Carlsbad, CA 92008 - PHONE NO.; 760-431-8500 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 211-100-14 QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FL, DU): 56 AC/350 Hotel Rooms. I ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: Unknown - I t A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = N/A B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = N/A C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) NIA - - D. Park: Demand in Acreage = $.40/sp.ft. B. Drainage: Demand in CFS = Identify Drainage Basin = (Identify master plan facilities on site plan) F Circulation: Demand in ADT = (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = H. Open Space: Acreage Provided = I. Schools: I. Sewer: Demands in EDU (Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan) K. Water: Demand in GPD = 7.167 4 N/A N/A 637 140.140 L. The project is not proposing any dwelling units thereby not impacting the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. . DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information MUST he disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and am other count-v, city and county, city , municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit" Agents may sign this document: how ever, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON- APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Timothy Snipe Corp/Part_________________________________ Title President Title_______________________________________ Address 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 200 Address__________________________________ Carlsbad, CA 92008 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e. partnership, tenants in common, non-profit corporation. etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all indi iduals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly- owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person William Haviluk Corp/Part Cãflsbad Estate Holding, Inc. Title President do LEGO California, Inc. Address One IIGOLAND Drive Title______________________________________ Carlsbad. CA 92008 Address One LEGOLAND Drive, Carlsbad CA 9 1.008 1635 Faraday Avenue e Carlsbad. CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760; 602-8559 I 3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (I) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust____________________ Non Profit/Trust______________________ Title Address Address 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s): - NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. I certify that all the above information is true and correct to the best of my 2affireofowner/ Signature of appli William Haviluk Timothy Stripe Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant /3c, Signature of owner/apW?lcant's agent if applicable/date ii// /7{7L7JYC k( Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent (-0lO(Q3 H:ADMINtCOUNTER\D}SCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 C] ATTACHMENT 14 URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCIATES, 12VC - - rae E-MAIL MEMO TO: Timothy Stripe E-Mail Address COMPANY: Grand Pacific Resorts Tstripc@grandpacfficresorts.com FROM: Sam P. Kab II / , TOTAL PAGES (including this page): DATE: May 23, 2004 / TIME: 2:20 pm JOB NUMBER: 004501 SUBJECT: CARLSBAD RANCH PA-5 RESORT SITE The current site plan (May 5, 2004) indicates that 1,293 parking spaces will be provided, accounting for a fifteen percent reduction due to shared parking among the varied uses (see parking tabulation in Attachment 1). A shared parking accumulation using the Urban Land Institutes (UU) parking demand characteristics for the HotelfResort( Restaurant/Meeting Room uses substantiates the fifteen percent shared parking reduction. The UU parking accumulation (see Attachments 2 and 3) indicates that 1,142 spaces would be needed during the hour of highest total demand for these uses. This parking demand results in 231 spaces less than the required amount of spaces. PARKING REQUIRED 1,423 spaces UU PARKING DEMAND -1,142 spaces 281 spaces less than required Therefore, the fifteen percent shared parking reduction of 214 spaces is considered appropriate. Cc: Bill l-Iofman ..................... ............. bhofmanhofmanplanning.com Q345O1 C \OFPICE_203532-1-5S0--sç Itr.3k 4540 K; ; "u1 R,;/,, SLur 106 • S ; Diruo C4 y2123-15 73 • 5Th 5u-4917 • Fi 5ñ9-34 S I ATTACHMENT 1 Parking Tabulation flljtM3 SUMMARY - 415 SHARED PARKING) -- REQUIRED PARKING: VILLA UNITS (TIMESHARES) FACILITIES uNrr QUANTITIES PARKING PER UNIT REQUIRED PARKING CONEI4flOI4AL UNITS 172 UNITS-0 12 SPACES jUNff 208 SPACES LOCK-OFF UNITS 178 UNITS ® 15 SPACES IUNIF 237 SPACES - - SUBTOTAL- 473 SPACES PARKING REQUIRED (15% SHARED PARKING): 402 SPACES HOTEL UNITS FACUJ11CS UNIT OIW4IT11ES PNØNG PER UNIT REQUIRED PARKING $Olt]. 1 125 UNITS @ tZ SPACES /UNXT 150-SPACES HOTEL 1 125 UNITS @ 12 SPACES ,UNIT 150 SPACES HOTEL 3 100 UNITS @ 12 SPACES /UNIT 120 SPACES suar)m& 420 SPACES PARKING REQUIRED (15% SHARED PARKING); 367 SPACES RESORT AND CONFERENCE FACILITIES FACILITIES UNIT QUANTITIES PARKING PER UNIT REQUIRED PARKING RESTAURANT *2 3,0(0 S.F. @ I SPACE /100 32. 30 SPACES MEETING ROOMS 2,001 SEATS @ 5 SEATS /SPACE 400 SPACES SIJGTOtAI. 430 SPACES PARKING REQUIRED 05% SHARED PARKING): 368 SPACES BUILDING PADS - FACILITIES UNIT QUANTITIES PARKING PER UNIT REQUIRED PARKING I1ESTMIRPNT It 7.000 S.E@ 40 SPACES + I SPACE 150 SE 100 SPACES SUSTOT.AL 100 SPACES PARKING REQUIRED 05% SHARED PARKING): 55 SPACES TOTAL PARKING AVA1LALE ON SITE (REFER TO SUMMARY RELOWI; 1,293 SPACES TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED ON SITE [MTII 16% SHARED PARKING): 1,210 SPACES SURPLUS PARKING; 03 SPACES t. PROVIDED SHOWN ON SITE PLAN: PARKING SPACE DESCRIPTION STfl4OA$30 PARKING (8'-frC0-01 PARKING ON-GRADE: PARKING IN PARKING SThUCUJRE COMPACT PPflQNG PARKING CN-GRADE: PARKING IN PARKING STRUCRJRE ACCESSIBLE PARKING (PS 2001 COC): PARKING ON-GRADE' PARKING IN PARKING SlflUCflJRt OF TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED PARKING 05.0% OF TOTAL PARKING 1,093 SPACES tO% OF TOTAL PARKING 61 SPACES 7.0% OF TOTAL PARKING 94 SPACES 011% OF TWN.. PARKING 0 SPACES 2.0% OF TOTAL PAI93 25 SPACES 0.0% OF TOTAl. PARKING 0 SPACES TOTAL PARKING ON GRADE 1,212 SPACES TOTAL PARKING IN PARKING SThIJC1URE. 81 SPACES TOTAL PARKING PROVIDED ON STE 1.293 SPACES KlTAbayashi Studio JPIv[ • AuIiIt,tOhtc DESIONMANAOCUENT SAY - LWSJMLM - lstIt,iIrZ • ?AwIIImrJi, - crsphW ARCHITECTURAL SHEEr A-i OF 44 ATTACHMENT 2 Shared Parking Accumulation WEEKDAY GUEST ROOM RESTAURANT CONFERENCE ROOMS OCCUPANCY ACCUMULATION TIME . 893 Spaces 130 Spaces 400 Spaces 1,423 Spaces Required 7 A .85 759 .05 7 .50 200 966 SAM .65 580 .10 13 1.00 400 993 9 A .55 491 .20 26 1.00 400 917 10 AM .45 402 .30 39 1.00 400 841 11 AM .35 131 .50 65 1.00 400 778 12 Noon .30 268 1.00' 130 1.00 400 798 1 PM .30 268 .70 91 1.00 400 759 2 PM .35 313 .60 78 1.00 400 791 3 PM .35 313 .60 78 1.00 400 791 4 PM .45 402 .50 65 1.00 400 867 5 PM .60 536 .70 91 1.00 400 1,027 6PM .70 625 .90 117 1.00 400 1,142 7 PM .75 670 1.00 130 0.50 200 1,000 8 PM .90 1 804 1.00 130 1 0.25 100 1,044 © Source ULI - Shared Parking. ® Increased to 1000/a to account for Maximum Use. © Decreased to Actual Expected Use, Per Grand Pacific Resorts. c\:mcE_2o-5c'1-1.525Orr.T..4c),crsk ATTACHMENT 3 ULI Parking Accumulation EXHIBIT 28 - REPRESENTATIVE HOURLY ACCUMULATION BY PERCENTAGE OF PEAK HOUR '-I RtsU..tljl 2.55k.. I oea ___________ I 2ntwi I - 1-tO)) fist fbI 0.stu 2-rn 2niss.sntItnsgt 'mu.7 San's.7 wndzy i.4a0 DAly Ws,%Aay Ssi..S,j Otly nkd.y S4.5147 VUIISy SUSt54 Cn$.rual C.n. 2na knArn. -Li tsi - - &00 am, 396 - - - - - - 100% 300% 300% 200% 90% 20% 20% - - 7:00tm. 20 20% 8% 3% 2% 2% - 87 95 95 85 70 20 20 - - 9.00 am 63 60 18 10 5 3 - 79 88 90 65 60 20 20 50% 50% 9:03a.m. 93 80 42 30 10 6 - 73 88 87 55 30 20 20 300 100 10.00 am 100 80 63 -43 20 8 - 63 14 83 43 40 20 20 300 100 11:00 am. 100 100 87 73 30 10 - 59 71 85 35 35 30 30 100 100 thcoloon 90 100 97 35 30 30 30% 60 11 85 3D 30 50 30 100 100 1.00p.m. 90 80 100 95 70 * 70 39 10 85 30 30 70 45 100 300 2:0Qp.m. 97 60 97 300 60 45 70 60 73 85 35 35 60 45 :00 100 30D pm. 93 40 95 100 60 45 70 61 73 85 35 40 35 45 100 100 4.-OD p= 71 40 87 90 30 45 70 66 75 81 45 30 30 45 100 100 5-00 P.M. 47 20 79 75 70 60 70 77 81 90 60 60 70 60 103 103 600p.m. 23 20 82 65 90 90 80 85 85 92 70 70 90 90 103 300 7.0* P.M. 7 20 89 60 100 95 90 94 87 94. 75 83 100 95 103 300 803 p.m. 1 20 87 55 100 100 100 96 92 96 90 90 100 100 101 300 9.00 P= 3 - 61 40 100 100 iCC 98 95 93 95 93 100 100 103 100 V 1000pm 3 - 32 35 90 93 803 99 96 99 100 800 93 93 30 50 lLOOpm. - 1... 13 13 70 83 80 100 98 100 300 100 70 85 - - 1200UId. - - - - 50 10 70 100 100 100 100 800 50 10 - - niitt - flecomneoded bibliographic listing: tiLt—the Urban Land Institute. Shared Parking. Washington, D.C.: liLt—the Uthaa -- Land Institute. 1983. Accumulation curves are then estimated for each land use, based on the selected hourly values de- s cribedin terms ofthe ercent of maximum-design-day parkingdemand expected atevetyhour duringthe day. The parking demand factor (step 2) multiplied by quantity of land use (step 1) produces an estimate of peak parking demand. This value multiplied by each hourly percentage produces an estimate of parking demand for every land use component by hour of day. #004501 n ATTACHMENT 15 KEYSER TAI ARSTON ASSOCI;TES Ixc lpi, HOTEL CIRCLE No ill ScrrE 7th S '. DIEuO C 'LiOP I; '42V" Pi{o E P b.Q5Ui F\ P14 7lE.5U' E',SEE'IAES1O', C(J'I 4j1%.,V. REiL ESTkTE REDE' ELUr',E'T EVOEDAISLt Hu[l'! Ft. ,j'OM It. Dl' ELUI MEMORANDUM To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director City of Carlsbad From: KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC. Date: March 18, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies Lego Hotel Project 54' DEpti Orrtld \1 Tr,mblc Paul C \Iarra Lt'. 4t.UrLEs Calvin F HcIl,' 11 kathleen H Head Jamts Rabe Paul C Ar.derscn Gragon D Soc'.Hoo SO bP CIS, O A Jern Ke aer Timutha C. Kella Kate Earle Funk Dt.bhie M kern RThen J \\ A. Introduction In accordance with our agreement dated February 5, 2004, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) has conducted a review of lodging market studies prepared by HVS International (HVS) and PKF Consulting (P1(F) for the Lego hotel project. As background, Grand Pacific Resorts (Developer) is proposing to develop a 700-room lodging facility, including both hotel rooms and timeshare units, on a 57-acre vacant parcel, situated adjacent to and northeast of the existing Legoland Family Park. The project components are proposed to be built in phases and will include the following: • A full-service, 350-room hotel component of 3-star quality. The hotel component would be marketed as the exclusive hotel of Legoland. . A timeshare component including 350 units. The objective of this assignment has been to conclude on the market support for a hotel development on the site and to evaluate the proposed quality and mix of lodging products (hotel and timeshare). In support of this objective, KMA has undertaken the following tasks: 1. Reviewed the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan, market studies prepared by HVS and PKF, and related documents. 2. Conducted interviews with other hotel/resort developers, the project proponent, and PKF staff. Cnn&47I'G30 )EIASOFSER ICE 700URCLJE'TS 04363mm 11060 004 001 To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies— Lego Hotel Project Page 2 3. Commented on the methodology and approach used by HVS and PKF, summarized their major conclusions regarding-distribution-of-demand for lodging units and timeshare units, and concluded on the validity of the conclusions. 4. Evaluated the potential for the project to support either additional rooms and/or a higher- quality-product if located elsewhere-in the-City. This memorandum report has been organized as follows: Section B presents our principal conclusions. • Section C summarizes the key findings of HVS and PKF regarding occupancy, average rate, and marketsegmentation. Section D concludes on the validity of the HVS/PKF studies. V • Section E comments on the site's potential-to support a greater quantity of superior-class hotel rooms, the necessity to include a timeshare component, and the availability of alternative sites in the City for upper-end hotel development. . Section F details assumptions and limiting conditions governing this assignment. B. Summary of Findings The following summarizes KMA'S key findings: • The proposed development program includes 350 hotel rooms and resort-type amenities, including restaurant, multiple swimming pools, game room, spa, and fitness center With respect to projected performance - occupancy, average daily rate, and absorption - - - both HVS and PIKE reached similar conclusions. Absorption occurs over a six-year period with stabilized occupancy projected at 75%. Projections of achievable Average baily Rates (ADR5) are also relatively similar. The ADR projections cited in this report appearto vary widely, due to the fact that the HVS figures represent constant 2001 dollars. • KMA finds that the methods applied by HVS and PKF in preparation of their studies were thorough and consistent with standard industry practices. • The subject site's potential for development as a 4- or 5-star lodging property is adversely impacted by limited view corridors and incompatible adjacent uses. CELEARA ThVG 30 YEARS OF SER VI CE 70 OUR CLIEN7Y 04363mm 11060.004.001 • To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 16, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Lego Hotel Project Page 3 • Several market factors also limit the subjects potential for development at the 4- or 5-star level. These include: limited availability of financing, existing competitive supply of rooms in this class, planned increases in room inventory at La Costa Resort & Spa, and the proposed Encinitas Beach Resort. • It is the KMA view that a 350-room hotel is the appropriate maximum hotel development for the site, considering a six-year absorption schedule. It should be noted that the timeshare component of the project represents an additional source of hotel rooms. On average, 25% of timeshare units are typically placed into use as hotel rooms, thus representing availability of 88 additional hotel rooms on the site at buildout. • The HVS/PKF studies do not address financial feasibility for the proposed hotel component, i.e., comparison of estimated development costs with supportable investment based on projected net operating income. Therefore, KMA cannot conclude that the proponent has demonstrated the necessity to include a timeshare component in the project. However, it is probable that in today's challenging hotel financing climate, the inclusion of a timeshare component may be necessary to finance the hotel and its amenities. • It is unlikely that the City of Carlsbad offers any appropriate sites that could support development of a new large-scale 4- or 5-star lodging property. C. Summary of HVS and PKF Market Studies As part of this assignment, KMA reviewed the documents listed below. The key findings and assumptions found in the documents are summarized in this section. • Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan • Market Study and Forecast of Occupancy and Average Rate, September 1, 2000; HVS International • Market Study and Forecast of Occupancy and Average Rate, May 20, 2002; HVS International • Study of Potential Market Demand and Statements of Estimated Annual Operating Results for the Proposed Carlsbad Resort to be Located in Carlsbad, CA, September 2002; PKF Consulting • Proposed Legoland Hotel, Carlsbad, CA, March 5, 2003; HVS International • Letter dated March 5, 2003 from PKF Consulting • Letter dated September 9, 2003 from Hilton Hotels • Letter dated June 17, 2003 from Starwood Hotels CELEFs1Ti33' & 2FS&RUCETO OCR CUE'.TS 04363mm 11060 004 001 I To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Lego Hotel Project Page 4 With respect to the market studies prepared by HVS and PKF, KMA finds that the methods applied were thorough and consistent with standard industry practices. In general, each document-included discussion andanalysis of the following key topics: • Site characteristics, advantages, and- disadvantages • Regional economic and-demographic trends • Neighborhood characteristics • Supply and demand factors, including group segmentation • Profiles of competitive:lodgirig prOperties • Market penetration analysis • Occupancy and average rate analysis The market studies prepared-to date by-HVS and PKF have focused on the-hotel-component. Though each of the three -market studies acknowledges the incluion of a timeshare component in the proposed project, only-the studies prepared by HVS factored in any degree of timeshare influence on the projected-hotel performance. Still, neither HVS nor PKF assert in their reports that construction of the timeshare component is essential to the market or financial feasibility of the-hotel-component. The following exhibit re-states-recommended project descriptions and conclusions found in the market studies. bdilit 1: Hid tsai1ia5 Funi in CaisUtat Ivbid Saidies Did - Total Hid Qrlity arrn FntIe Rrm Type RC &çl 212 3M Ni 9af Ni Sal FtvS May 2002 350 RIñ 349a 14v'S S42000 350 RJl 349a TOW NMng Rng - Arnerities Spam #dlYer 11.0 1Zf 10112 tttSdsJ 00 15 1t6 IOYIO Saxldcre rSasat 4 lZ500 • .. ji:: The earliest market study, prepared by HVS in September 2000, predated the events of 9/I1. Therefore, it is the KMA view that the study's findings should not be considered further as part of this assignment. The latter two studies were both prepared in 2002 and reflect more recent market conditions, including the influence of 9/11 on the lodging industry. The updated HVS study dated May 2002 and the PKF study dated September 2002 forecasted the following occupancy and average rate performance for the subject hotel: CELEBRATING 30 YE4RS OF SEA VICE TO OUR CUEJ'.7s 04363mm 11060.004001 S To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Lego Hotel Project Page 5 Exhibit 2: Conclusions of l-IVS, May 2002 Study (1) 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Rooms On-Line 73 125 125 198 250 308 350 Total Room Nights Captured 15,958 31,000 32,276 54,074 69,647 83,458 96,033 Available Room Nights 26,625 45,625 45,625 72,125 91,250 112,450 127,750 Occupancy 60% 680'0 71% 75% 76% 74% 75% Average Rate $133.57 $138.11 $141.80 $147.82 $154.07 $160.79 $166.43 Average Daily Rate (ADR) (1) $118.67 $119.43 $118.76 $120.19 $121.63 $123.23 $123.84 Market Segmentation Commercial 44% 42% 43% 42% 43% 44% 43% Meeting and Group 30% 24% 23% 26% 28% 29% 31% Leisure 16% 24% 230% 220/6 21% 21% 21% Timeshare 10% 10% 100 11% 90% 601/0 5% (1) ADRgses in cmstarl2D31 doila,E Exhibit 3: Conclusions of PKF, Septenter 2002 Study 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Rooms On-Line 125 125 125 250 250 250 350 Total Room Nights Captured 27,375 30,569 32,850 63,875 66,613 69,350 95,813 Available Room Nights 45,625 45,625 45,625 91,250 91,250 91,250 127,750 Occupancy 60% 67% 72% 70% 73016 76% 75% Average Daily Rate (ADR) (1) $133.00 $137.00 $141.00 $145.00 $149.00 $154.00 $159.00 (1) ADRfigus in future ddia,a Ii KMA Conclusion Regarding Validity of HVS/PKF Studies As previously stated, each of the studies was prepared in a fashion consistent with standard industry practices, using similar approaches. The interpretation of base market trend data used in market forecasting is always subject to the opinions and experiences of the respective professional analysts preparing the study. Therefore, the ultimate findings of separately prepared studies will invariably differ. However, the conclusions reached by the respective firms studying the subject hotel fall within a relatively narrow and essentially consistent range. The magnitude of variation is not deemed significant by KMA. Furthermore, KMA does not detect any material flaws in the studies. The overall findings of the studies indicate that the hotel, as proposed, will meet or exceed operational benchmarks for like properties and that the phased approach to development will facilitate proper market introduction and stabilization before subsequent phases are constructed CsLEBk,rfG3O)E1RsurSEPlICETOOt CDE\7S D4363nrn 11060 004 Q3 r . To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Lego Hotel Project Page 6 Relative to the questions raised by the City, what is most lacking in the studies is analysis of financial feasibility for the proposed hotel-component, i.e., comparison of estimated development costs with supportable investment -based-on projected net operating income. Such an analysis would culminate in a determination of financial: feasibility. for the hotel component, exclusive-of the timeshare component, and establish a basis for the necessity of a timeshare component-lo subsidize the-cot Of -hotel improvementh. - E. Evaluation of Development-Potential for Alternatives Three key-questions to be addressed in this memorandum are re-stated, as follows: 1. Can the site uppofthotel rooms in excess of the proposed 350 rooms? 2. Is there-a-demonsttated necessity for inclusion of a timeshare component? 3. If located-on a-different site in Carlsbad, could the-alternative site support more hotel rooms of a higher quality than the proposed 3-star hotel? Representatives of both HVS-and PKF addressed these issues in correspondence with the Developer in March 2003. KMkreviewed this correspondence and interviewed the proponent and PKF staff. The key factors cited by these parties are as follows: 1. Site Factors • Proximity to Legoland and Palomar Airport generates noise and traffic impacts that detract from the site's appropriateneás as a potential 4- or 5-star resort site. • View corridors are-limited and include some unappealing views. Not all rooms will offer ocean views and the site's panorama will include power lines, power plant, back-of-house Legoland areas, and commercial buildings. The site's irregular shape and topography, in conjunction with the 3-story height limitation, further limit views. • The site cannot provide visitors a sense of seclusion. • The site does not include a high-end, hotel-operated golf course. Although there maybe a municipal course adjacent to the subject site, the course is not anticipated to offer priority access or tee-times to hotel guests. 2. Market Factors • Obtaining financing for a 4- or 5-star hotel on the subject site would be extremely difficult due to current market conditions and the physical constraints (as listed above). CELEBRATING 30 YEA PS OPSER VICE TO OUR CLIENTS 04363mm 11060.004.001 . To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 16, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Lego Hotel Project Page 7 • The inclusion of the timeshare units is necessary to provide cash flow to support the cost of high-quality, resort-style amenities (e.g., tennis courts, swimming pools, and landscaping). Competition from existing Carlsbad high-end resort properties, Four Seasons Aviara and La Costa Resort & Spa, would be strong. Aviara represents the County's only AAA-rated 5-diamond facility and La Costa is planning a 400-room expansion. These properties each offer a superior range of amenities, including golf, in a true resort atmosphere. Four Seasons Aviara, La Costa, and the planned 126-room Encinitas Beach Resort will absorb the demand for high-end rooms in the Carlsbad trade area for the foreseeable future. KMA conducted corroborative research to test these assertions, including contacting other experienced resort developers, evaluating characteristics of existing Southern California 4- and 5-star resort properties listed by AAA (diamond ratings) and Mobil (star ratings), and reviewing industry financing trends. Listed below are KMA's findings: 1. Site Factors The site characteristics noted by HVS and PKF are indisputable. Based on KMA's familiarity with the site, KMA concurs with the assessment of their impact on the site's potential for development as a 4- or 5-star resort. 2. Market Factors Very few full-service hotels are currently being built. Financing availability is limited because lenders perceive new hotel developments as exceptionally risky in the post-9/11 market. Lenders, therefore, are requiring substantial equity contributions from prospective hotel developers. As a result, developers in today's market are pursuing two options, (1) seek contributions from city governments to achieve financial feasibility, or (b) include condominiums or timeshares in the project as a way of improving the project's revenue stream. Alternatively, purchase of an existing, established hotel has become preferable to either method. The inclusion of timeshare units in resort developments is becoming commonplace. The synergies between timeshare and hotel include sharing of amenities, cost efficiencies, and co-marketing opportunities, mixing of uses (e.g., timeshare units used as hotel rooms). The inclusion of timeshare units provides an extra revenue stream to support construction of more and better on-site amenities than would otherwise be feasible at a hotel-only site. Financing for projects sponsored by qualified timeshare developers is more readily accessible than for stand-alone full-service hotels. CflEJRA77G30 )&itsOFSERLcErcOLP CLIEVTS 34363mm II D60 004 001 To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Lego Hotel Project Page 8 La Costa Resort & Spa has just completed a $55 million renovation of its guest rooms and facilities. Moreover, La Costa is proposing to add 197 commercial condominium units to its property (a mix of 1-, 2-, and 3-bedroom units). Though the condominium-units will be sold as ownership units, owners can voluntarily place the rooms back into -a hotel management pool to be rented as hotel rooms when not in use by the owners. In total, based on the per-unit bedroom-distribution, the 197 condominium units-could-represent an-increase to La Costa's existing-474-room hotel inventory of 393 hotel rooms, for a total room count of 867 rooms. - The planned Encinitas Beach Resort, situated immediately south of the Carlsbad boundary, is anticipated to rank-as a 4-or 5-star quality hotel. The 126-room project is expected to break ground-some time between March and September 2005. The presence in the immediate market area of two existing/established high-end resort hotels, Four Seasons Aviara-and La Costa Resort & Spa, as well as a planned third 4-star property, represents strong competition for a similar facility on the subject site. The expansion of La Costa and construction of the Ehcinitas Beach Resort will likely absorb much of the future growth in market demand auhis price point. Existing 4- and 5-star properties in-Southern California rarely contain as many -as 700 rooms, unless they are located in sought-after metropolitan areas or established resort destinations. These facilities are usually situated in metropolitan downtowns-or on "one-of- a-kind" exclusive sites-featuring beachfront or golf. They can range in size from 50 to 900 rooms, but 375-400 rooms is a typical range. The construction of a municipal golfcourse adjacent to the site would be an-amenity that could be used by guests of the proposed hotel. However, municipal courses tend to be of a-lesser quality than private courses and lack exclusivity and prioritization for hotel guests. Municipal courses typically accommodate a significantly higher number of golf rounds on an annual basis, resulting in crowding and a less attractive course. Legoland, while a premier regional attraction, achieves annual attendance well below other Southern California attractions. Legoland% annual attendance is estimated to approximate 1.4 million visitors. By way of contrast, Disneyland's annual attendance is approximately 17.7 million (12.7 million at Disneyland plus 5.0-million at Disney's California Adventure); Universal Studios, 5.2 million; Sea World, 4.0 million; Knoll's Berry Farm, 3.6 million; San Diego Zoo, 3.2 million; Six Flags Magic Mountain, 3.1 million (sources: Amusement Business, 2002; Legoland). CELEBRAV,VG 30 YEARS op3'e.*'jce TO OUR CLJE%7S 04363mm 11060,004.001 S To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18. 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies - Lego Hotel Project Page 9 • In Southern California, only Disneyland has an integrated 4-star lodging facility, the 751- room Disney Grand California Resort Hotel. Built in 2301, this hotel capitalizes on Disney's worldwide reputation and the very high annual visitation achieved by the adjacent Disneyland and California Adventure theme parks. A hotel of similar scale and quality on the subject site would not have annual visitation comparable to Disney's to support it. Legoland is better suited to moderately-priced family accommodations. Exclusive of consideration of the depth of market demand, the potential to develop a 4- or 5- star resort facility elsewhere in Carlsbad is highly site-dependent. Throughout Southern California there are few sites that can offer the physical and aesthetic amenities necessary for construction of high-end lodging product. A golf course would be a key component of such a project and would require between 40 and 75 acres of land. Large beachfront sites are non- existent. It may be the case that no such opportunities remain in the City. Even sites offering superior ocean views and/or lagoon views, such as in the Ponto DrivelSouth Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area (SCCRA), are not likely to support construction of a 4-star-or-better lodging facility due to their surroundings and location east of Pacific Coast Highway (PCH). By way of contrast, the Encinitas Beach Resort is to be located west of PCH; and by virtue of its location atop the bluff and its unfettered beach access, it will qualify as a 4-star property. If the City is desirous of another 4- or 5-star lodging property in the City, then it may be necessary to re-visit plans to realign Carlsbad Boulevard to, in essence, create a beachfront site that can meet the criteria for a high-end beach resort. F. Assumptions and Limiting Conditions The analysis contained in this document is based, in part, on data from secondary sources such as state and local government, planning agencies, real estate brokers, and other third parties. While KMA believes that these sources are reliable, we cannot guarantee their accuracy. 2. The analysis assumes that neither the local nor national economy will experience a major recession. If an unforeseen change occurs in the economy, the conclusions contained herein may no longer be valid. 3. The findings are based on economic rather than political considerations. Therefore, they should be construed neither as a representation nor opinion that government approvals for development can be secured. CELThk7/\G3() )wsorSz; 'CE TOc P CLZV7 04363mm 11060 004 001 To: Lisa Hildabrand, Finance Director March 18, 2004 Subject: Review of Hotel Feasibility Studies -a Lego Hotel Project Page 10 4. Market feasibility is not equivalent to financial feasibility; other factors apart from the level of demand-for a land use are of crucial importance in determining feasibility, these factors include the-cost of acquiring sites, relocation burdens, traffic impacts, remediation of toxics (if any), and mitigation-measures required -through the approval process. 5. Development opportunities-are ?ssumed to be achievable during the-specified-time frame. A change in development schedule requires that the conclusions contained herein be reviewed for validity. 6. The analysis, opinions, recommendations and conclusions of this-document are KMA's informed judgment bated-on market and economic conditions as of the date-of -this report. Due to the-volatility of-market conditions and-complex dynamics influencing -the economic conditions of the building and development industry, conclusions and recommended actions contained herein-should not be relied upon as sole input -for final business decisions regarding current and future-development and planning. 7. KMA assumes no responsibility for mailers of a legal, environmental, planning, or engineering nature. CELEBk4 I7NG 30 YEARS OF SER rics TO OUR CLJE.\1 04363mm 11060.004.001 Carlsbad IFO July 12, 2004 Ms. Carol Gaubati Program Malyst Native American Heritage Commission 915 Capitol Mall, Room 364 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5—Project Comments dated June 16, 2004 Dear Ms. Gaubatz: Thank you for your comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 in the City of Carlsbad. A previously recoded archeological site is located within the project boundary, on the eastern edge of the project, just north of the existing off-site Water storage tank- The project applicant has taken a number of steps to incorporate mitigation measures into the project design to minimize the impacts to the archaeological resources. The mitigation measures are incorporated in the project design in consultation with Dennis Gallegos of Dennis Gallegos of Gallegos and Associates and Mark Mojado of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. Mr. Gallegos was responsible for the preparation of the original Archaeological Report that was included in the Final Program EW for Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan. Mr. Gallegos and Mr. Mojado agreed to the creation of a 5,000 square foot archaeological preserve site with the completion of a data recovery program. The archaeological preserve will include an information plaque informing visitors about the area and the Native American heritage. Also, a reflecting/viewing area will be provided allowing visitors to view the archaeological site without harming pre- historic resources. The project will be surveyed and any archaeological artifacts found on the property would be collected and cataloged. A letter is attached from Mr. Gallegos detailing his findings. If you have any additional comments or questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4619. Sincerely, A Saima Qureshy, AICP Associate Planner SQ:mh Attachment J. C . 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314- (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us UD iT uu4 vb:45 s-ss sic o57 ATTACHMENT 16 STATS OF CMiFORNIA Andd Sth.nwieno flntj7W NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION — 916 CAPITOl. MALL ROOM 364 SACRAIfl1TO, CA 95814 (916) 6534082 (916) 657-9O - Fax June 16. 2004 Ms. Sairna Qureshy City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Draft KIR; Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5—Resort Site SCH# 2004051107 Dear Me. Qurethy: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced Negative Declaration. The Commission was able to perform a record search of its Sacred Lands File for the project area. The record search failed to indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources in the immediate project area; however, the absence of specific site information in the Sacred Lands File does not guarantee the absence of cultural resources in any project area. Other sources of cultural resources should also be contacted for information regarding known and recorded sites. Section 800.2 of the Federal Section 106 process (36 CER PART 800) requires that agencies consult with Native American tribes in order to provide thorn with "a reasonable opportunity to identify (their) concerns about historic properties, advise on the identification and evaluation of historic properties, including those of traditional religious and cultural importance, articulate (their) views on the undertaking's effects on such properties, and 6articipate in the resolution of adverse effects." Enclosed is a list of Native American individuals/organizations who may have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area. The Commission makes no recommendation or preference of a single individual or group over another. This list should provide a starting place in locating areas of potential adverse impact within the proposed project area. 1 suggest you contact all of those indicated: if they cannot supply Information, they might recommend others with specific knowledge. A minimum of two weeks must be allowed for responses after notification. If you receive notification of change of addresses and phone numbers from any these indivIduals or groups, please notify me. With your assistance we are able to assure that our lists contain current information. Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude the existence of archeological resources. Lead agencies should include provisions for accidentally discovered archeological resources during construction per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Public Resources Code §15064.5 (1); Health and Safety Code §7050.5; and Public Resources Code §5097.93 mandate the process to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated osnetely and should be included in all environmental documents. if you have any questions, please contact meat (916) 653-6251. Sincerely, Carol Gaubat 4 Program Anal cc State Clearinghouse . 501 Palmer WaN Suite A Carlsbad. Lahfcrn:4 9250S (760) 92Q4355 email gailcgos@ aol czirn [çJALLEGOS & Associates 04-300MM April 27, 2004 Saima Qureshy Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Panty Avenue Carlsbad- California 92008 Re: Cultural Resource Open Space Modification for Carlsbad Specific Plan BUt Dear Ms. Qureshy, As per the Carlsbad Specific Plan ELK, a portion of CA-SDI-8797 was to be developed and a portion placed in open space and capped. Planning for the proposed hotel by Grand Pacific Resorts identified that development of the property was not economically feasible without encroachment into that portion of CA-SDI-8797 proposed for open space. Without this encroachment, the proposed project would lack the necessary view potential for the hotel units or conference facilities, and which could result in the creation of higher man-made slopes and a possible increase in the amount of grading required for the proposed project To resolve this issue, a meeting was held with Tim Stripe (Grand Pacific Resorts), Bill Hofinan (Hoflnan Planning), Don Neu (City of Carlsbad), Mark Mqjado (Native American Representative), and Dennis Gallegos (Gallegos & Associates) to discuss potential alternatives and/or modifications to the open space proposed for a portion of CA-SDI-8797. This meeting resulted in mitigation of development impacts and protection of the primary site area (45,000 sq. ft.) within an open space easement. This area as well as the slope, will contain only native plants, will be assisted in design by the Native American Representative, will provide capping and protection for a portion of CA-SDI-8797, and will be signed with a plaque discussing Native American history. The incorporation of the 45,000-sq-ft portion of CA-SDI-8797 into the development plan will, overall, provide better long-term protection. Development impacts to the remaining site area, previously proposed for capping, will be mitigated through the completion of a data recovery program. As this redesign is not consistent with the Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan (1992), the redesign with mitigation measures of avoidance and capping, as well as data recovery, is consistent with CEQA and City of Carlsbad Guidelines. Please call me should you have questions or comments, or need additional information egards, President Cc: T Snipe. 13 }Iofivaan 06/2-1/2004 16:54 FAX 7604315 US FISH AND WILDLIFE us. US-Fish and Wildlife Service - wv,a Carlsbad Fisk and Wildlife Office . I' - 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, California 92009 - - (760) 431-9440 7 '7 FAX (760) 431-5902 Lrdm California Department of Fish & Game South CoastRegional-Office 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego, California 92123 (858) 467-4201 FAX (858) 467-4299 in Reply Refer to: PWS-SDG40531 Ms. Saima Qureshy City of Carlsbad -JUN 2 1 21)04 Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Re: Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5, City of Carlsbad, California Dear -Ms. Qureshy: The California Department of Fish and-Game (Department) and U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) (collectively, "Wildlife Agencies") have-reviewed the above-referenced Mitigated Negative Declaration (NINE)), dated May 21, 2004, for the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area Sin the City of Carlsbad (City). The comments provided herein are based on the information provided in the NIND, the biological letter report for the project, dated January 10, 2003; our files on the project; and the Wildlife Agencies' knowledge of sensitive and declining vegetation communities in San Diego County, and participation in regional conservation planning:efforts. The primary concern and-mandate-of the Service is-the protection of public-fish and wildlife resources and theirhabitats. The Service has legal responsibility for the welfare of migratory birds, anadromous fish, and-endangered animals and plants occurring in the United States. The Service is also responsible for administering the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). The Department is a Trustee Agency and a Responsible Agency pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA-), Sections 15386 and 15381, respectively. Pursuant to Section 1802 of the Fish and Game Cod; the Department-has jurisdiction over the conservation, protection, and management of fish, wildlife, native -plants and habitat necessary for biologically sustainable populations of those species. As a Trustee Agency, the Department must be consulted by the Lead Agency during the preparation and public review for project-specific CEQA documents if There are potential impacts to biological resources. The Department also administers the Natural Community Conservation Planning program. The City is currently participating in the NCCP program through the preparation of a Multiple Habitat Conservation Program Habitat Management Plan (lIMP). TAKE PR1DEJ lNAMERICAuu( -I. 06 21 2004 16:54 FAX 7604315 As IS FISH AND WILDLIFE IZ 003 W. Saima Qureshy(FWS-S]X3-4053.1) 1 2 The 56.52-acre project! site is located on the west side of Hidden Valley Road beiween Cannon Road and Palomar Ai4iog Road. The site is surrounded by agriculture to the no4h, a vacant property to the west, Sd Legolaxid to the soutit The east side of the site is adiacFnt to a pmposedbathline conservation area (Hnbb Psalt) and a 10-acre existing bazdline}conservation which are both w' ;tbdn the lIMP's Focused Planning Area. Sensitive spec$ detected on- site include northern hither (Circus cyaneus), which was sect foraging over the gricultma fields on site. According to the MND, impacts to 1.98 acre of annual grassland 'till be mitigated at a 0.5:1 ratio. In addition the project proposes to Impact 41.23 acres of agriculpare and 8.13 acres of disturbed habitat. The Wildlife Agencies ; appreciate the opportunity to comment on the MM. We offer the following recommendations and comments i Enclosure Ito assist the City in TmnimiziT)g and mitigating project inip&,-ts to biological resources and assuring that the project i&consistent with ongoing regional habitat conservation. We have the following primary concerns: 1 (1) clarify if 0.16 acre of coastal sage scrub on. site will conserved or impacted; (2) r plant surveys should be conducted',(3) development should be consistent with the adjacency standaxth in the City's lIMP; (4) all vegetation clearing should occur outside the bird breeding season; (5) verify that the thai modification zone has been included in the calculation of the jroj act impact4 and (6) permanent fencing should be placed between the development and biological open space. The Wildlife Agencies are available to work with the City to address these cone us, Please contact Nancy Frost (Department) at (858) 637-5511 or Ben Fiater (Service) at (760)431-9440, if you have any questions or comments concerning this letter. Sincerely, 'P Theresa O'Rmirke Assistant Field Supervisor US Fish and Wildlife Service cc: State Clearinghouse Enclosure r'7 't . •, I II -iii • 06,21,2004 1:55 F1!0431S90 US FISH AND WILDLIFE - f004 Ms. Saima Qureshy (FWS.SDG4053.1) ENCLOSURE WILDLIFEAGENCY COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE CARLSBAD RANCH PLANNING AREAS PROJECT MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 1. The MIW indicates that 0.16 acre of coastal sage scrub (CSS) on-site will be conserved; however, the biology letter report,-dated January 10,2003, states -that the projectwill impact this habitat, which is contiguous with CSS preserved off site, and along the northeastern edge of the project. Please clarify this discrepancy. If impacts to CSS are proposed, the project should-be redesigned to avoid such impacts. Any unavoidable impacts to CSS would need to be authorized by the Wildlife Agencies--under the 4(d) Special Rule of-the Act. If the project -proposes to impact CSS, we recommend protocol- level surveys for coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica cahfornica; gnatcatcher). 2. The annual grassland and-CSS on site have the potential-to be inhabited by rare plant species. The Wildlife Agencies recommend that rare plant surveys be conducted in the spring during a year with adequate rainfall to make detection ofrare ephemeral plants likely if they are present. 3. Because the project site is adjacent to existing and proposedhardline conservation areas, development should be consistent with-the adjacency standards in the City's HMP. 4. The Wildlife Agencies recommend that construction activities be scheduled -to avoid -the bird breeding season (approximately February 15 through August 31, however raptors may begin breeding as early as January). Construction activities dating the breeding season may result in the destruction of nests or disruption of nesting success. Gnatcatchers are known to occupy the CSS in the adjacent preserve and could be indirectly impacted from construction noise. Therefore, if project construction is necessary during the bird breeding season, a qualified biologist must conduct a survey for nesting birds, including ground-nesting birds such as northern harrier, within three days prior to the work in the area, and ensures no nestingbirds on-site, or gnatcatchers in the adjacent preserve, shall be impacted by the project. If an active nest is identified, a-buffer shall be established between the construction activities and the nest so that nesting activities are not interrupted. The buffer shall be a minimum width of 300 feet (500 feet for raptors), shall be delineated by temporary fencing, and shall remain in effect as long as construction is occurring or until the nest is no longer active. No habitatremoval or any other work shall occur within the fenced nest zone, until the young have fledged, are no longer being fed by the parents, have left the nest, and will no longer be impacted by the project. The mapped survey results will be submitted to the Wildlife Agencies for review and approval prior to vegetation removal to ensure full avoidance measures are in place. .3 rL3n SW "lLAiLirt jQQ5 Ms. Saima Qureshy (FWS-SDG-4053.1) 4 5. The Wildlife Agencies consider a fuel modification zone to be part of the project's impacts. Please verify that the fuel modification zone has been included in the calculation of the project impacts to habitats and species. If fuel modification is required in the CSS on site and/or on the adjacent biological open space, the project should be redesigned to avoid such impacts. Any unavoidable impacts to CSS due to fuel modification would need to be authorized by the Wildlife Agencies under the 4(d) Special Rule of the Act. 6. A biological monitor should be present during construction and implementation of mitigation programs to ensure that conservation measures required in the MYD, resource agency permits, and construction documents are performed in compliance with those documents and any concurrent or subsequent mitigation plans. Any unauthorized impacts or acts not in compliance with the required mitigation should be immediately brought to the attention of the City and Wildlife Agencies. 7. The limits of impact should be fenced and erosion/siltation should be controlled/minimized during initial vegetation clearing/grubbing and project construction through the use of silt fencing, siltation basins, gravel bags, or other controls necessary to prevent the spread of soil from the project into the adjacent biological open space. Fencing and erosion control measures should be placed within the impact footprint in a manner that avoids impacts to vegetation in the adjacent biological open space. Fencing and erosion control measures should be installed prior to performing initial vegetation clearing/grubbing and kept in place and in good repair until completion of project construction. 8. We recommend that permanent fencing (with signs delineating the area as biological open space) be installed between the impact area and biological open space (on site and off site, to the east). Fencing should be designed in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies to minimize intrusion into the sensitive habitats from humans and pets. There should be no gates between the development and the open space. 9. The Wildlife Agencies recommend the use of native plants to the greatest extent feasible in the landscape areas adjacent to and/or near mitigationlopen space areas and/or wetland/riparian areas. The applicant should not plant, seed or otherwise introduce invasive exotic plant species to the landscaped areas adjacent and/or near the mitigation/open space area and/or wetland/riparian areas. Exotic plant species not to be used include those species listed on Lists A & B of the California Invasive Plant Council's list of "Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California as of October 1999." This list includes such species as: pepper trees, pampas grass, fountain grass, ice plant, myoporum. black locust, capeweed, tree of heaven, periwinkle, sweet alyssum, English ivy. French broom, Scotch broom, and Spanish broom. A copy of the complete list can be obtained by contacting the California Invasive Plant Council at 1442- A Walnut Street, #462, Berkeley. California 94709, or by accessing their web site at http://www.ca1eepc.org. Od'Z1,Z004 16:55 FAX 76043i US FISH AND WILDLIFE f006 Ms. Saima Qureshy (FWS-SDG-4053.1) 5 10. We recommend that a resident education program be developed in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies. The program should advise residents of the potential impacts to state and federally listed species and the potential penalties-for taking -such species. The program should include, but-not be limited to, information pamphlets andsignage of the fencing between the-development and-the biological conservation easement. Pamphlets should-be distributed to all residences. At a minimum, the program-shoud include the - following topics: occurrence-of listed andsensitivç species in the-area, their general ecology,sensitivi of the species-to human activities, impacts from free-roaming pets (particularly domestic and feral-cats), legal protection-afforded these-Species, penalties for violations of Federal and-State laws, reporting requirements, and-project features designed to reduce the impacts to-these species and promote continued successful occupation of the preserved areas. C C Carlsbad IF nut July 12, 2004 Ben Frater U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services 6010 Hidden Valley Road Carlsbad, CA 92009 RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5— Project Comments dated June 17, 2004 This letter is in response to your comment letter to the City for Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Resort Project. Please see the attached letter from Project Biologist. Merkel & Associates responding to your comments. Also attached is the addendum to the ELk which lists additional mitigation measures that are included in response to your comments. If you have any additional comments or questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4619. Sincerely, CUvAS-\ Saima Qureshy, AICP Associate Planner SQ rub Attachment c: Nancy Frost California Department of Fish & Game South Coast Regional Office 4949 Viewridge Avenue San Diego, CA 92123 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad CA 92008-7314 - (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559• wwv, ci.carlsbad.caus I - Merkel & Associates, Inc. - - 5434 Ruffin Road, San Diego,CA 92123 Tel: 858/560-5465 • Fax: 858/560-7779 -i e-mail: associates@merkelinc.com July 5, 2004 M&A #02-096-03 Mr. Bill HoiThan Holman Planning Associates 5900 Pasteur Court, Suite 150 Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area &— MIND Comments Biological Response and Biological Report Addendum Dear Mr. HofThan: At your request, we have reviewed the biological information we previously prepared on January 10, 2003 for the Carlsbad Ranch Planning AreaS relative to joint comment from the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish & Game (Wildlife Agencies) submitted to Ms. Saima Qureshy in response to the published Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the proposed development and-dated June 21, 2004. This letter is to serve both to address Wildlife Agency comments on the MND and to serve as an addendum to the biological report previously prepared by Merkel & Associates (M&A). The addendum is necessary to address the designed reduction in project impacts thatoccurred after the completion of the January 10, 2003 report. Following the issuance of the January 10, 2003 biological report, several impact minimization recommendations made in the biological report were implemented in project design changes. Most substantially, the project planners and developer revised the project footprint to avoid all direct impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub. In addition, the project proponents worked with the Carlsbad Fire Department to-develop a fuel modification boundary that is completely contained Within the development footprint and does not extend into sage scrub habitat. For purposes- of clarification of the project grading limits and fire protection boundaries, M&A has requested and been provided a current exhibit of the eastern project boundary in areas adjacent to native habitats and the Rubb Park hardline conservation area of the City of Carlsbad's NM? (attachment, provided by Kurt Wilkins, Excel Engineering, July 2, 2004). M&A has reviewed the project modifications and concurs that these changes will adequately ensure thatthe project will not directly result in the loss of Diegan sage scrub habitat. As such, habitat impacts of the project are revised in this addendum to be as follows: T-Tnhitnt Tmnaets of Carlsbad Ranch Plannin2 Area 5 -HabitT3pe Acres bnpacted MNDfHW Mit. Ratio Mitigation Agricultural Fields 41.23 acres Annual Grassland 1.98 acres 0.5:1 0.99 acres Disturbed Habitat 8.13 acres Diegan Sage Scrub 0.00 acres 2:1 0.00 acres S The following responses are offered to address the comments provided by the Wildlife Agencies. Agency comments have been summarized in this response and the reader is directed to the Wildlife Agency comment letter of June 21, 2004 for full comment text: Comment 1: clarjfv the discrepancy between the MAID and Januan' 10. 2003 biological letter report relative to impacts to 0.16 acres ci coastal sagi scrub. Response 1: The MND is correct. No direct impact to Diegan coastal sage scrub would occur as a result of the proposed proiect. Modifications to the plan were made to avoid impacts post January 10. 2003 to address recommendations made in the biological report for impact avoidance. Comment 2; Wildlife Agencies recommend a spring rare plant sun'ev of the annual grasslands and C'SS on-site during a year with adequate rainfall. Response 2: Coastal sage scrub impacts have been eliminated by project design modifications. The grasslands on the site are located in marine loamy coarse sands and not clay soils. This substantially limits the potential for occurrence of rare annual or bulbous perennial plants that would not be detectible e'cept in spring months. In addition, the grasslands on site have been historically under intense agricultural uses as has the remainder of the disturbed lands. This historic use further limits potential for rare plants. Finally, the only ephemeral rare plant that would normally be expected in such habitats is the Del Mar Mesa Sand Aster (Corethrogvnefilaginifolia var. linifolia). This species is not known to range as far north as the site. Because of these conditions, a spring rare plant survey, is not believed to he necessary for the grassland habitat proposed to be impacted by the project. Comment 3: Because the site is adjacent to existing liardlinc preserve areas, development should he consistent with the adjacency standards in the city's PIMP. Response 3: The proposed project should comply with adjacency standards of the Carlsbad I-DiP. Most of these were addressed in previous recommendations of the Januan' 10. 2004 biological report. However, to clarify, those adjacency standards applicable to the proposed project are briefly summarized below along with recommended measures to ensure compliance with these standards. Fire clearing must he shown to be within the development area and shall not extend to preserve lands. The project is designed to achieve this standard. No new swface drainage shall he directed into the preserve. The proiect is designed to drain to the west, away from the preserve area on the eastern project boundary. 3. No invasive specks shall he ited in landscaping adjacent to the preserve areas. The project shall restrict the use of landscape materials on Lists A & B of the California Invasive Plant Council's list of "Exotic Pest Plants of Greatest Ecological Concern in California as of October 1999". In addition, proposed landscape plant material palettes shall be reviewed by the City of Carlsbad and a qualified biologist to ensure that materials to be used do not possess known invasive qualities. 4. Pre petit irrigation runoff into the preserve. - The project shall be designed to prevent runoff of irrigation into the adjacent preserve. This requirement shctll be made apart of final landscape design review and final inspection to be completed by the City of Carlsbad. 5. Pennanentjèncing shall be erected along the preserve boundary to protect the preserve from adverse edgieffects. The project boundary adjacent to the preserve area shall be fenced using a fence designed to minimize accessibility of the open space by both people and domestic animals. Several fences designed for this purpose are presently being marketed. It is recommended that fence selection be cOordinat$ with the Wildlife Agencies given-recent exposure to many various fencing designs to address barrier designs. The City of Carlsbad shall verify fence material selection suitability and installation as an element of final project review and-construction inspection. 6. Lighting within the project shall be directed away from the preserve wherever practical and shall be shielded in a manner that avoids illumination of preserve areas. A proposed street and security lighting plan shall be submitted for review and acceptance by the City of Carlsbad. The lighting plan shall include the use of low-intensity shielded lighting in areas adjacent to or facing the preserve areas. Lighting shall result in a predicted increase in illumination at the preserve boundary by no more than 10% of the ambient levels. Comment 4: Wildlife Agencies recommend that construction activities be scheduled to avoid the bird breeding season (February 15 through August 31). Where breeding season construction cannot be avoided,, Wildlife Agencies have recommended that a qualified biologist conduct pre-construction surveys for breeding birds not more than three days prior to initiating work and providing a temporarily fenced buffer of at least 300 fret between work areas and any occupied avian nest. Response 4: This recommended measure should he incorporated into the conditions of approval for the prcvjeet. CommentS: 11'ildhfe Agencies requ cst verific anon that i/ic fuel modification zone is included full" it it/i/n the de le!npnlcm tootpflhii and Jr es not 1xrcnd into CSS.. Response 5: The prect plans incorporate the fuel modification zone completel) ithin the project footprint and no impacts to CSS would occur as a result of fuel management activities. Comment 6: Wildlife Agencies hai'c' request that a biological monitor be Present during construction and implementation at mitigation programs to ensure conservation measures in the MND, resource agencY permits. and construction dot irnients are in compliance with niiii,qation measures. Response 6: This recommended measure should be incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project. Comment 7: Wildlife Agencies request the nuplementation of consiruction fencing and silt runoff control measures prior to initiation of construction and maintenance of these measures throughout con vtructiofl. Response 7: This recommended measure should be incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project. Comment 8: Wildl(fe Agenda recommend permanent fencing and signage to he onsrructcd along the preserve hozmdar. Response 8: See response to Comment 3. This recommended measure should be incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project. Comment 9: Wildlife Agencies recommend the use of native plants to the greatest extent feasible within time landscaping near the preserve boundaries and reconnnend avoiding the use of species that are known to be invasive to native habitats.. Response 9: See response to Comment 3. This recommended measure should be incorporated into the conditions of approval for the project. Comment 10: Wildlife Agencie.s ,-ccomnmnend the unpk'mcntauon of a resident education program to he developed in coordination with the Wildlife Agencies. The Pro grain should advise rcsidt ins of the potential impacts to listed specks and potential penalties for take. In addition the program should include the distribution of pwnph!cts and posting of sienaqe along the preserve fence. The program should address livicil noel sensitive species in the area doniesuc aminals, legal protectiont attordccl listed spec its. and pro jct ttatuitc incorporated to ensure conniuted occupation of the preserved areas. Response 10: The project should include the preparation of informational material and signage that specifically addresses the requirements of development occupants. Materials should be posted along the preserve fence and should also be provided as pamphlets made a part of the disclosure documentation for all new occupants. Material shall be developed and-approved for use by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department incoordination with Wildlife Agencies. I hope this letter clarifies-project changes made post-January 1-0, 2003 and adequately responds to commentsmade in the June 21,2004 Wildlife Agency letter addressing the MND - for the project. Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, - - - - - Keith W. Merkel Principal Consultant - Attachment: Vegetation Exhibit -. preserve boundary map DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT II P 0. BOX 85406, MS 5€' SAN DIEGO. CA 92186-5406 PHONE (619) 688-6954 FAX 619 6884299 TI? (619)688-6670 - Flex tour , St tnergv ifflewn: June 17, 2004 1 1-SD-005 PM 47.03 (KP 75.7) 5CR 2004051107 Ms. Saima Qureshy City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 Dear Ms. Qureshy: The California Department of Transportation (Department) appreciates the opportunity to review the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed Carlsbad Ranch Resort, located east of Interstate 5 (1-5) between the Palomar Airport Road and Cannon Road Interchanges. The project is estimated to generate 7,167 ADT. We have the following comments: TRAFFIC A Transportation Analysis for the Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan - Zone 13 (of which the Carlsbad Ranch Resort is a part of) was prepared for the City of Carlsbad in August 1994. The traffic analyses were conducted for the Year 2000 and "Buildout" conditions (2010). As stated in the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, January 2001, Section II C - A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) requires updating when the amount or character of traffic is significantly different from an earlier study. Generally, a TIS requires updating every two years, and may require updating sooner in rapidly developing areas. Traffic volumes on Interstate 5 in the vicinity of Palomar Airport Rd. and Cannon Rd. have increased from 159,000 in 1995 to 208,000 north of Cannon Rd. and 210,000 south of Palomar Airport Rd. in 2002. The freeway is currently operating at or near capacity during a large segment of the day and is breaking down in the peak travel hours in both directions at several locations within the Carlsbad city limits. Therefore, an updated Traffic Impact Analysis in accordance with the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, dated January 2001 is requested. The Traffic Impact Analysis must use traffic data from the latest Caltrans District 11 Traffic Volumes to analyze the Level of Service at all State owned facilities and mainline freeways. For future traffic data, contact Maurice Eaton, Caltrans Travel Forecasting Branch Chief, to obtain forecasted freeway traffic volumes. tairran L'-aproL et niobilzr- ar"oss Ca2LforrI.a Ms. Saima Qureshy June 17, 2004 Page 2 Caltrans endeavors to maintain a target Level of Service (LOS) at the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" (see Appendix "C-3" of the Caltrans Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, January 2001) on State owned facilities, including intersections. If an existing State owned facility is operating at less than the appropriate target LOS, the existing measures of effectiveness (MOE) should be maintained. If an intersection is currently below LOS C, any increase in delay from project-generated traffic must be analyzed and mitigated. Analysis of the intersections shall be-done using Intersecting Lane Vehicle (ILV) calculations as per the Highway Design Manual (HDM), Section 406, page 400-21. With increasing emphasis on joint involvement with Federal, State, and Public Agencies to have as their goal providing an adequate transportation network in the year 2030, Caltrans supports The concept of "fair share" contributions on the part of the developer. Potential improvements to Interstate 5 include: • Widening the southbound ramps (off ramp and on ramp) at Palomar Airport Rd. • Constructing an auxiliary lane northbound between Palomar Airport Rd. and Cannon Rd. and between Cannon Rd. and Tamarack Ave. OC. • Traffic channelization over the existing bridge structure at Palomar Airport Rd. • Widening of the 1-5 Corridor with High Occupancy Vehicles (HOV) lanes. • Constructing a Direct Access Ramp (DAR) at Cannon Rd. If you should have any questions related to the TIS please contact Julie Carlin at 858-467- 2374. Close coordination with the Department is encouraged. If you have any other project- related questions, please contact Vann Hurst, Development Review Branch, at 619-688- 6976. Sincerely, 1 &V 'MARIO H. ORSO, Chief Development Review Branch C: JCarlin (MS 55) BFigge (MS 50) EGojuangco (MS 55) VHurst (MS 50) Carlsbad Ranch Resort ta(trans unproves mobility across Californu? S July 12, 2004 S City of S 7/21/c q Carlsbad Mario H. Orso, Chief Development Review Branch Department of Transportation District 11 P.O. Box 85406, MS 50 San Diego, CA 92186-5406 RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5— Project Comments dated June 17, 2004 Dear rvlr. Orso: Thank you for your comments on the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 in the City of Carlsbad. Please see the attached report by Urban Systems Associate, Inc. in response to your comments. If you have any additional comments or questions, please contact meat (760) 602-4619. Sincerely, 4cdwsi Sauna Qureshy, AICP Associate Planner SQ:mh Attachment 1635 Faraday Avenue e Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 - www ci carlsbad.ca us URBAN SYSTEMS ASSOCL47ES, INC TO: Ms. Saima Qureshy / COMPANY: City of Carlsbad FROM: Sam P. Kab II DATE., July 2, 2004 TIME: 10:54 am SUBJECT: CARLSBAD RANCH PA-5 RESORT E-Mail Address squre@chcarlsbathca.us TOTAL PAGES: 6+ 8 Attachments JOB NUMBER: 004501 Urban Systems Associates, Inc. has prepared an evaluation of the Interstate 5(Cannon Road interchange based on both existing 2003 conditions and buildout conditions as included in the Final Environmental Impact Report for Carlsbad Ranch. This evaluation is in response to the Caltrans letter dated June 17, 2004, regarding this project. As a result of our evaluation, it can be concluded that: o The current peak hour operations at the I-5[Cannon Road interchange ramps are at levels of service "A" or "B" so that adequate reserve capacity would be available as the Carlsbad Ranch Resort is constructed without the need for interchange improvements. o The buildout peak hour conditions are expected to beat LOS "D" at the 1-5 [Cannon Road ramps without the need for interchange improvements. o At buildout, the peak hour conditions at the t-51Cannon Road interchange are expected to be at or slightly greater than the 1,500 ILV(HR value that Caltrans typically uses for design purposes, so that no additional interchange improvements should be needed through buildout of the City of Carlsbad, including the Carlsbad Ranch Resort. o At buildout, the peak hour project trips to Interstate 5 mainlanes will be less than one percent of peak hour capacity. Therefore, according to Regional Congestion Management Program guidelines, the project impact to 1-5 is less than significant and no project freeway mitigation should be needed nor is recommended. Provided below is a discussion of our evaluation: BUILDOUT FORECAST COMPARISON The buildout scenario included in the approved Carlsbad Ranch FEIR was based on volumes provided from the SANDAG Regional Traffic Model in use at the time of DEIR preparation, plus a manual addition of project only traffic from LEGOLAND, since the theme park is a #004501 Page 1 C.\OFFICE_2004\4501-70204-spkwpd/cflsk 4540 KJ:IRN} V:.,.M Rain, Smm 106 - SAN DIEGO, CA 92123-1573 (858) 560-4911 • F& (858) 560-9734 0 r Ms. Saliva Qureshy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. July 2. 2004 unique traffic generator. The Regional Traffic Model included the buildout of the City of Carlsbad General Plan as background traffic. The Year 2020 was assumed as the time frame for the City of Carlsbad buildout. The current SANDAG Regional Traffic Model assumes Year 2030 as the design time frame. However, the previously approved Year 2020 traffic model results are still valid for use in the evaluation of the Carlsbad Ranch Resort since the recent economic slowdown and slow growth caused by the economic conditions have extended the design time frame of the traffic model. An evaluation of the traffic growth rate from Year 2003 to Year 2030 using the approved Carlsbad Ranch FEW peak hour projections for buildout indicate that the total growth in approach volumes at the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange is approximately 3.8% per year in the AM peak hour and 3.1% per year in the PM peak hour. These growth rates per year are higher than the approximately 3% growth per year typically assumed when using a "straight-line growth rate" to predictfuture traffic volumes. Therefore, the approved FEIR buildout peak hour volumes are appropriate for use for this evaluation. 1-5 [CANNON ROAD TOTAL APPROACH PEAK HOUR VOLUME COMPARISON AM PM - EXISTING 2003 2,778 \'PH 3,031 \'PH YEAR 2030 5,660 \'PH 5,530 VPH GROWTH + 2,882 VPH + 2,499 VPH AVERAGE GROWTH RATE 3.80/c 3.1% (YEAR 2030 - YEAR 2003) (27 YEARS) (YEAR 2003) = AVERAGE GROWTH RATE LAND USE COMPARISON Attachment 1 includes excerpts from the Carlsbad Ranch Congestion Management Plan which includes land use, trip generation, and buildoutvolunie assumptions used in the Final EIR for evaluation of traffic impacts. t204301 2 2 IQFF7CE2CC+ -f2i-j2C'---: 0 Ms. Sairna Qureshy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. lu/v 2. 2004 The current proposed resort is within the -land use assumptions assumed in the approved FEW for the Carlsbad Ranch. The table below shows a comparison of the land use assumptions to the current project. The golf course is not part of the resort project. - - - - - LAND USE COMPARISON -- FEW - FCURRENT PROJECT 700 ROOMS . - 700 ROOMS 19,000 SF RESTAURANTS - 10,000 SF RESTAURANTS 46,000 SF MEETING ROOMS AND SUPPORT 33,000 SF MEETING ROOMS 3,000 SF SPORTS CENTER The similarity of-land use to the approved FEIR also applies to the traffic assumptions so that the project traffic contribution to the I-5ICannon Road interchange will not change. EXISTING PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE Attachment 2 includes AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes and levels of service calculations for the I-5fCannon Road interchange ramp intersections for current conditions. The levels of service and capacity utilization percentages are summarized below: - EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE - SOUTHBOUND RAMPS NORTHBOUND RAMPS % CAPACITY LOS % CAPACITY LOS AM 50% A 58% A PM 44% A 67% B As shown in this table, adequate reserve capacity (up to 90% of capacity equals LOS "D") exists for the addition of background traffic plus resort traffic without the need for interchange improvements. #004501 Page 3 C:\OFFICL2004\4501.7020"rSPkWPdIdiSk I- Mr. Sairna Qureshy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. July 2, 2004 BUILDOUT PEAK HOUR LEVELS OF SERVICE Attachment 3 includes worksheets used to calculate buildout peak hour levels of service based on the buildout peal: hour volumes included for the approved ETR analysis. BUILDOUT LEVELS OF SERVICE SOUTHBOUND RAMPS NORTHBOUND RAMPS % CAPACITY LOS % CAPACITY LOS AM 87% D 89% D PM 78% C 84% D As indicated above, acceptable levels of service are expected through buildout without the need for interchange improvements. CALTRANS INTERCHANGE DESIGN VOLUMES AT BUILDOUT The Caltrans design volumes at interchange ramps 'picalIy are at 1,500 Intersecting Lane Vehicles Per Hour (ILV(HR). An IL\'/HR calculation for the current lane configurations and current peak hour volumes total 1,084 ILVIHR in the AM peak hour and 1,049 IL\'/HR in the PM peak hour. Therefore, reserve capacity exists at the interchange that can accommodate future traffic including project traffic without the need for additional lanes at tile ramp intersections. Attachment shows the existing conditions ILV[HR calculations. An ILV/HR calculation for buildout peak hour volumes assumed in the approved FEIR indicates the interchange would accommodate 1,538 ILV(HR in the AM peak hour and 1,528 IL\'(HR in the PM peak hour under buildout conditions with no additional lanes at the ramp intersections, as summarized in Attachment 5. TIGHT DIAMOND ILV[HR AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR EXISTING 1,034 ILV/HR 1,049 IL\'IHR BUILDOUT 1,538 tIN/HR 1,528 ILVIHR :c':E.2o:-45:-r:c-:c L:. Ms. Saima Qureshy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. july 2, 2004 - INTERSTATE 5 MAINLArJE PEAK HOUR EVALUATION Attachment 6 shows the buildout peak hour assignment of project trips to Interstate 5. The trip generation and directional - distribution percentages were taken from the Carlsbad Ranch Congestion Management Plan. As shown in this attachment, the highest one direction peak hour traffic from the project is expected to be only 93 vehicles per how. The rnainlane capacity per lane is 2,350 vehicles per hour per lane as obtained from Caltrans' Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies, December. 2002 see Attachment 7X. The project's trafficto 1-5 mainlanes,-therefore, would be less than one percent of capacity: 93 VPH = 0.99% 4 LANES x 2,3-50 PCI-HR/LANE According to SANDAG's Regional Congestion Management Program's Measure of Significant Project Impacts (Attachment 8), the allowable change of volume to capacity (vIc) ratio due to a project impact to freeways is a -one percent change. Therefore, since the project peak hour change in V/C ratio will be less than one percent the project's traffic impacts to I-S mainlanes should be considered less than significant No project freeway mitigation nor contribution to mitigation should be needed- nor is recommended. CONCLUSIONS Existing Conditions The current I-5ICannon Road ramp intersections operate acceptably and with reserve capacity by both City of Carlsbad and Caltrans criteria so that project traffic can be added with no interchange improvements needed. Suildout Interchange Ramp Levels of Service At buildout, using peak hour volumes contained in the approved Carlsbad Ranch FEIR, the 1-51Cannon Road interchange ramps are expectedto operate acceptably andwithin the City #004501 Page 5 C\0FF10E2004A4501-70204-spkwpdfdisk 6 . Ms. Saima Qureshy Urban Systems Associates, Inc. July 2. 2004 of Carlsbad Growth Management Program requirements of no worse than LOS "D" during peak hours, with no additional Lanes needed at the interchange. Buildout Caltrans' ILVIHR Evaluation At buildout, the 1-5/Cannon Road interchange is expected to operate at or near the Caltrans design volume for a tight diamond interchange without the need for additional lanes at the intersection. Buildout 1-5 Mainlane Evaluation At buildout, the project's peak hour contribution to 1-5 mainlanes is expected to be less than one percent of rnainlane capacity so that the project impact is considered less than significant and no mitigation is needed. Please let me know if you have questions or need additional information. Attachment 1: Congestion Management Plan for the Carlsbad Ranch Excerpts Attachment 2: Existing AM and PM Traffic Counts at I-S [Canon Road, LOS Calculations Attachment 3: Buildout LOS Worksheets Attachment 4: Existing IL\'IHR Attachment 5: Buildout ILV(HR Attachment 6: Resort Buildout Peak Hour Assignment to 1-5 Attachment 7: Basic Freeway Segments Capacity Attachment 8: Freeway Segment Measure of Significant Impacts cc: Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning Tim Stripe, Grand Pacific Resorts c oFFiCE_:OC-r\-5O1-7CLc!c CONGESTION MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE CARLSBAD RANCH Carlsbad, California May 23, 1995 1- Prepared for: CITY OF CARLSBAD Prepared by: KAKU ASSOCIATES, INC. 1453 Third Street, Suite 400 Santa Monica, California 90401 (310) 458-9916 Ref: 828 Pointe Resort 700 Rooms 8 pot room 5,600 6,000 SF Commercial 121 16,000 SF Commercial 12 24,000 SF Meeting 121 19,000 SE Restaurant IOU per 1000 SF 1,900 C '4 ccja - s' QAc p-06G-SF4lubhosiso-- uaparvOurse--- ___________________ 8,100 GIA 550OOO SF IJIlice! Campus Speciality Retail 125,000 SE Office 300,000 SF U & U 500,000 SF Hotel 280 Rooms 20,000 SF Retail DEVELOPMENT I LAND USE Family Park 1 (3) GENERATION RATE DAILY AM PEAK IloUll PIA PEAK HOIJII TRIPS IN our TOTAL IN OUT 526 ID1AL - 2 per stall plus sLdnts (I) 4,700 550 Cl DII I -- 132 650 50 pat 1000 SF 16.250 227 913 325 731 731 1.463 20 per 11000 SP 6,000 7543 84 840 1613 624 700 O per 1000 SF 4,000 576 164 640 56 501 560 10 per room 2,800 101 67 168 184 90 224 40 pot 1000 SF 800 14 10 24 36 36 72 3,600 115 1130 77 112 192 200 170 167 126 235 2913 392 8,162 50,032 II 8 10 lOG 46 152 206 127 83.6 279 319 598 152 0 152 ISO 726 fllfl 2505 1 510 1 3,095 1 1,675 1 3,556 1 5,231 TABLE ES-I CARLSBAD fIANCE! WIt' GENEI1A11ON BUILDOIJT Notes. (lJ Per 'Carlsbad Ranch Specific Plan' (Urban Systems Associates, Inc. Juno 1992) (2) Supporting uses of hotel. 3' Trip goncialkin per 'Traffic Study for the Carlsbad LEGO Family Park' (Kaku Associates. Inc. April 1994). c. Sc -01 -4 0 C-, Sag. -, oc, s SrI 7 S I 33 (7Z)J UI C a = -u C 0. C() it F > •-1 rn z C,) as / / 00 (330) 05 '165 40 r BlOOD? 30 (33) I Ed 91 I O jTz * I 1.000 C7I0fr NO twa> p3) tQ 215 a 16 CR / AZ 'I L tot fl \'t (aIM t r noot—t 0 Itililu 0 A P p 1-5 Southbound )lawjIc at Caunou Rood I tnt Conflanhlon lot lntpr,, li"II Caparily Ulilizialnu Pn0i. 2 oil [I I $ntihA flI _kArni21 Ayr,ftp) jArjWfl)j _ MANI Ii '0 AM Cr11 Thm man WI Thai Nvbl Left Thm j3jjI i-nnr Iaaldt I I I boll,! kIll 1 I I I 3 I I 4 I I,ilql,- I lllIt'tClit% LP II 11 1£ U l( LI 1 Ill 1 U ra1'sria Ii 0 0 3801' 0 1800 0 4000 1100 300 4000 Al his lInrIIi(So,iIlI ph boO spill (Yell)' N - All flo, U ,,itWrnh plipots opus (Yfl-I)' N U Lb 1itIIL Lull I lOUT 0 to homily Vrhinr, 0 0 0 1039 2 291 0 30(1 34 46 III 0 A dptrrd IlnItihy VOIL,mT U 0 0 1041 n 241 II 1001 14 OG III Ihi,Is,'i'n f-lr, 1)00 nor. 0100 021 0130 Oil 0011 010 00' 003 005 0110 ,,Ip,-,l}olrT' 000 null 021 010 003 — 050 L00 A TilInirbe tLws'aasrall si inITrnnclbnn of. I-S Snallibound Ilanap. and CillIllo I*IIII Time 7.30 AM In 8430 AM lioth Approach I-S Sn,sthbnnnd lUthpu ('Ill - 01)74(1)3 Da mommy 1331 TonI Namo P-nm. Flog 1331 0 Subtotals a Sib - 297 2 1033 Sub- 1&,It htML J - 1~ 4110 092 0 0 114 lEO SI 217 A I-bob . 0 I' 1419 itr 0 0 0 Cannon Road SiiE,ie,haln 133 0 tol,! 112 Sailili A pprnnrh 0mb Left-lam volume, incluic 11-liin,1 h-him' ni-old 1-5 Sotillihounol Ramps at manna Road I nor rm11flellrAalnn (no ow' rriinn C".'. Ulih,ntion Pp.m'c 3 nI 'k IlitimoPmood Snuhprp(tIl1) tkflhAflj) _LL _Poip! I II phi In - 045 Li-I LellThL1L illS J,11 11i0,RHiI Jill JJIUQ JllOICI k!L lion OMit Lana 1.0, I I CmrIftio- (left) 7 I I I I MUMS 3 I I 4 I I UiiI-'l,lr I (mrr-Ilnw l_nucS,IlIin;o 0 0 0 7 0 I 'I 7 I i 2 0 Coparily 0 0 0 ItOn 0 1100 II 40111 1900 31,1111 40011 0 Art t1m t4,,rlli/SoaIli phnra nplbL (Y/N)? H Are ho L'tU/'.YeuI phn,o'i 011111 (YIll)1 II bflhctency 1011 nOb DID Sourly Vnitisia' rJ 0 0 357 1 141 0 446 83 49, S3F Adimled Honily Volu,ai, 0 0 0 In'S 0 141 Ii 441 03 Ion 55* 0 UIalIz,blnn Caine flhlO om 000 010 0011 nOt o(IT) oil U fl 0)3 014 0110 Cdmlrnl Forhmiu 300 "up 010 Oil 013 - -t ICOPulIn — 044 LOS A e-tcntJt °2LrI" TilmIno Movomairimic at brlrererllon nI 14 Soolhibanml Otnotro and ('Imlolol. 11,tnil Time c 445111 In 5 45 PM Noimhm Approach I 5 Sni.Ihbc,miiid (homaip, t'ni'- 011241113 13,yThuhdn III I time Prot, ('nag OIl Fl ibMiI 0 Sob - 141 1 341 TrIa Sub- l' raisin I I [ ohIo 1r4nl VT 4I - 0 10% a a t234 II 0 It t 120 440 —+ + 'l' 1014 83 -- I — 4Yi II a 1Oct11. 0 P 0133 0 0 0 Cc, nun,, ('nail 0 440 'nitli Appro'rlu lInt.' 1 1 IutrmIooIi,nw-ttu. - Li tu,i'c ta i-nil PL. lit lime Paled: South APsiNBI 730AM Is Non), A09r (SRI West Apprml c41_ $.3OAM Lan JjjL •&,It an 'Pon R,,ht *L2ni. Sb! SL SS are !nudr I Con03- (left) 2 I I I I 3 I I I .1 I I S 6 Outside 7 Ins. flow Lotelietisep 0 I 2 j 0 0 0 2 2 0 i 0 2 1 apiciiy V JUW V n luiAJ ii.W U U 4000 '500 MeuheNoctloath phases spill (YflI)7 N Are SM Et'uWtsl phases oplil (ViW N Efficiency Loot Factor 0.00 ilooflyvolume 70 0 522 0 0 0 III 1317 0 0 195 187 Adjused IIrjucIyVolume 0 70 522 0 0 0 III 1317 0 0 19$ 181 ullImison rinse 000 004 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 03 033 0.00 0.00 0.05 010 C.6.1 Panels 0.15 0.00 033 0.00 (lsnauo- 04$ L03 A Tumni Movemesils ii Inleescetion or 1$ Notiliboand lumps pnsl Cannon Raid Tim: 740AM In 1:30 AM NoethApproach 1.5 Northbound Ramps Dais 07124(03 Day funds7 305 Total Name. FinrnI, luck. Mscl,ad o 305 Subtotals W a 265 1700 it Cii 187 1435 13I7+ 19$ 302 0 0 0 A 't Noith P • 1839 P 70 0 522 Caanon Iliad 0 SubtoUlo 0 592 Total 592 1-5 Northbound Ramps at Cannon fond Lane canfl&urilon for luIutnscthonCapae,lytiislrnhIoo P.2c13 I-S t4orthbound Ramps at Canxion Road Lane Conflguu,ilon fur Inneircealas. Capacity Utilization Paso .r3 71e.IlrTinicPeriod; South Appe (NIl) 4:30 PM, to 4-jo PM Sb! Lana Inside I )Innh ADM (50) Sb! WseI Aopr(ElIl St - Ss Em Apc(M]I St Si. Sb' Coons- (kA) 21 I H. urnflo,,s 3 I I I 4 I I S 6 Could. 7 Res-(low Linesctlinp n I 2 F 0 0 0-1 2 2 0 0 2 I LS5ICIIJ U 2(MIJOOXI ii 0 0 30004000 0 0 40001100 Are the Nonhmouth phases split (Yftl)7 N Are the Esst(Wesn pliant spill (Yft7 N E(rgi,cyLonracuer 0.10 RounlyVolome 79 2 137 0 0 0 301 522 0 0 835 806 AdjutirJ Noisily Volume 0 81 137 0 0 0 301 522 0 0 885 806 Ulilinlion Ficuor 0.00 004 0.04 000 000 0.00 043 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.22 1145 CalsicslInetoes 004 0.00 0.08 . 015 Eaul. 067 & 2J" ..cTiA / Turning ?(nvemenna III Insenseetfoni of; 04 Northbound Ramps and CannoloIlneil tlnz:430PM s9530 PM North Approach 7.5 Nnrtbbonnd Ramp, Vise: 07/24503 Day: flundsy 1109 TONI Name: Dainiclç Rick, MIchael 0 1109 0 Sib- 0 0 0 Sub. Sat Tom -b JW3L I I I L tooktook - w n 964 + 1. 0787 301 806 523 522 —+- + 88$ 1491 2121 'V I r 0 0 t A A Noah 629 C . 79 2 137 ConnnRoad 0 Sohlctalu 0 21$ Total ala 10 4 a 2350 A P P r South Apxoodi Note. Lofl.i,un Volume. Include U4smt U.iums in bold. South Approach Not: LeO tiara voinmesmclud: a. .iur,s t'.ot,,eIn,.na Ij a, -4. I I Vfr'?4K ! j I j Wai I k {hL'.ii .1 C [1W] —~ —r ICU All. Alt. A 101) Alt. H (if) 1111 II-! 3&MLPOLCI W $ r9/cAt4Mo,3 W. S"11tCLtJ1D - Iot I 1 AM?4R fti1 4- - EEO tAll IOU All A IOU Alt. S IOU Alt. 0 _ _ - - Nri ndUuIISri MIII*tlo MOVE CAPACITY ICU MOVE CAPACITY ICU MOVE CAPACITY CU LOA LOS MOVE CAPACITY ICJJ MOVE CAPACITY 1013 MOVE rAPACITY tee IOU All. 0 0,10 _ _-- - Laliiite 4-_..._ LOS. _ I ç LOS Ito mIIIullOR 1tL yIIIgAcIon MIIlnllan V'3 -V ¶;uu00u-r A%C acuct. £_jx t4coRflt&tvJO WA qjEA 4ut it cCP1C)\ fl) - — _ a (LtiPti 939 ') I II7.Wi J2qsJ .__4_ iI4;I ______ Jj4*i 44 I H 1!L I 1 'm YAM Cli All. A 2. mU All. B ! ICU Alt. 0 MOVE CAPACITY ICU MOVE CAPACITY CU MOVE APACFrY !Icu - Los, — LOS. - Ito TJlIg.tlol L5- 't I.CIIa.11on "V in 5O&Lt ICIJ All. it 2 CCII Alt. 1W All. 'C 'CAPACItY ICU HOVE, CITY ICU MOVE CAPACITY r _-___- am L.O.S. - I-oct LOS. - LOS - lID ndIlg.loo ___________ l.UllosllOn dES ci LOS. - JAIIlgillo SYSTEMS t . ATTACI-IMENT4 Page 1 o 2 TIGHT DIAMOND Signalized Intersection CAPACITY ANALYSIS INTERSECTION; Route S & Cannon Road 01ST. co. RTE. ALTERNATiVE:_Existing 2003 P.M. 47-98 BY DATE_6/02/04 I TIME PEAK HOUR P.M. DEMAND TRAFFIC FLOWS' Cannon Rd. = 0) NW) 0)0 I 187 207 MO aCME DIAGRAM V I 396 60- 151 I ,/-96 j1317 Ui C c LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HR)' PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 jIi 10 \ 2 55 - — 103 35 35 I I I '39 a _ ,98 139 S20 Ut- CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES (tV/HR). PHASE1 PHASE I PHASE3 r_PHASE 4 (261j 198 L.520 TOTAL OPERATING LEVEL (ILV/HR). TRFflt_CONDITIONS: EXISTING 2003 CD-S L5O1.ktachtterts.d.vg <12O0 E>1200 BUT < 1500 ILV/HR 1064 D>isoo ILV/HR (CAPACITY) I PHASE I I b 'C a- PHASE 1 UI liP -a A78 — ATTACHMENT 4 Page 2 of Signalized Intersection TIGHT DIAMOND CAPACITY ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: Route 5 & Cannon Rood - 01ST. co. RTE. 115D5 ALTERNATIVE: - -Existing 2003 P.M._47.28 - --- BY DATE 6102104 TIME _PEAK HOUR A.M. 0 B 7 DEMAND TRAFFIC FLOWS' C a 1= Cannon Rd.j JA N.t' - lB I -u - 955 560 /-456 520 453 N No 001'. DIAGRAM Do In LANE VOLUMES (ILV/KR)' CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HR). PHASE 1 7F PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 \-558 232 111,179 TOTAL OPERATING LEVEL (ILV/I-IR)s TRAFFIC coNDmOP4s EXISTING 2003 CO-S 4501-Attackment&dWg S <1200 ILV/HR 0>1200 BUT < 1500 ILY/HR 1049 0>1500 ILV/HR (CAPACITY) . . ATTACHMENT 5 Page 1 of 2 Signalized Intersection TIGHT DIAMOND CAPACITY ANALYSIS INTERSECTION: Route 5 & Cannon Rood 01ST. CO. RTE. _11-50-5 ALTERNATIVE: Buildout P.M. 47.98 BY_ DATE 6/02/04 / TIME PEAK HOUR P.M. A /4 V- DEMAND TRAFFIC FLOWS- A Lm In B U) _ _ 60 - 760 = F Cannon Rd.l j N / oo 195—' r640 1365 675 N 6 DIAGRAM / co a t') 0 LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HR)' PHASE 4 443 442 —:1 CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HPJ. PHASE: 1 1 r-PHASE 2 PHASE3 PH ASE 4 "4380 335 TOTAL OPERATING LEVEL (ILV/Hffi' TR*VnC_coNomows: E I D<ioo (LV/11R BUILDOUT { E>oo BUT < 1500 ILV/HR 1536 >15D0 ILV/HR (CAPACITY) Ct'-T 45 D1-Attazhniet}Ldwg CRITICAL LANE VOLUMES (ILVJHTh' PHASE _I ______ 545 TOTAL OPERATING LEVEL (ILV/HR). TRAFnC_CONDITIONSt BUILD 0 UT PHASE2 160 PHE3 AS 390 0<1200 ILV/HR I 0>1200 BUT < 1500 ILV/HR L 1528 _J 1>530 n.Y/HR (CAPACITY) H_PHASE 4 ç 433 I ATTACHMENT 5 Page 2of2 - - - TIGHT DIAMOND Signalized -Intersection CAPACITY ANALYSIS INTERSECTION:- Route 5 & Cannon Road DIST. CO. RTE. 1 1,SD5 ALTERNATIVE: Buildout--- Pal.— - BY—DATE 6/02/04 TIME PEAK HOUR A.M. A 'A /1 i \I— DEMAND TRAFFIC FLOWS,. A B C4 co 1550 Coflnon Rd. R -1090 400 1290 IDIAGRAM 780 NOeCALE LANE VOLUMES (ILV/HR). PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 PHASE 4 / 54 0 A4/2 xa 390 _ Ioff ______ Al CD-S 450 i-Aftachnients4wg DELOP!,E tD USE GENE5F1TfCN C/ILl AFE$fHDUR .1 FE.HDUR. imps jj otis TOt/i. IN Cis TOT'i. CIA !!O.EDJ CF OIre& 2prrInhI WIC r,nIs 1 4700 ESO Ci 607 10: EZE LEO S. eJit!L P41:11 Carnris Z,Dff SF ED lLZu S LV SE 3ZG 721 Clico 207 053 CF :3por 10:7 6.01D flO [4 C40 156 =4 7E5 & 0 7O;5 CF t;or 1055 SF 4,C7 STE 04 C42 EG 5:4 EK jIbe' 253 F75't,t IC'por losT SEES 101 67 ¶62 IS' 21 524 23 523 SFR0'a'j 40;er 10:2 CF [DC 14 10 CC 26 72 3653 ioz 77 '2: lTD 126 226 —Th Ft no Foson 703 Fc:,s Epervcsn £ 523 ¶63 115 220 157 223 j 362 Ls;uFan 5FOTL :: ': :: :: :: :: 23 E1O 3.t2S ICTSJ 20I 0 çQMc ! •t-, I U 4- CRLS2AD RAF4CH M' GBiERFflON rn,IL000r aaL Fr Csrno P4-:t $; P? Utzi 5,5 fr'.Z trszc :Iec, ho. 1E5 Tr'o ; . tr Cz'tffj LZCCIF-r , Fzr<' frEa .a c' 1tIr 1S3) :7t1 lIt 33% - I.-- S)O(% -- -— KAKU 'SSCCL JEi C &4t,jt S TIZtf Accf o W.kLAui Lt:LrT cc ,: 7 - 0/JEIt'fl: t1±r1TI1O LOS Control Delay per Vehicle (sec/nh) Al :51O- B >10-20 >0-. 35 D >35-55 E >55-SO F >80 P / —4 4* I A-7 . Transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" Criteria (Reference Highway Capacity Manual) BASIC FREEWAY SEGMENTS @65 xni/hr LOS - Maximum Density (pc/mi/In) Minimum Speed (mph) Maximum v/c Mtdthuin Service Flow Rate pg/hrith) A U J 65.0 j 030 [ 710 B - 18 65.0 0.50 I 1170 C 26 64.6 0.71 11 1680 E 45 52.2 1.00 ,C 2350 SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS and RAMP MULTI-LANE HIGHWAYS @ 55 mi/hr LOS Maximum Density (pc/mi/In) Minimum Speed (mph) Maximum v/c Maximum Service flow Rate (pc/hr/In) A 11 55.0 0.29 600 B 18 55.0 0.47 990 C 2 54.9 0.68 1430 35 y -rfl ............. 1850 41 fl_51.2 . fl 1.00 I 2100 Dotted line represents the transition between LOS "C" and LOS "D" Sccte.c: c--- 5SX.. tip 'TVASSAL \qALT c.n-t015 1 \Ca91-E'L 2.co2 - . C— Et4L.Mrn.5tJ ti/c. Q,s' 731't _A1 I, D —Traffic Impact Studies Guidelines Table D-1 Measure of Significant Project Traffic Impacts _Allowable Change due to Project lmpact*t Level of Freeways & Roadway I Ramp" Service with Segments I Intersections Metering Project* WC Speed V/C Speed Delay Delay (mph) (mph) (sec.) (mm.) D, E, & F (or ramp meter 0.01 1 0.02 1 2 2 delays above 15 min.) Notes: * All level of service measurements are based upon HCM procedures for peak-hour conditions. However, V/C ratios for Roadway Segments may be estimated on an ADT124-hour traffic volume basis (using Table 0-2 or a similar LOS chart for each jurisdiction). The acceptable Los for freeways, roadways, and intersections is generally "0" ("a" for undeveloped or not densely deelcpeu locations per jurisdiction definitions). For metered freeway ramps. LOS does not apply. However, ramp meter delays above 15 minutes are considered excessive. .-*!f a proposed project's traffic causes the values shown in the table tobe exceeded, the impacts are determined to be significant. These impact changes may be measured from appropriate computer programs or expanded manual spreadsheet. The project applicant shall then identify feasible mitigation (within the Traffic Impact Study report) that will maintain the traffic facility at an acceptable LOS. If the LOS with the proposed project becomes unacceptable (see above * note), or lithe project adds a significant amount of peak-hour trips to cause any traffic queues to exceed on- or off-ramp storage capacities, the project applicant shall be responsible for mitigating significant impact changes. --- See Exhibit 0-2 for ramp metering analysis. KEY: VJC = Volume to capacity ratio Speed = Speed measured in miles per hour Delay = Average stopped delay per vehicle measured in seconds for intersections, or minutes for ramp meters LOS = Level of Service Jarua't :ccs &MX10E Final Draft 2002 SAUDAS congestion !ranagsrnent Procrrarn Li r ot CA4p FFOt August 20, 2004 City of Carlsbad Mario H. Orso, Chief Development Review Branch Department of Transportation, District 11 P;O. Box 85406, MS 50 San Diego CA 92186-5406 RE: Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5— Project Comments dated August 3, Dear Mr. Orso: Thank you for your comments on the Carlsbad Ranch Planning Area 5 - Resort Site, located on the south side of Cannon Road, east of Armada Drive and west of Faraday Avenue in the City of Carlsbad. Following are city's responses to your comments: 1. Peak Hour Level of Service: Traffic impact studies are typically conducted during the morning and afternoon peak hours, the highest volumes of commuter traffic. The existing counts at the ramps provided by Caltrans are the highest volume for One hour throughout the entire day, not during the morning and afternoon commute peak hour. The attached Caltrans count summary shows the counts done by Caltrans were at noon and 2 p.m., not at 8 am. or 4 p.m., typically the commute hours. Also, the existing conditions counts we provided were taken from the city's 2003 traffic monitoring report. Therefore, the traffic counts evaluated for existing conditions are considered to be appropriate, and no revisions should be needed. 2. Caltrans Interchange Design Volumes at Build out: The Caltrans ILV/HR capacity of 1,500 ILV/HR will not be reached at build out since on-ramp meters restrict the flow onto the freeway. As an example, the existing p.m. peak hour northbound on-ramp with the ramp meter operating is approximately 1,100 VPH, while the Year 2030 p.m. peak hour demand volume is estimated at 1,905 VPH. This future volume would be restricted by the ramp meter flow rate of 1,100 VPH or lower, so that the ILV/HR value would not exceed 1,500 in the future. Also, the Cannon Road interchange was rebuilt specifically for Carlsbad Ranch, including all future build out projects using these same build out volumes from the Carlsbad Ranch Program ER. Caltrans reviewed and approved the geometrics prior to the reconstruction. 3. Cumulative Analysis: The Carlsbad Ranch Program EIR Traffic Study was a cumulative evaluation that included build out of Carlsbad plus all of the Carlsbad Ranch and LEGOLAND. 4. Updated Traffic Impact Analysis: The build out volumes used in the Carlsbad Ranch EIR and our updated traffic evaluation are higher than both the Year 2020 and Year 2030 traffic models. These volumes were also used in the Cannon Court traffic report reviewed by Caltrans, that resulted in the recent restriping at the northbound on-ramp, for a WB shared-through/right lane at the northbound on-ramp. Therefore, the updated traffic evaluation confirms the volumes previously used for the interchange design and indicates no additional cumulative impacts are expected beyond those previously identified in the Carlsbad Ranch Program EIR. 5. 1-5 Improvements: The City of Carlsbad has cooperatively worked as a partner with Caltrans to design/build and fund the following I-S freeway interchange projects within the past 10 I . Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 - (760) 602-4600 - FAX (760) 602-8559 - wwci.parlsbad.ca.us • . Mario Orso - Dept of Transportation Carlsbad Ranch PA 5 Comment August 20, 2004 Page 2 . 1-511-a Costa Avenue Interchange; . I-S/Poinsettia Lane Interchange; • 1-5/Palomar Airport Road Interchange, a full interchange project which included widening the southbound off and on-ramps, and constructing auxiliary lanes between Palomar Airport Road and Cannon Road; • 1-5/Cannon Road Interchange, a project that was completed in March 1999, and was designed to accommodate all of the Carlsbad Ranch development, including LEGOLAND and the PA-5 Resort, as well as cumulative traffic from the future build out of Carlsbad (see the attached project description fact sheet from Caltrans). With those projects, the City of Carlsbad has provided freeway improvements designed to accommodate the build out of the City. These projects were partially funded by traffic fees paid by developers as well as other city generated funds. The City of Carlsbad has paid its fair share towards freeway improvements in the past. The City currently has no other freeway related projects in its Capital Improvement Program, and therefore would not have the ability to collect additional "fair share" contributions from developers beyond our currently established Traffic Impact Fee Program. Please note that while the City may agree with your suggestion that new projects should pay their fair share contribution towards freeway improvements, at this time neither the City nor Caltrans has an adopted fee program or studies to quantify the amount each developer would need to pay as their fair share. If in the future, Caltrans conducts such studies to establish a fee program to pay towards freeway improvements, the City might be supportive of such a program. Exactions imposed on developments need to be reasonably related to the project and the extent and the degree of the exaction should be in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project. At this time, since there is no adopted fee program, the City cannot establish a nexus between the proposed development and contribution towards freeway improvements and cannot reasonable exact such a "fair share" contribution. If you have any additional comments or questions, please contact me at (760) 602-4619. Sincerely, Saima Qureshy, Associate Planner SQ:vd c: Gary Barberlo, Team Leader Don Neu, Assistant Planning Director Clyde Wickham, Project Engineer File Copy - Attachment I 11, P.O. Box £5406, San Diego, CA 92186-5406 FACT SHEET INTERSTATE 5/CANNON ROAD INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS *** PROJECT COMPLETED MARCH 1999 *** PRQJECT PROPOSAL The District is-currently preparing plans for ajoint funded ptoject to modify the Interstate 5/Cannon Road interchange. This project has been requested by the City ofCarlsbad to accommodate the proposed construction ofLEGOLM.D Carlsbad as part of the Cathbad Ranch-Development. PROJECT FEATURES The proposed improvements will consist of widening the existing interchange-ramps, metering the entrance ramps,.signalizing and channelizing the local street and ramp termini intersections, and constructing a--northbound merge lane on Interstate 5 north of the Cannon Road interchange. INCENTIVE PROPOSAL / HISTORY Governor Pete Wilson, through the California Trade and Commerce Agency, committed to provide infrastructure improvements, human resources benefits, and-develop the Cannon Road Interchange project if LEGO those to locate in Carlsbad. Caltrans and various other state agencies, as part of the Team California LEGO/Pointe Working Committee, plan to deliver the proposed project by 1999 to coincide with the City of Carlsbad development projects, including LEGOLAND Carlsbad. Caltrans provide improvements and other benefits estimated up to $3,950,000; including 50% of the design and. construction costs in partnership with the City of Carlsbad, enhanced landscaping, additional freeway signs, funds for ramp metering local interchanges, and 100% ofthe support costs for environmental approval of the interchange improvements. FUNDING The project will be joint funded-(50/50) between theCity of -Carlsbad and Caltrans with the-Caltrans portion-using state-and federal funds. COST / SCHEDULE The total cost of this project is estimated to be $2.5 million. The project is scheduled to begin construction in the early spring 1998. Return to Pact Sheet Home Page http://www.dot.ca.gov/distl 1/factsl5cannon.hlm 815/2004 S . . 50-5 P.M. Dates Days 24Hr V Oft(EE5 (EE? (ES R41.509 R41.330 03120/02 4 9,802 670 1200 725 1300 R41,663 03127102 4 10,156 519 1200 875 1800 R41.739 03120102 4 9,117 659 1000 685 1800 P41.376 03127102 4 9,358 654 1200 715 1800 R42.712 R42.542 03120/02 4 10,938 528 1200 328 1800 R42.838 03127102 4 7,290 553 1200 516 1500 R42.865 03113102 4 8.683 827 0700 . 694 1800 R42.591 03)20102 4 9.124 648 1200 752 1600 R44,071 R43.911 03120/02 4 9,509 596 0800 832 1900 R44210 03/27102 4 7,287 541 0900 861 1600 R44.290 03127102 4 7,750 743 0800 806 1800 R43.885 03/20102 4 8,747 814 0700 653 . 1800 R45.571 R45410 03127102 4 9.198 622 0900 742 1900 R45.724 03)27102 4 6.388 518 0800 484 1500 R45.754 03127102 4 5,916 451 0800 542 1800 R45.409 03120102 4 9,129 569 1000 692 1800 R47.032 R46.526 04117102 4 16.640 1.448 0900 1.167 1400 R47.144 04117102 4 12.978 725 1200 1.360 1800 R47.269 0017102 4 16.559 2.604 0700 1,013 1600 R47.097 04124102 4 28,868 3.918 0700 4,041 1700 R46,669 04117/02 4 2,864 247 1200 281 1800 R47.975 R47.843 05115/02 4 3,484 519 0800 253 1700 R48.1313' 04117102 4 9.525 C2 12009t0' 1.042 1700 R48.118 04117/02 4 8,995 1,297 0800 () 1400 R47.534 04/17102 4 2,868 (2) 1200t1*Z4( 473 1800 R49278 R49.117 04117102 4 8,291 507 0800 713 1700 1149,189 04117/02 4 8,212 518 0800 594 1500 R49 464 04117/02 4 5,168 274 1200 438 1800 R49.386 04117102 4 5,474 519 0800 390 1500 &kac.E: C7\LThWJ$ '/EA(L 5 30.5 interchange Ramp San Marros UC (Encinitas Blvd.) NB Ott NS on SB Off 'SB On Leutadia Blvd. tiC (Woodley Rd.) NB 011 14B On SB 01? 'SB On La Costs Avenue OC NB Off 'NB On SB Off 'SR On Poinsotha Lane 00 NB Off 14B On SB 01! SB On Palomar Airport Rd. CC NB Oil 149 On SB Off 'SE On from WB 'SB On from ER Cannon Rd. tiC Tamat Ave. CC NB Off 68 On SB Off NB On