WHAT PRICE MAIN STREET CONCERNS WITH THE PROPOSED ONE PASEO PROJECT Last Updated November 20, 2014 PROJECT SUMMARY Proposed by Kilroy Realty LP, the One Paseo project is located in the City of San Diego’s Carmel Valley community on the southwest corner of Del Mar Heights Road and El Camino Real, east of Interstate 5. The 23.6-­‐acre site is the last remaining undeveloped parcel in the 25-­‐year-­‐old master-­‐planned community, and is zoned for 510,000 square feet of corporate office. Kilroy originally proposed a 1,857,400-­‐squarefoot project and is now pursuing the “Reduced Main Street Alternative,” which consists of 1,454,069 square feet (sf) of mixed-­‐
use development. PROJECT BACKGROUND The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), which included the Reduced Main Street Alternative, was released in July 2014 and identified significant unmitigated impacts to Transportation/Circulation/Parking and Visual Effects and Neighborhood Character. In September 2014, the project was rejected by the Planning Boards of Carmel Valley, Del Mar Mesa and Torrey Pines over concerns that it would have dire impacts to Carmel Valley and the surrounding communities. In October, the San Diego Planning Commission denied the project as proposed and did not recommend its approval to the San Diego City Council, instead offering suggestions for how it might be improved. Since the project was announced, it has steadily gained opposition from groups concerned about its negative impacts. At the core of the opposition is What Price Main Street (WPMS), a coalition that is concerned that the Reduced Main Street Alternative, or a similar project, will permanently destroy Carmel Valley’s community character. The following is a breakdown of the original zoning, as well as the proposed Reduced Main Street Alternative: Project Component Community Plan/Original Zoning Current Proposal: Reduced Main Street Alternative Size/Type • 510,000 sf • Corporate office/retail space Commercial Retail •
•
•
•
Office Residential Average Daily Traffic (ADT) General retail Cinema prohibited 510,000 sf Zero residential units. •
•
•
•
• 6,497 vehicle trips per day 246,500 sf Includes cinema 492,840 sf 608 multi-­‐family units (714,729 sf) • 23,854 vehicle trips per day Nearly four times allowed in current land use plans. 1 • 1,454,069 sf • Mixed use space Three times the amount of square feet allowed in current land use plans. As part of the review process, members of the WPMS coalition worked with industry-­‐leading independent experts in the fields of transportation planning, land use planning, fiscal market analysis and air quality to understand the project’s impacts. Following the review of the Draft EIR, FEIR and revised project, WPMS is concerned about the following key items: Land Use The following chart outlines the project’s significant inconsistencies with current land use plans. Land Use Plan Consistent City of San Diego General Plan No Carmel Valley Community Plan No Carmel Valley Employment Center Precise Plan No San Diego Land Development Code/Carmel Valley Planned District Ordinance No Regional Comprehensive Plan No Environment The following chart outlines the project’s significant and unmitigated impacts. FEIR Element Significant Unmitigated Transportation/Circulation/Parking Yes Yes Roadway Segments Yes Yes Yes Yes • Del Mar Heights Road from I-­‐5 SB ramps to I-­‐5 NB ramps Yes Yes • Del Mar Heights Road from I-­‐5 NB ramps to High Bluff Drive Yes Yes • El Camino Real from Via de la Valle to San Dieguito Road Yes Yes • Via de la Valle from San Andres Drive to El Camino Real (West) Intersections Yes Yes Yes Yes • El Camino Real/SR 56 EB on-­‐ramp Yes Yes • Del Mar Heights Road/I-­‐5 NB ramps Ramps Yes Yes Yes Yes • Del Mar Heights Road/I-­‐5 SB Yes Yes • Del Mar Heights Road/I-­‐5 NB Visual Effect and Neighborhood Character Yes Yes The bulk and scale of the proposed buildings would be greater than Yes Yes and different from existing surrounding development, resulting in a significant neighborhood character impact. Community Character: Density and Scale The following chart outlines the project’s proposed height and density. Project Component Community Plan/Original Zoning Revised Project: Reduced Main Street Height Floor Area Ratio (FAR) •
•
None Current: 0.5 •
•
2 170 feet maximum Revised: 1.41 •
•
•
•
•
•
•
At 1,454,069 square feet, One Paseo is nearly three times the size of what is currently allowed on the site. Located on a 23.6 acre site, this equates to an FAR of 1.41 in a community where neighboring office buildings have a maximum FAR of 0.5. One Paseo is nearly seven times the density of the adjacent Del Mar Highlands Town Center, which currently consists of 283,070 square feet on 31.97 acres. One Paseo proposes a new zone just for this site (i.e. spot zoning). The proposed zone is based on the most intense community commercial zone in the Land Development Code, one that has never been implemented. This zone allows a mix of heavy commercial and limited industrial uses and residential uses in order to accommodate development with high intensity. If this currently proposed spot zoning is approved, it would allow Kilroy to later develop up 1.8 million square feet. One Paseo would be one of the most dense mixed use/retail projects in California resembling urban redevelopment such as LA Live, Hollywood & Highland and Paseo Colorado. One Paseo's density is similar to Horton Plaza in downtown San Diego and greater than UTC. The height and scale of One Paseo directly conflicts with Carmel Valley. The One Paseo project includes multiple buildings that would stand at 170 feet tall, more than 100 feet taller than the average building in Carmel Valley. Kilroy has proposed two new intersections and traffic lights along Del Mar Heights Road, resulting in significant interruption of traffic in the area. This is inconsistent with the existing suburban feel of the community and a violation of previous access restrictions implemented by the City. Kilroy Realty has never genuinely studied an appropriately sized alternative. The limited analysis of smaller alternatives in its EIR was woefully deficient and lacked any substantial detail, falling well short of CEQA’s standard to study a range of alternatives. Traffic Project Component Community Plan/ Original Zoning (current) Current Proposal – Reduced Main Street Alternative Level of Service (LOS) LOS: D Speeds slightly decrease as traffic volume slightly increases. LOS: F Average Daily Traffic (ADT) • 6,497 vehicle trips per day • 23,854 vehicle trips per day Nearly four times allowed in current land use plans. Dirt Removal Zero cubic yards 452,600 cubic yards, which equals 24,000 truckloads of dirt to be hauled away. •
The FEIR shows there are eight intersections and road segments that would suffer from significant, unmitigable impacts, resulting in failing levels of service and significant delays. Independent analysis of Del Mar Heights Road between Bluff Drive and El Camino Real found that traffic would back up to previous intersections, leaving cars locked in traffic jams. 3 •
The smaller alternatives Kilroy studied used the same mitigation measures and had the same impacts as the original proposal, confirming the ineffectiveness of the proposed improvements. •
One Paseo will add four times the traffic to Peak Hour Traffic Congestion Carmel Valley’s roads and proposes adding on Del Mar Heights Road two traffic lights on Del Mar Heights Road, a recipe for exacerbating rush hour traffic jams. In its proposed alternative, Kilroy reduced the traffic generated by One Paseo by just 10 percent. Kilroy’s focus was evidently not on reducing One Paseo’s severe traffic impacts. One Paseo’s traffic study was fatally flawed and contained numerous shortcomings that led its authors to underestimate the project’s traffic impacts. The study contained errors in the calculation of trips to One Paseo and analysis of intersections, used outdated data, and excluded data from future development in the region. Kilroy proposed several traffic improvements, but these are unlikely to be implemented or successful, including a traffic light synchronization system that Caltrans has stated it will not install and on-­‐ and off-­‐
ramp improvements for I-­‐5 that Caltrans and the City of San Diego have not planned, approved or scheduled. The City Transportation Department has never stated that synchronization would solve One Paseo’s traffic impacts and independent analysis shows that even the highest level of improvements made by synchronization would not offset the lowest level of delays caused by One Paseo. •
•
•
•
Parking • Through a “shared parking” program, One Paseo will provide less parking per square foot of retail than the Del Mar Highlands Town Center and less parking than is required for each of the development’s various uses. If One Paseo is as successful as the Del Mar Highlands Town Center, it will cause severe parking shortages in the area. • At the Planning Commission hearing, Kilroy stated that One Paseo’s office parking will be paid parking and that they are considering validated parking for retail visitors, which would create spillover into nearby free parking lots. Mass Transit • Kilroy promotes One Paseo as a smart growth, transit-­‐oriented development. However, the transit connection to the community and the rest of the City does not exist and may never be installed. • The project relies on the addition of a single bus rapid transit stop at the site for its connection to mass transit. However, this transit line is not scheduled to exist until 2035, if ever, leaving the site with no actual connection to mass transit for two decades or more. • In its comment letter on One Paseo, Caltrans stated: “It is unclear if this project is consistent with the region’s smart growth principles and could be adequately served by the limited transportation alternatives in the area.” 4 •
We cannot find a single project in the State of California with this type of density and scale that does not have mass transit as a critical component of its transportation plan. Yet One Paseo has none. 5