The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1987-09-16; Design Review Board; ; RP 87-02 - CARLSBAD INN TENNIS CLUB0^ APPLICATION SUBMITTAL DATE: MARCH 20. 1987 STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 16, 1987 TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FROM: SUBJECT: I. PLANNING DEPARTMENT RP 87-2 CARLSBAD INN TENNIS CLUB - Major Redevelopment Permit to build five tennis courts and a 1,335 square foot clubhouse in the AT&SF railroad right-of-way between Oak and Pine Avenues, in Subareas 4 and 5 of the Village Redevelopment Area. RECOMMENDATION That the Design Review Board ADOPT Resolution No. 104 DENYING RP 87-2, based on the findings contained therein. II. BACKGROUND AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION This project was scheduled for a public hearing in February 1986. At that time, the City Attorney's office determined that projects could not be processed in an area that had no zoning or General Plan designation. The Planning Department originally assumed the area was covered under Redevelopment Zoning, but, in fact, the railroad right-of-way and 1-5 freeway had no designations on the General Plan. Staff was directed to formulate a zone and land use designation for these two transportation corridors, and in September 1986, the Transportation Corridor (T-C) Zone and General Plan designation were adopted by the City. In addition, the North Beach Planning and Traffic Study was underway, which was evaluating possible land uses in the right-of-way, as well as the feasibility of extending Washington Street through from Elm to Tamarack. Following approval of the T-C zone, the tennis club proposal was revised and the application resubmitted. The present application requests a major redevelopment permit to build five regulation tennis courts and a 1,335 square foot clubhouse with a second- story viewing deck, located on the west side of the AT&SF railroad tracks. (The previous proposal had five courts with a 1,000 square foot clubhouse.) Twelve parking spaces were originally proposed for the tennis club. The applicant also originally indicated a willingness to construct an additional 25 spaces for public parking on adjacent land that would be operated Page 2 and maintained by the City. The latest revised plans show a total of 20 spaces (i.e., 17 spaces have been eliminated). Surrounding land uses include vacant land to the south. Apostolic Church to the north, railroad tracks to the east, and multiple family residential to the west. Access would be provided from Washington Street or Oak Avenue. Walking distance from the Carlsbad Inn is about two blocks. These courts would offer tennis facilities to guests of the Carlsbad Inn but also would be open to the public for membership or hourly use. Proposed hours of operation are 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. daily; all of the courts would be lighted. A small tennis pro shop would be located within the clubhouse. III. ANALYSIS Plannina Issues 1. Does the project comply with the intent and requirements of the Transportation Corridor (TC) Zone? 2. Is the project in concert with the draft recommendations of the North Beach Planning/Traffic Study? 3. Is the project a safe and compatible use at this location? 4. Does the proposed project conform with the goals of Subareas 4 and 5 of the Village Redevelopment Area? Discussion Zonina Ordinance The proposed project does not meet the requirements of the T-C zone. The zone permits public tennis courts by conditional use permit (which in this case could be satisfied by a major redevelopment permit). An accessory use or structure to a tennis court, e.g., a clubhouse, is not specifically mentioned in the code, although it could be implied as being a "similar temporary use" {Section 21.100.30(1)}. The major problem is with the definition of "temporary" which means not a fixed structure on a permanent foundation, capable of being easily removed. Examples of temporary structures could include modular buildings or even small trailers, structures with a fixed foundation that are easily removable. The clubhouse, as proposed, is not a temporary structure. It is a major fixed structure on a permanent foundation, requiring a large capital investment, and would not be easy to remove in that it would have to be knocked down and hauled away or moved to a nearby location. The applicant feels it is somewhat temporary as it has a sub-floor similar to some of the older homes in Carlsbad. Page 3 The T-C zone only allows temporary uses because the intent is to preserve public transportation rights-of-way by ensuring that adequate land area is available for future transportation modes, such as light-rail or trolley lines. Attached Exhibit "Y" from the Department of Transportation, dated February 1987, advises public agencies to include provisions for a second track for possible increased Santa Fe passenger service between Los Angeles and San Diego. It is obvious that with increasing congestion on 1-5, some form of rail service is inevitable in the near future. The San Diego region has shown a commitment to providing alternative transit, in the form of trolley lines to the South Bay, and now easterly to El Cajon. SANDAG studies predict that there will be a San Diego - Oceanside line using the existing railroad right-of-way within the next 10 - 11 years. The right- of-way may be wide enough for both the rail system and the proposed clubhouse. However, each new permanent use in the right-of-way could make planning the system more difficult, and implementation more expensive. A third reason why the clubhouse does not comply with the T-C zone is because general commercial uses are not permitted. The building as proposed contains a lounge area with a fireplace, a service counter, pro shop, vestibule, manager's office, and men's and women's locker rooms, each with three lavatories and a shower. Outside there are vending machines and a large patio area. The features of this facility suggest a permanent, luxurious health club which will require a substantial investment by the applicant, who will in turn, seek paying memberships to make a return on this investment. The clubhouse will be a commercial operation. The Carlsbad Inn requested direction as to how they could comply with the T-C Zone — staff responded in writing (letter of December 17, 1986, attached) and also verbally to say that an enhanced modular structure could be used to accommodate a scheduling counter/office and two restrooms. In addition, a smaller fixed structure might be feasible with the same functions. Those necessary functions would not require much more than a 400 square foot structure and also would not require a major capital investment in case of its required removal for public transportation. The proposed project essentially is replacing tennis courts removed from the hotel site so that onsite intensity could be increased. Carlsbad Inn could have allowed for provision of a clubhouse and tennis courts on its own property as do most hotel/time share facilities that advertise tennis facilities. Staff sees no justification for this project to set a precedent for other permanent commercial uses to locate in the railroad right-of-way when the facility could have been, and still can be, located out of the T-C zone. Adjacent property should be purchased for this commercial portion of the tennis court proposal. Page 4 Tennis courts are permitted by c:UP within the T-C Zone. Staff has concerns regarding the retrieval of tennis balls in the area close to the tracks with proper safety conditions; however, staff could support the tennis courts by themselves because: they would provide a needed recreational opportunity to the community; they would not conflict with the General Plan or existing land uses; the land area proposed would be of adequate size to accommodate courts, sidewalks, lawn areas, landscaping, and parking; and the street system could handle the traffic generated (Oak/Elm/Washington). Staff would recommend several changes to the site plan (besides the obvious reduction in the size of the clubhouse) in an effort to preserve the existing mature trees in the right-of-way, the view corridor east from Pine Avenue, and a possible trail system which would link to the north or south. Finally, the applicant is proposing 20 parking spaces. It should be noted that Carlsbad's parking ordinance does not specifically address parking requirements per tennis court as part of a tennis club. As such. Section 21.44.030 of the parking ordinance requires the Planning Commission (Design Review Board) determine such requirements based on the most comparable use specified in the code. Since there are no comparable uses in the code. Staff would recommend 2.5 spaces/court and 5 spaces/1000 square feet of clubhouse be considered. The 2.5 spaces may seem a little low but rarely are all courts involved in doubles play at the same time. Also, staff feels this is enough to cover any overlap of arrival and departure of players. Parking by the clubhouse is based upon the International Traffic Engineers parking generation rate of 5 per 1000 square feet for sports facilities (eg. clubhouse) . Of note is that no public parking is provided as part of this proposal, which was included in the former proposal, and was a benefit to the City originally and used to help justify the project. Draft North Beach Plannina/Traffic Study The above-mentioned study discussed the tennis club proposal, but did not make recommendations specifically pertaining to it because the study was policy-oriented, not project-oriented. The text does make several comments about the project design, mainly, the importance of the Oak and Pine Avenue view corridors to the east, which should not be blocked by buildings or tennis fences, and the fact that the clubhouse, if a "modest" structure, could be appropriate. As a policy direction, the study recommends that the City study the concept of a neighborhood linear park in the railroad right-of-way from Elm to Tamarack — in that context, the tennis court proposal would be compatible with, and could be an early phase, of the park. If the clubhouse were a modest, temporary structure, more view opportunities would be preserved within the corridor. Page 5 The North Beach Study does not recommend constructing Washington Street as a local through street from Elm to Tamarack, primarily because the right-of-way has been partially blocked, and such a street would take away from the residential character of the area. However, the Planning Commission and a number of residents who feel the street is needed for day-to-day, as well as emergency, access. The blocked City right-of-way means the street would have to be located within the railroad right-of-way. In the past, AT&SF has not been receptive to proposals within the railroad right-of-way; however, the railroad now seems more willing to lease property than in the past. Earlier studies (1982) recommend the deletion of Washington between Oak and Pine to minimize traffic at Elm and Washington and provide a separation between residential and commercial traffic. The issue of Washington Street may remain divided for some time. A temporary structure would preserve the option. If Washington Street were ever needed for access between Oak and Pine, it would be easier to remove a temporary structure than a major building. Land Use and Redevelopment Plan Compatibility The project would be near residential uses, and tennis courts adjacent to multiple family housing can be compatible, although a commercial operation such as the clubhouse may not be, due to noise, congregating, etc. The courts would close at 9:00 p.m., and hooded light fixtures would be used to focus all of the direct light onto the courts. In addition, the courts could be removed in the future if necessary. As thoroughly discussed earlier, the clubhouse, which is the size of a moderate home, as discussed, is not compatible with the T-C Zone. Regarding the Design Manual for this area, the proposed project technically is located in Subareas 4 and 5 of the Redevelopment Area. The tennis facility as proposed is in Subarea 4 which provides for heavy commercial/light manufacturing uses typically permitted by the commercial manufacturing zone. A small portion of the proposed project, the parking lot, is located in Subarea 5, which promotes tourist, recreational, and commercial activities of the Village Center with the beach area. Parking lots are an encouraged land use within Subarea 5, so that portion of the project would comply. Tennis facilities would not seem compatible with commercial manufacturing uses; however, they may be compatible with uses on the west side of the tracks. Staff doesn't believe that the railroad right-of-way really relates to either Subarea since it was intended to be an open corridor to provide existing and future rail transit through the area. In summary, staff feels the idea of tennis courts in the railroad right-of-way, with proper safety measures, could be a positive addition to the community. The project, with the clubhouse as Page 6 proposed, however, is an inappropriate use within the Transportation Corridor Zone. The clubhouse does not meet the zone's "temporary use" recjuirements, it would impede future light rail transit opportunities, and it would be a non-permitted general commercial use. A commercial, membership tennis club facility should be located outside the T-C zone. Staff recommends denial of RP 87-2. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Department has determined that this project will not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration on December 28, 1985. ATTACHMENTS 1. Design Review Board Resolution No. 104 2. Location Map 3. Boundary Map 4. Background Data Sheet 5. Letter, dated December 17, 1986, to Carlsbad Inn 6. Exhibit "Y", Department of Transportation Advisory Notice, February 3, 1987 7. Disclosure Form 8. Environmental Document 9. Exhibit "A", dated July 30, 1987 10. Exhibits "B" - "D", dated March 20, 1987 NER:dm 8/21/87 OCATION MAP Q > CQ CARLSBAD INN z o O CO H ELM > CO I o 6 u u H Pn o c 0 a: OAK DU P D DU P U DU P D AP T AP T AP T AP T AP T PINE AVE AVE CO •n 33 33 AVE SITE CARLSBAD INN TENNIS CLUB RP 87-2 • • • • • • B§UNDARY MAP( SITE VILLAGE CARLSBAD REDEVELOPMENT SUB'AREA MAP CARLSBAD INN TENNIS CLUB RP 87-2 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: RP 87-2 APPLICANT: CARLSBAD INN, LTD. REQUEST AND LOCATION: Major Redevelopment Permit to build 5 tennis courts, 1333 square foot clubhouse, and parking lot in AT&SF Railroad right-of-way between Oak and Pine Avenues in downtown Carlsbad. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached Exhibit "X" APN: 203-010-14, 15, and 203-296-02 Acres 1.3 Proposed No. of Lots/Units N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation V-R Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed N/A Existing Zone T-C Proposed Zone T-C Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: Zoning Land Use Site T-C Vacant-Railroad ROW North T-C Vacant South T-C Vacant East T-C/V-R Railroad Tracks/Downtown West R-3 MF PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's N/A Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated September 3, 1983 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT X Negative Declaration, Issued December 28, 1983 E.I.R. Certified, dated Other, PLANNING DEPARTMENT 2075 LAS PALMAS DRIVE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92009-4859 . (619)438-1161 Citp of €avlihati December 17, 1986 Mr. Scott Leeger Carlsbad Inn, Ltd. P. 0. Box 2089 Del Mar, CA 92014 Dear Mr. Leeger: This letter is intended to give you direction for further processing of the Carlsbad Inn Tennis Club application. As we discussed, the newly-approved Transportation Corridor (T-C) designation and zone have been established, which do not allow permanent buildings to be constructed within the railroad right- of-way. The intent is to preserve the ROW for future transit needs and secondly, to preserve thp existing openspace view corridor which is provided by the ROW. Based on the intent of the T-C zone, the clubhouse as presently designed is clearly incompatible. I suggest the following: the clubhouse cannot be a "permanent" structure, in accordance with appropriate building codes; and, it should be reduced in size to accommodate only two restrooms and a counter area used for scheduling appointments, etc... This would not seem to require more than 300-400 square feet. Also, the Beach Area Study suggests some design changes -- the view corridors from Oak and Pine toward the east should not be blocked by a building or high tennis court fences. Earlier, I sent you the preliminary exerpts which discussed the tennis courts. I think the above information has answered your question regarding what can or can't be done with the clubhouse. Give me a call if you have any questions. S incerely, NANCY E\J ROLLMAN Associate Planner NER:bn STATE OF CALIFORNIA-BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATI EXHIBIT "Y" D HOUSING AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIVISION OF MASS TRANSPORTATION 1130KSTREET. SUITE 101 P.O. BOX 942874 SACRAMENTO. CA 94274-0001 TDD (916) 323-7665 ADVISORY NOTICE The Los Angeles-San Diego State Rail Corridor Study Group, formed in 1985 under the provisions of Senate Bill 1095, is composed of the following members representing their respective organizations: Lee F. Deter, California Department of Transportation Jacki Bacharach,, Los Angeles County Transportation Commission Richard B. Edgar, Orange County Transportation Commission Gordana Swanson, Southern California Association of Governments Walter Gilbert, San Diego Association of Governments Claudia Elliott, Speaker of the Assembly Senator Jim Mills, Senate Committee on Rules Jim Barber, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) Robert E. Welk, Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company Lawson L. Chadwick, California Labor Federation At its recent meeting, the Study Group, acting unanimously, found that certain improvements, including the addition of a second track in areas between Fullerton and San Diego, and a third track in areas between Fullerton and Los Angeles, may be necessary or desirable to maintain and/or improve rail passenger service on the Santa Fe Railway's route between Los Angeles and San Diego. Therefore, the Study Group advises all public agencies in the Los Angeles-San Diego Corridor to include provisions for a second track (or a third track between Fullerton and Los Angeles) in any project such as a road, highway, or drainage channel that crosses the rail line. LEE/F. DETER, Chairman Los Angeles-San Diego State Rail Corridor Study Group February 3, 1987 EXHIBIT LEGAL DESCRIPTION: That portion of that certain 200 right-of-way of the Atchison, Topeka, and Santa Fe Railway Company as granted to California Southern Railway company under the provisions of the Act of Congress of March 3, 1875 (18 STAT. 482), and shown on the Map of said right-of-way filed in the Office of the Secretary of the Interior March 14, 1881, and approved May 12, 1881, lying within Lot 7 of Section 1 Township 12 South, Range 5 West, and in the West Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 6, Township 12 South, Range 4 West, San Bernardino Meridian, according to the Official Plat thereof lying Southeasterly of a line drawn parallel with and 235.00 feet Northwesterly measured at right angles to the Southwesterly prolongation of the center line of Oak Avenue, as said Oak Avenue is shown on the Plat of Industrial Tract, according to Map thereof No. 1743, as filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, and lying Northwesterly of a line drawn parallel with and 715.00 Southeasterly measured at right angles to said Southwesterly prolongation. DISCLOSURE FORN APPLICANT: Carlsbad Inn, Ltd. a California Limited Partnership Name (individual, partnership, joint venture, corporation, syndication) P.O. Box 99, Del Mar, CA 92014 Business Mdress 619/755-3991 AGENT: Telephone Number Howard D. Meacham Name P.O. Box 2089, Del Mar, CA 92014 MEMBERS: Business Mdress 619/755-7778 Telephone Number (See Attached List) Name (individual, partner, joint Home Mdress venture, corporation, syndication) Business Mdress Telephone Number Telephone Number Name Home Mdress Business Mdress Telephone Number Telephone Number (Attach more sheets if necessary) The applicsuit is required to apply for Coastal Commission Approval if located in the Coastal Zone. I/We declare under penalty of perjury that the information contained in this disclosure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be relied upon as being true and correct until amended. APPLI BY Agent,jQwnori Partner • rv:*» row*'**'*' /f<^ L«T A.T. & S.F. R.R. COUI r 1 1 n I COUI T a COUI T 4 I III I SITE PLAN (. WASHINGTON ST. OWNER / APPUCANT ft~RCHr^ECT / APPUCANTS , ^JPRESENTAnVE i F;R0JECT DESCRIPTION STAnSTICS GENERAL NOTES LOCATION MAP WEST ELEVATION WOOO COHBELB FinCPLACI STACK WOOO tlAMt • TUCCO SIOINO NORTH ELEVATION PAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION FLOOR PLAN C0N8TRUCTI0H OU|bin» locAtKM: ttmtmnat ttmit mnmm au tttmm tm rmrmmi* vm ein m fiwu. ir—n a* «• •IHO. mn Of uuNHU. 0Q.WDCTK1.I mumirif •> •• Tm t aoa* HimvMa^am BMifTiw. wanTiOM; mMTMH «• •• omiimam SBKMISIBBVUM . ItmilMI no iivn M u- o e. iin i/i-HIU HlM iiiM cmtum •in MII « riaiM. immiLATiu* lu. mnica .AU* B Main 4- ma l^n—lUlauM un iiMUTia ux tme wtoa TO uain If ma fi.wni tm Mft imni nm n mn niu •• lanuTian. ess unaio. anun wou 10 M ma nai •nil aatfa. ona Doaaa m m i-i/4* M4a ont aMM laua aoon. UP aiAttm: tu. iiaion TO n autxiao UM- cavan tu. ctiiun n n mia oatsi un UU iQCluoar ctaiim TO M Miwa n rtm. niLni m n riaa, a*tn a aa nmi, m atatiau ana. iim. niirrijM. utsuoa moau noo n uain on aait m nxn MOIU artn. irrnioa nanni TO M Miana ii nif ntcria taa im oDtuTi atnaitu. ctainna. nc.. n uciin -ui- ntia taa no ootn aa uowu. tu. naoan nun nrti. n u Tuanw aumiM. tu. iimau n H -tnaicta maotn-• U Ifnona nati.. tu. auMaiw n n laartua tl na lai i.a c. itna cuam n M atTa atiin Tm. atm atna n a ata-rim. •Mtticti.: toaoa tll utTin niT n a ata-fin*. HTMnTT.i. aiTtn aninaai. lUCTllCtl.: ALk UlCniCtL flBlL BJcme oa. tix 1 leti. ani«B n lAmmcirtmi. t UnuuntrlMia atn •- nam SITE PLAN CARLSBAD INN TENNIS CLUB PAGE / OF I DATE PREPARED UTE ricr.in: ruiu»T 7. IM: OWNER A.T.I S.F. lAlLIOiS CAltSiAD LTD.. A CALirOllIA LINITEB PitTICISHtP. VINNCRS CIRCLC lESOITS IRTERIATIMAL. I«C. AS CO-CERCIAL PAKTHEt. BT: JAHCS Jl. UATV1IS. PtESIDDT AGENT POf NI. WATKtaS: JUDI CAtlOLL P. 0. BOX 2089 DEL HAI. CALIFOiata 9201* ^(619) 755-777* ENGINEER CAlOIFF, CALtFOIBlA LANDSCAPE / DESIGN saoua on A scrci.TE put ti-. LEGAL UTILITIES UATEti CITT SEWEI; ELECT!ICt CAS: CITT OF CAKLSBAD SAI ELICTtIC DIECO CAS « ELECTtIC :FIC TELEPIOIE: A3S-SU4 43S-272Z -5604 -6323 235-6323 BOO-A22-433-5541 2722 5604 235-6323 -6323 -422-4133 GRADING piorosED nu.: 3.90 C.I. itmoi.) OTHER NOTES mm TIXT TVE IHPIOTEHEVTS AVD PtOPnTT LUES (BODIDARIES> AS SVOVV I CAKLSBAD BLTD VICINITY MAP 'NO SCALE / 1 / 1 -« :% / / ^ -« :% / 1 -« :%