HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 106; Lusk Mobile Home Park; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (21)MEMORANDUM
March 11 , 1975
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT : CITY POLICY ON MOBILE t-IOFIE PARKS
The applicant for the Lusk Mobile Home park has requested that the City delay consideration of their CUP application until the broader issue of mobile home park policy 3s resolved. cussion analyzes the history of mobile home park development in Carlsbad and describes the concerns of the City in relation to the impacts of mobile homes on public services, the environment, and the socio-economic character of the Cit.y.
The following dis-
The City of Carlsbad adopted Supplement No. 1 to the Housing Element of the General Plan in May, 1970. The Supplement, entitled "Mobile Home Growth", was directed by the City Council after the City had ap- proved a number of Mobile Home Parks which would have generated some 2900+ mobile home spaces. The objective of this Housing Element Supplement was to study the implications of mobile home park develop- ment in relation to the goals and objectives of the General Plan. Of particular concern was the effect of mobile home park growth on
the environment, municipal services and the socio-economic structure of the City.
The report pointed out a number of issues and questions which, at that time, could not easily be resolved. To that end, the Housing Element Supplement on Mobile Homes recommended additional studies which could provide empirical evidence which would allow the City to more adequately assess the issues of municipal services, cost-benefit, etc. Therefore the Housing Element Supplement on Mobile Homes recommended:
1) No further mobile homes be developed until a coordinated C0unt.y wide study of mobile home growth could be completed by the CPn: and
2) No further mobile home development be approved until the authorized mobile home parks are developed and studied as to impact, or the approved Conditional Use Permits become null and void because of failure to begin construction within one year of the dafof issuance of said permit.
Based on recommendations of the Mobile Home Supplement to the Housing Element, the City Council passed Ordinance No. 9256 which placed moritorium on all mobile home applications for the period of one year. was enacted October 6, 1970 and expired one year later, October 6, 1971. During that period one of the approved CUP'S expired.
The Ordinance
The Planning Commission requested the City Council on February 28, 1972, to re-enact the Mobile Home Moratorium because the CPO had not yet completed a study on County wide impacts, mobile home park impacts, and the City had not yet analized municipal impacts outlined in the mobile home supplement. The City Council did not take any action on the Planning Commission's request.
To date, of the 5 approved CUP's which generated the concern over mobile home park growth, only two CUP's have been exercised, Rancho Carlsbad (504 spaces) and H.B./Sequoia Pacific (386 spaces), The two CUP's in conjunction with already existing Lanakai Mobile Home Park (146 spaces) and solamar Mobile Home Estates (106 spaces), total 1,142 of the 2900+ spaces which the City had approved. Occidental Petroleum Land CUP) approved two mobile home parks, one south of Poinsettia Lane (Sequoia Pacific) and one north of Poinsettia Lane (Lusk).
One of the original CUP's, (the H.B./
In as much as it does not seem that the total number of spaces
proposed (2900+) are ever qoing to be constructed, the City should be aware of the relationship of mobile home parks to municipal services, (cost-benefit, etc) and the impact that the potential of 1500+ mobile home spaces will have on the City.
Therefore, the question still remains regarding mobile home parks. Should the City withhold approving any additional mobile home park developments until ; (1 ) a complete analysis has been completed as recommended by the 197n Housing Element Supplement on mobile homes: and
(2) the City can establish quakitative standards and criteria for mobile home location and design? The Staff is of the opinion that these matters should be resolved prior to consideration of any additional CUP applications for mobile home parks.
To this end, Staff is recommendinq that the Planninq Commission forward a memorandum to the City Council requesting that they clarify what (if any) aspects of mobile home park nolicy needs to be further developed or defined. It is anticipated that this matter would go before the City Council prior to the Planning Commission hearinrl on the Lusk application on April 8.
ATTACHMENT: Letter from Donald Steffenson, dated March 11, 1975