Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 91-02; PERL FAMILY TRUST; Redevelopment Permits (RP) (5)APPLICATION COMPLETE DATE: APRIL 19. 1Q91 STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 4, 1991 TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: RP 91-2 - PERL FAMILY TRUST - Request for approval of a Minor Redevelopment Permit to change the use of an existing 880 square foot structure to a beauty salon at 3055 Madison Street in the Village Redevelopment (VR) Zone. The General Plan designation is Central Business District. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Design Review Board ADOPT Design Review Board Resolution No. 171, DENYING RP 91-2, based on the findings contained therein. n. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND This project involves the structure at 3055 Madison Street. As shown on Exhibit "A" dated September 4,1991, the property has fotir existing structures; two 880 square foot buildings (i.e. a video store and an existing office), an apartment building and a 400 square foot garage used for storage. Five parking spaces are located as shown. Assimiing a non- residential use at 3055 Madison Street, sixteen parking spaces would be required for the entire lot. The original use of 3055 Madison Street was residential. Over time the use was converted to office and a medical office has occupied the site for approximately 11 years. This request iixvoim the change from the previous use to a beauty salon. in. ANALYSIS Planning Issues 1. Can all zoning requiiements necessaiy for the use change be satisfied? RP 91-2 - PERL FAMILY TRUST SEPTEMBER 4, 1991 PAGE 2 DISCUSSION An office use existed within the subject structure which has been recently vacated. The City has no record of the conversion of 3055 Madison Street from residential (the original use) to non-residential use (medical office). If the conversion were legally approved, intemal upgrades to comply with the requirements of a B-2 occupancy, Title 24 and handicap provisions would have been required and no such improvements exist. In addition, a non-residential use would also be non-conforming as far as parking. The City has no record of a business license for any previous use. Because the City has no official record of approval of the office use at 3055 Madison Street this is an illegal non-conforming use. Only a residential use would be allowed without providing additional parking and building upgrades. The proposed beauty salon use would require 3 parking spaces. Overall the lot has insufficient parking since it also contains four 2-bedroom apartment units and two free standing buildings being used for non-residential uses. If the beauty salon use is included, a total of 16 parking spaces would be required but only five spaces exist on the site. If the issue of land use is reviewed in isolation, the proposed retail use (beauty salon) is compatible with existing adjacent land uses and permitted land uses in the Redevelopment Plan and Village Design Manual. To the north of the site is the San Dieguito Bank parking lot, to the south is the video store, the apartment building to the west (rear) of the lot and Madison Street to the east. The proposed use change must satisfy all applicable regulations and development standards. Because the site is deficient in parking, staff cannot recommend approval of this proposal. Even if the necessary building upgrades were completed as required for a conversion from a residential to non-residential use, the site carmot accommodate additional parking. The video store on the lot appears to also have been converted from a residential to a non-residential use. If an application for a use change or business license (other than the video store) was submitted, then compliance with applicable building codes and development standards (parking) would be necessary or the request would be denied. At this time tkere are no parking districts or redevelopment parking resources for the applicant to pvticipate in to satisfy the parking requirement. It is anticipated that the future Redevdopment Master Plan revision will develop and allow implementation of various parking mechanisms/solutions. IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW As described in Section 15270(a) of the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), environmental review and CEQA do not apply to projects which a public agency rejects or disapproves. RP 91-2 - PERL FAMILY TRUST SEPTEMBER 4, 1991 PAGE 3 V. SUMMARY Although the proposed land use is acceptable in this location insufficient parking exists to service the use, due to an overall parking deficiency on site. Staff therefore cannot support this application and recommends denial. ATTACHMENTS 1. Design Review Board Resolution No. 171 2. Location Map 3. Backgroimd Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Form 5. Exhibit "A" dated September 4, 1991 ENM:vd:lh May 20, 1991 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 171 A RESOLUTION OF THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNL\ DENYING A MINOR REDEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW A BEAUTY SALON RETAIL USE TO BE LOCATED IN AN EXISTING STRUCTURE ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF MADISON STREET, SOUTH OF CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE AT 3055 MADISON STREET. CASENAME: PERL FAMILY TRUST CASE NO: RP 91-2 WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Design Review Board; and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Design Review Board did, on the 4th day of September, 1991, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider said application on property described as: Lots 25, 26 and 27 of Block 39, Map No. 1722 as recorded in the County of San Diego, Califomia. APN: 203-305-12. WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Design Review Board considered all factors relating to RP 91-2. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Design Review Board as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Design Review Board hereby DENIES RP 91-2, based on the following findings: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Findings: 1. 2. Since the beauty salon use is for a structure that has not been legally converted finom a residential stmcture, the previous use had no business license and all associated development standards cannot be met, the proposed use would be inconsistent with the goals and objectives of the Village Development Plan and Village Design Manual to redevelop pioperties in an orderiy and functional manner. The subject property is within two Subareas (1 and 7). The portion of the property with the pioposed use change at 3055 Madison Stieet is within Subarea 1. The beauty salon use would be appropriate at the proposed location, however, the pioject cannot be supported since this does not involve a replacement of a legal non-confoiming use and all development standards are not met. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Design Review Board of the City of Carlsbad, Califomia, held on the 4th day of September, 1991 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chairman DESIGN REVIEW BOARD ATTEST: KATHY GRAHAM HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ENM:vd:ih:rvo DRB RESO NO. 171 -2- s JEFFERSON ST. i MADISON ROOSEVELT ST. SITE ST. V City If Carislii PERL FAMILY TRUST RP 91-2 W BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO.: RP 91-2 CASE NAME: Peri Familv Trust APPLICANT: Mort O'Gradv REQUEST AND LOCATION: Request to allow a retail beauty salon use to be located in an existing 880 square foot stmcture at 3055 Madison Street. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 25. 26 and 27 of Block 39. Map No. 1722 as recorded in the Countv of San Diego. Califomia. APN: 203-305-12 (Assessor's Parcel Number) Acres .24 Proposed No. of Lots/Units N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation Central Business District Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed N/A Existing Zone _VR Proposed Zone _VR Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning Requirements) Zoning Land Use Site _VR Vacant North VR Bank South VR Video Store East _VR Madison Street West J/R Apartments PUBLIC FACILITIES School District Carisbad Water District Carlsbad Sewer District Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) _1 Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated N/A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated Other, CEOA does not applv to a proiect being rejected or disapproved bv a public aeencv per Section 15270fa) of CEOA. ^^'"^ Citv of CarlRKaH DISCLCSURE ST.\TcMHNT SwPc CF Cc=~"A,N CWS£3SH(P •'N''E=E3'S CN Au» -==L.CAr:CNS V.t-'C.- r CF ':-£ c.Tv CCLNC:L cfl ANY A?=C.NTED SCA;;C CCM'V;SS.CS CP CC "r.e following informaticn must be discicsea: 1 Applicant List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application. Owner List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the properr/ rvc.-.ec If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the na-rs addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any p^.-.-e- interest in the partnership. If any person identifltd pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the narss : addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or fcere'.c of the trust. FRM00013 8/90 2075 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad. California 92009-4859 • (619) 438-1 16 Disclosure Statement Pace 2 . H r-rrp than ^250 wcr.h of business transacted with any memcer cf Cr/ s:- Yes No If yes. please indicate perscn(s). • • (NOTE: Anacti additionai pages as necessary.) 3>A i^ignature'of 'Owner/S^te Print or type name ot owner Signature of appticantycMrte Print or type name of applicant FRM00013 8/90