Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRP 94-02; Army & Navy Academy Master Plan; Redevelopment Permits (RP)MEMORANDUM October 4, 1995 TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD/PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: Planning Department SUBJECT: RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 • ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN - Request for approval of a Negative Declaration, Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Pennit, and Conditional Use Permit for a conceptual master site plan to redevelop and expand the existing facilities of the Army and Navy Academy located along the east and west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, north of Beech Avenue, in Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION Design Review Board That the Design Review Board ADOPT Design Review Board Resolution Nos. 232,233, and 234 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL ofthe Negative Declaration, RP 94-02 and CDP 94-02, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. Planning Commission That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3796 and 3797 APPROVING the Negative Declaration and CUP 94-02, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. PRO.TECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND On September 6,1995 the Planning Commission and Design Review Board, at a joint public hearing on the Army and Navy Academy Master Site Plan, continued the project to October 4, 1995 so that the developer and staff could resolve project details concerning phasing of private and public improvements. Staff has met with the consultant representing the Army and Navy Academy, and both parties have come to an agreement on this matter. As a result of the meeting there is a revised project Phasing Plan which replaces Exhibit "G" (See attachment Exhibit "G"). Included vdth the change in the project's phasing is an amendment to Condition No. 6 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3797 and Condition No. 10 of Design Review Board Resolution No. 233. In addition, the appropriate Design Review Board and Planning Commission Resolutions have been amended to include the changes requested in the Planning Department Errata Sheet, dated September 6,1995, that was distributed at the last public hearing on September © RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN OCTOBER 4,1995 PAGE 2 6,1995. Staff is still recommending approval of the project and the revised resolutions are attached to this memorandum. The project's phasing plan has been amended to reflect Engineering Department requirements for public improvements along the various public streets that front the school. These improvements include street widening, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and the undergrounding of utility lines. The revised phasing plan would still include, as part of Phase 1, a permanently improved parking lot north of Mountain View Drive that must be constmcted concurrent with any future development of the school. Except for the parking lot north of Mountain View Drive, the remaining development can be constmcted out of the numerical phase sequence as long as the necessaiy public facility improvements are constmcted per the appropriate phase. The timing of the necessary public improvements are triggered by the project's constmction phasing. For example, the developer would be permitted to build Phase 8 after the completion of Phase 1, if the public improvements for Phase 8 are also constmcted. ATTACHMENTS 1. Design Review Board Resolution No. 232 2. Design Review Board Resolution No. 233 3. Design Review Board Resolution No. 234 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3796 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3797 6. Staff Report, with attachments, dated September 6,1995 (previously distributed) 7. Revised Exhibit "G", dated September 6, 1995 'Ik A RKPflRT Tfl m Mim WW BOARD m THE vumm (mamm Item No. Apphcation resubmittal May 26, 1995 P.C. AGENDA OF: September 6, 1995 date: Project Planner: Jeff Gibson Project Engineer: Mike Shirey SUBJECT: RP 94-02/CDI I Kl I Miiiiiii ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SHE PLAN - Request for approval of a Negative Declaration, Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and Conditional Use Permit for a conceptual master site plan to redevelop and expand the existing facilities of the Army and Navy Academy located along the east and west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, north of Beech Avenue, in Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION Design Review Board That the Design Review Board ADOPT Design Review Board Resolution Nos. 232,233, and 234 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of tiie Negative Declaration, RP 94-02 and CDP 94-02, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. Planning Commission That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3796 and 3797 APPROVING the Negative Declaration and CUP 94-02, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION The project consists of a master site plan for the redevelopment of the existing Army and Navy Academy, and includes a Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and a Conditional Use Permit. The above permits are necessitated by the multiple zoning districts over the property, overlapping coastal jurisdictions, and unique physical and functional characteristics of both the site and the proposed development. TTiese permits would bring the private school into compliance with the zoning and permit requirements of the R-3 and Village Redevelopment Zones. Private schools are permitted in the R-3 Zone RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-1^ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6, 1995 PAGE 2 of the City with a Conditional Use Pemiit or in the Village Redevelopment Zone with a Major Redevelopment Permit. The project complies with the pohcies and regulations of each of the applicable coastal programs and zoning districts and there are no unresolved project issues. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND On December 7, 1994, the Design Review Board and Planning Commission conducted a joint public hearing and both denied without prejudice the Army and Navy Academy's proposal for a master site plan based on the proposal to close Cypress Avenue between Carlsbad Boulevard and Ocean Street. On January 17,1995, the Ajmy and Navy Academy appealed the decision to the City Council and Housing and Redevelopment Commission, where it was retumed to Staff for further review and analysis to consider a potential partial closure of Cypress Avenue. The Army and Navy Academy is now requesting approval of the necessary land use permits for the private school without the proposal to close Cypress Avenue. The project consists of a Major Redevelopment Permit, Coastal Development Permit, and Conditional Use Permit to allow the continued use and future relocation, reconstmction, renovation, and expansion of existing faciHties at the Army and Navy Academy. The school site is 15.8 acres in size and is located on the east and west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, north of Beech Avenue, in Local FaciHties Management Plan Zone 1. The Army and Navy Academy is a private junior and senior high school for boys. The school currently has dormitories and facilities to accommodate 296 resident students and 50 day students, with facilities that include faculty housing, academic halls, a libraiy, chapel, dining hall, gym, infirmary, athletic fields, pool, administrative offices, 25 onsite parking spaces, and maintenance and storage buildings. The school is partially located in two Coastal Zone Segments (Village Area Redevelopment Plan and Mello II), and has the following General Plan, Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Redevelopment Plan designations and zoning districts: 1. General Plan Designations - ViUage (V), Residential High (RH), Residential Medium High (RMH), and Open Space (OS): 2. Local Coastal Programs A. MeUo II - School/PubHc Use; B. Village Area Redevelopment Plan - Open Space; 3. Zoning Districts - VUlage Redevelopment, R-3 Multiple-Family Residential, Open Space, and Beach Area Overlay Zone. RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-Or- ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6,1995 PAGE 3 The school is within several different zoning designations, therefore, a Major Redevelopment and Coastal Development Permit are required for the portion of the campus located in the ViUage Redevelopment 2^ne and a Conditional Use Permit is required for the portion of the site located in the R-3 and Beach Area Overlay Zone. Because of the split zoning designations the project must be reviewed by the Design Review Board, Housing and Redevelopment Commission, and the Planning Commission. The surrounding neighborhood includes the foUowing land uses: 1. North - Single and Multiple-Family Dwelling Units; 2. East - AT&SF RaUroad Tracks; 3. South - Magee Park, Ebb-Tide Inn, and Single and Multiple-Family Dwelling Units; 4. West - Sand Beaches and the Pacific Ocean. The Army and Navy Academy was in existence at this location before Carlsbad incorporated into a City and before there were Coastal, R-3, and Redevelopment Zones, therefore, the private school does not have the necessaiy land use permits that are currently required by the City for a private school. When the MeUo II LCP land use plan was approved for this area, the property was designated as a private school land use, and until recently the General Plan designated the site for a school. Subsequently, when the ViUage Redevelopment Plan and LCP was approved for the area, a portion of the property was designated for open space land use. The current Zoning Ordinance and Village Design Manual both provide land use regulations for the property. The ordinances allow a private school in the R-3 Zone with a Conditional Use Permit and in the Village Redevelopment Zone with a Redevelopment Permit. Before the Army and Navy Academy begins physical renovation of the school the City is requiring that a Conditional Use Permit and Redevelopment Permit be approved to bring the private school land use into permit conformance with the R-3 Zone and the Village Redevelopment Zone. The permits would also establish land use, development phasing, public improvements, and the location of onsite parking areas and building envelopes. Because the future renovation of the school involves multiple stmctures and facilities spread over a large area, the master site plan would guide the future renovation of the campus to ensure compatibility within the site and with the surrounding neighborhood. Because the appHcant did not provide detailed building elevations and floor plans, nor drainage and grading information with the application, the permits would not grant specific discretionary entitlement to constmct any of the proposed facilities, but rather, provide a master plan framework for the review of future development. For the actual physical constmction and renovation of each new facihty and building location shown on the plan the appHcant would apply for individual permits and/or an amendment to the applicable RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER STTE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6,1995 PAGE 4 Redevelopment/Coastal Development/ Conditional Use Permit. At that time, the Design Review Board or Planning Commission would determine compliance with LCP/City Redevelopment Agency codes and poHcies, and determine conformance with the master site plan, including the proposed Architectural Design Guidehnes. The master site plan would coordinate the provision and timing of the public and private improvements to the campus and provide a comprehensive framework for the overall architectural and land use design of the school. The master site plan includes the following major components: 1. The expansion of existing school faciHties by approximately 87,500 square feet, and the constmction and renovation of buUdings; 2. The addition of 110 onsite parking spaces for students, employees, and visitors; 3. A phasing improvement plan for the buildout of the master site plan; 4. A planned maximum enroUment of 350 students and 100 employees - (302 resident students and 48 daytime students); and 5. Site Plan and Architectural Design Guidelines. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND PERMFFS Because of the spHt zoning designations on the property, the project's discretionaiy review is within the purview of both the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. The Design Review Board maintains authority over all Redevelopment Permits and Coastal Development Permits within the Village Redevelopment Zone (V-R). For Major Redevelopment Permits the Design Review Board functions as an advisory body to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission. The Planning Commission has final approval authority for the Conditional Use Permit, which appHes to the portion of the school located in the R-3 Zone and the Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ). Due to these unusual circumstances, the public hearing on September 6, 1995 has been consolidated into one joint pubHc hearing with the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. The Design Review Board wiU make a recommendation to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission on the Major Redevelopment Permit and the Coastal Development Permit. The Planning Commission will act on the Conditional Use Permit and be the final decision-maker unless appealed to the City Council. For the portion of the school in the Mello II LCP Segment, the appHcant will have to obtain a Coastal Development Permit from the Coastal Commission, and the Conditional Use Permit has been so conditioned. For the portion of the school in the ViUage Area RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6,1995 PAGE 5 Redevelopment LCP Segment the Coastal Development Permit, if approved by the Housing and Redevelopment Commission, is subject to appeal to the Coastal Commission. The project is subject to the following land use plans, policies, programs, and zoning regulations: 1. General Plan; 2. Mello II and Village Redevelopment Local Coastal Programs; 3. Conditional Use Ordinance (Chapter 21.42 of the Zoning Ordinance); 4. Village Area Redevelopment Plan/Village Design Manual/V-R Zoning Ordinance; 5. R-3/BAO Zoning Ordinances; 6. Growth Management Ordinance (Chapter 21.90 of the Zoning Ordinance). IV. ANALYSIS Staff recommendation of approval for this project is based upon the following analysis of the project's consistency with the applicable policies and regulations listed above. The following analysis section discusses comphance with each of these regulations utilizing tables and text depicting and describing consistency with appHcable poHcies, ordinances, and standards. A General Plan The proposed project is consistent with the policies and programs of the General Plan. The table below indicates how the project complies with the Land Use, Circulation, and Open Space elements of the General Plan which are particularly relevant to this project. GENERAL PLAN ELEMENT PERMITTED USE/POLICY/STANDARD PROPOSED LAND USE/STANDARD COMPLIANCE Land Use ViUage/RH/RMH - Title 21 - zoning implementation allows schools as a conditional use in residential and redevelop- ment zones. Private school permitted with a Conditional Use Per- mit & Redevelopment Per- mit. Yes RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6, 1995 PAGE 6 ELEMENT PERMTTTED USE/POLICY/STANDARD PROPOSED LAND USE/STANDARD COMPLUNCE Circulation A.2 A City with adequate circulation infrastructure to serve projected popu- lation. A.4 A City with properly maintained, smooth functioning and safe traffic control systems. 1. The project would pro- vide street widening and roadway improvements such as curb and side- walks. 2. There would be no oper- ational deficiencies at intersections and on roadways serving the project. The Cypress Ave/Carlsbad Blvd. inter- section operates within acceptable levels. Yes Open Space Historical & Cultural Preser- vation A.1 A city in which its exist- ing and continuing heri- tage is protected, pre- served, recognized and enhanced. C.3 Provide landmark iden- tifications of designated cultural resources. C.7 Incorporate the Cultural Resource Guidehnes in the environmental re- view of development applications. 1. The exterior of Fegan Hall, formerly the Red Apple Inn - an historic structure of local signifi- cance will remain, with only interior remodehng. 2. Based on an archaeologi- cal survey and historical inventory, the project would not significantly impact cultural resources. Yes B. Mello II and Village Redevelopment Local Coastal Programs 1. MeUo II Segment of the Local Coastal Program The portion of the project west of Garfield and Ocean Streets, and north of Mountain View Drive is located in the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program (LCP). The property is designated "School/PubHc Use" on the coastal land use plan. The master site plan would not grant specific discretionary entitlement to constmct any of the facilities shown on the plan, but rather, provide a master plan framework for the review of future development permits. For the actual physical constmction and renovation of each new facility within this LCP segment, the developer would apply for an individual development permit that would be evaluated RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6,1995 PAGE 7 for compliance with the relevant Mello II policies, including geotechnical analysis, erosion control, and bluff stabUity. On the master site plan a potential building envelope and a stringline setback in the area seaward of Ocean Street is proposed, as shown on Exhibit "A". Vertical pubhc access to the beach is currently provided by the existing public access stairways located 50 feet south of the project, along Ocean Street. The project site west of Ocean Street has been used historically as a private, fenced area by the school and provides no direct views of the ocean or public access to the beach. As shown on Exhibit "A", the existing recreation hall would be replaced with a new facility that does not exceed the height of Ocean Street, and therefore, opens up a large ocean view corridor along Ocean Street. As the various facilities are renovated and replaced, the streets fronting the property would be widened and improved with curbs and sidewalks. This would enhance the pubhc parking in the area and provide safer pedestrian access to the beach. The addition of 110 onsite parking spaces would reduce the school's reliance on offeite public street parking to satisfy the paridng demand created by the school's students, guests, and employees. 2. Village Redevelopment Local Coastal Program The Village Design Manual is the zoning document and implements the LCP for the redevelopment area. The manual specifies uses and development standards for each of the seven sub-areas. A portion of the proposed project is located within Sub-area 5 of the manual. Permitted land uses in Sub-area 5 include visitor serving commercial uses along with uses allowed in the R-3 Zone, which includes private schools with a Redevelopment Permit. In the ViUage Area Redevelopment Plan the Army and Navy Academy site is designated open space, and is not designated for commercial usage. Therefore, the LCP requirement that "the entire ground floor of all projects shall be devoted to visitor commercial uses" for property designated for commercial use (such as the Lutheran Home) is not applicable to the Army and Navy Academy. With a Major Redevelopment Permit/Coastal Development Permit to allow the school as a conditional use, the school will come into compliance with all LCP requirements. C. Conditional Uses (Chapter 21.42 of the Zoning Ordinance) In the V-R and R-3/BAO Zones, the proposed school is allowed as a conditional use. Conditional uses in any zone are generally allowed if the use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, compatible with surrounding uses, and consistent with the General Plan/LCP/Redevelopment Plan. Additionally, the site and street system must be adequate to accommodate the use and the project design must be integrated into the neighborhood. RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6, 1995 PAGES General Plan Consistency and Compatibilitv The Army and Navy Academy is considered necessary and desirable to satisfy the educational needs of students in the community, and the use is consistent with residential land uses designated for the area by the General Plan/LCP/Redevelopment Plan. The fact that the school has occupied the site for 58 years is evidence of its compatibility with the neighborhood, and although some of the existing facilities would be replaced, remodeled, and in some cases expanded, it's potential student capacity and operation would not substantially increase. Zoning district standards such as setbacks, buUding height, lot coverage, and story limitations would ensure that the scale and location of future development is compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhood. In addition to the zoning standards for the property, the proposed Design Guidelines and conceptual landscape plan would ensure a level of quality and compatibility for all buildings and physical improvements within the campus. The Design Guidelines (Exhibit "J") include criteria for architectural style and materials related to such items as building massing and form, architectural elements and features, walls and fences, walkways, signage, and landscaping. Traffic Issue (Cvpress Avenue/Carlsbad Boulevard Intersection) During the last public hearing for this project the City CouncU and several citizens expressed concem about the Cypress Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevard intersection. The Engineering Department has since investigated and analyzed the operation and safety of the intersection using traffic counts, traffic collision statistics, comer sight distance determination, and a geometric alignment/operation investigation. Based on the investigation the Engineering Department concludes that the intersection operates within safe and acceptable parameters for the foUowing reasons: 1. The required comer sight distance for this type of intersection is 330 feet. Both field observation and improvement plan review indicate that the existing intersection's sight distance exceeds the standard and is approximately 500 feet to the north and 450 feet to the south. 2. A field evaluation of the intersection's sight distance was conducted in March, 1995. At that time it was determined that the landscaping in the center median did not reduce or negatively impair the intersection's sight distance. The Community Services Department trims the median vegetation on a scheduled routine to ensure adequate sight distance. 3. Staff researched the reported traffic colHsions at the intersection from Januaiy 1,1991 through June 1,1995. Within this time period, there has been one (1) reported traffic colHsion in September 1992. RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6,1995 PAGE 9 4. Additionally, the Beech Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevard intersection, which is the next intersection south, is scheduled for a traffic signal as part of the constmction program for the Washington Street Commuter RaU Station. The instaUation of this traffic signal should enhance the already acceptable operation of the Cypress Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevard intersection by creating additional gaps in the flow of traffic. D. & E. V-R Zoning Ordinance/Village Design Manual, and R-3/BAO Zoning Ordinance The project complies with all standards and design criteria specified by the appHcable ordinances as follows: COMPLUNCE WFFH V-R ZONE AND R.3/BAO ZONE STANDARDS STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED Lot Coverage V-R Zone < 80%; R-3/BAOZ < 60% 13-50% 49% Front Yard Setback V-R Zone - N/A R-3/BAOZ - 20' 10-20' 20' Street Side Yard Setback V-R Zone - N/A R-3/BAOZ - 10' N/A 10' Side Yard Setback R-3/BAOZ - 10' 10-12' Rear Yard Setback R/3/BAOZ - 20' Mello II - Stringhne Setback 40-70' Stringline provided Building Height V-R Zone - 35' R-3/BAOZ - 24' (Flat roof) 30* (Pitched roof) To be determined with future building plans Parking (Chapter 21.44 of the Zoning Ordinance) 1 space/10 students - (350) & 1 space/employee - (100) = 135 parking soaces 136 Parking F. Growth Management The proposed project is located in Local FacUities Management Zone 1 and consists of the redevelopment of an existing private school. The school is a commercial nonprofit organization, and the student dorms and faculty housing are not considered dwelHng units; therefore, growth management standards based upon population and density are not applicable. The impacts created by the development on pubHc faciHties and comphance with the adopted performance standards are summarized as follows: RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6, 1995 PAGE 10 GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLUNCE STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE City Administration Not Applicable Not Applicable Library Not Applicable Not Applicable Waste Water Treatment 17.13 EDU Yes Parks Not Applicable Not AppUcable Drainage Drainage Basin A Yes Circulation 1,400 ADT Yes Fire Fire Station 1 Yes Open Space 6-1- acres Yes Schools Not Applicable Not Applicable Water 3,768.6 GPD Yes V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff has conducted an environmental impact assessment to determine if the project could have a potentially significant effect on the environment pursuant to CEQA Guidehnes and the Environmental Protection Ordinance (Title 19) ofthe Carlsbad Municipal Code. Based on the level of detail provided with the master site plan, including land use, development phasing, public improvements, and the location of onsite parking areas and buUding envelopes, it was determined that these modifications to the existing campus would not create significant environmental impacts. However, sufficient grading, drainage, building details, and geotechnical analysis necessary to assess potential significant visual and geologic impacts has not been provided as part of this plan, therefore, each future development permit for the physical constmction of the facilities and buildings would undergo further environmental review to determine specific environmental impacts that could not be assessed at the master site plan level. As part of this environmental review a Phase I Archeological Survey and Historical/Architectural Evaluation of the Army and Navy Academy was prepared by Phillips Research Services, dated May, 1995. The report indicated that the proposed plans for the future development of the campus would not result in significant impacts to cultural resources and no further evaluation or work was recommended by the consultant. With regard to air quaHty and circulation impacts, the City's MEIR found that they are significant and adverse and the Council adopted a statement of overriding consideration. RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER STTE PLAN SEPTEMBER 6, 1995 PAGE 11 The project is consistent with the General Plan and as to those effect, no additional environmental document is required. As a result of this environmental review it was determined that no significant impacts would occur due to the disturbed nature of the site, compliance with permit and zoning requirements, and the fact that the plan does not constitute the addition of major new land uses or a significant increase in the potential capacity of the school. Therefore, a Negative Declaration was issued by the Planning Director on June 16, 1995. The Negative Declaration was also sent to the State Clearinghouse for State PubHc Agency Review and no letters of comment were received. ATTACHMENTS 1. Design Review Board Resolution No. 232 2. Design Review Board Resolution No. 233 3. Design Review Board Resolution No. 234 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3796 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3797 6. Location Map 7. Background Data Sheet 8. Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form 9. Disclosure Form 10. Exhibits "A" - "J", dated September 6, 1995. JG:vd July 27, 1995 SITE VILLAGE Y REDEVELOPMENT AREA BEECH AVE 4 City of Carlsbad ARMY NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/ CUP 94-02 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 CASE NAME: Armv & Naw Academv Master Site Plan APPLIGANT: Armv & Naw Academy REQUEST AND LOGATION: East and West side ofCarisbad Boulevard. North of Beech Avenue. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 46 and a Portion of Lot 47 of Granville Park According to Map Thereof No. 1782. February 21. 1924: Lots 58-73. 75. 76. 94-96. 98-101. 102-130. 131. 153-170. 177-198 Indusive of Granville Park No. 2. According to Map Thereof No. 2037. Tune 18. 1927: A Portion of Block 3 of Town Garlsbad. According to Map Thereof No. 755. Februarv 15. 1894: That Portion of Block 1 and 2 of Oceanside Addidon To Garlsbad. According to Map Thereof No. 893. April 8. 1903; That Portion of Lot 1. Block "A" of Haves Land Companv Addition to Carlsbad. According to Map Thereof No. 1221. November 4. 1909: all Filed in the Ofllce of the Countv Recorder of San Diego Countv. and all in the Citv of Carisbad. Countv of San Diego, State of California. APN:203-041-02:203-043-06:203-010-16:203-142-06:203-141-03.23:203-051-03:203-052-01.02:203-053-01 Acres: 15.8 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designadon Village fV)/Residential High and Medium High (RH AND RMH)/Open Space (OS) Density Allowed N/A Densitv Proposed N/A Exisdng Zone V-R/R-3/BAOZ/OS Proposed Zone N/A Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carisbad's Zoning Requirements) Zoning Land Use Site V-R/R-3/BAOZ/OS Armv & Naw Academv North R-3/OS Single-Familv Residences South V-R/R-3 Park/Multi-Familv Residences East T-G Railroad Corridor West OS Pacific Ocean/Beaches PUBUC FACILITIES School District Carlsbad Water District Garlsbad Sewer District Carisbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) 17.13 I\iblic Facilities Fee Agreement, dated N/A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued June 16, 1995 Certified EJI vironmental Impact Report, dated N/A Other, JGivd CFFY OF CARLSBAD GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM LOCAL FACILFnES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM (To be Submitted with Development Application) PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT: FILE NAME AND NO: RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 Armv and Naw Academv Master Site Plan LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE:J_ GENERAL PLAN: V/RH/RMH/OS ZONING: V-R/R-B DEVELOPER'S NAME: Armv & Naw Academv ADDRESS: PO Box 3000. Carlsbad. CA 92008 PHONE NO.: (619) 729-2385 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC, SQ. FT., DU): 214.041 ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: K. 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) N/A D. Park: Demand in Acreage = N/A E. Drainage: Demand in CFS = N/A Identify Drainage Basin = A (Identify master plan faciHties on site plan) F. Circulation: Demand in ADTs = 1.400 (Identify Trip Distribution on site plan) G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = I H. Open Space: Acreage Provided - 6+ I. Schools: N/A (Demands to be determined by staff) J. Sewer: Demand in EDUs - 17.13 Identify Sub Basin - N/A (Identify trunk line(s) hnpacted on site plan) K. Water: Demand in GPD - 3.768.6 L. The project is N/A units N/A the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance. JG:vd APPLICATIOI^TOMPLETE DATE: SEPTEMBER 28. 1994 STAFF PLANNER - JEFF GIBSON STAFF REPORT ® DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: I. DECEMBER 7, 1994 DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING DEPARTMENT RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 94-02 - ARMY AND NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN - Request for approval of a Major Redevelopment Permit, Conditional Use Permit, and Coastal Development Permit for a master site plan to close Cypress Avenue and redevelop and expand the existing facilities of the Army and Navy Academy located along the east and west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, north of Beech Avenue, in Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1. RECOMMENDATION That the Design Review Board ADOPT Design Review Board Resolution Nos. 216, and 217 recommending DENIAL of RP 94-02, and CDP 94-02, and the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3727, DENYING CUP 94-02, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. II. PRO.IECT DESCRIPTION & BACKGROUND The project consists of a Major Redevelopment Permit, Conditional Use Permit, and Coastal Development Permit to allow the future relocation, reconstmction, renovation, and expansion of existing facilities at the Army and Navy Academy. The school site is 4.38 acres in size and is located on the east and west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, north of Beech Avenue, in Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 1. The Army and Navy Academy is a private junior and senior high school for boys. The school currently has dormitories to accommodate 296 students, with facilities that include faculty housing, academic halls, a library, chapel, dining haU, gym, infirmary, athletic fields, pool, administrative offices, 25 on- site paridng spaces, and maintenance buildings. The school is located in the Coastal Zone and has the foUowing General Plan and Zoning designations: 1) General Plan Designations - Private School (P), Residential Medium High (RMH), and Open Space (OS); RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP ^fe ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN DECEMBER 7, 1994 PAGE 2 2) Zoning Designations - Village Redevelopment, R-3 Multiple-Family Residential, Open Space, and Beach Area Overlay Zone. The school is within several different zoning designations, therefore, a Major Redevelopment and Coastal Development Permit are required for the portion of the campus located in the VUlage Redevelopment Zone and a Conditional Use Permit is required for the portion of the site located in the R-3 and Beach Area Overlay Zone. Because of the split zoning designations the project must be reviewed by the Design Review Board, Housing and Redevelopment Commission, and the Planning Commission. The surrounding neighborhood includes the foUowing land uses: 1) North - Single and Multiple-Family Dwelling Units; 2) East - AT&SF Railroad Tracks; 3) South - Magee Park, Ebb-Tide Inn, and Single and Multiple-Family Dwelling Units; 4) West - Sand Beaches and the Pacific Ocean. The applicant is proposing a conceptual master site plan for the school that would guide the future renovation of the campus. The master site plan would not grant specific discretionary entitlement to constmct any of the facilities, but rather, provide a master plan framework for the review of future Redevelopment/Conditional Use/Coastal Development Permits. For the actual physical constmction and renovation of each new facility shown on the plan the applicant would apply for an individual Redevelopment/Conditional Use/Coastal Development Permit. At that time, the Design Review Board or Planning Commission would determine comphance with City codes and poHcies, and determine conformance with the master site plan, including the proposed Design Guidelines. The master site plan would coordinate the provision and timing of the public and private improvements to the campus and provide a comprehensive framework for the overall architectural and land use design of the school. The master site plan includes the following major components: 1) The expansion of existing school facilities by approximately 66,000 square feet, and the constmction and renovation of buildings; 2) The closure of Cypress Avenue from Carlsbad Boulevard west to Ocean Street; 3) The addition of 110 on-site parking spaces for students, employees, and visitors; 4) A phasing improvement plan for the buildout of the master site plan; RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN DECEMBER 7, 1994 PAGE 3 5) A planned maximum enrollment of 350 students and 100 employees - (302 resident students and 48 daytime students); 6) Site and Architectural Design Guidelines, and; 7) A pedestrian bridge crossing Carlsbad Boulevard. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND PERMFFS Because of the split zoning designations on the property, the project's discretionary review is within the purview of both the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. The Design Review Board maintains authority over aU Redevelopment Permits and Coastal Development Permits within the VUlage Redevelopment Zone. For Major Redevelopment Permits the Design Review Board ftinctions as an advisory body to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission. The Planning Commission has final approval authority for the Conditional Use Permit, which appHes to the portion of the school located in the R-3 Zone and the Beach Area Overlay Zone. Due to these unusual circumstances, the public hearing on December 7, 1994 has been consolidated into one joint public hearing with the Design Review Board and the Planning Commission. The Design Review Board will make a recommendation to the Housing and Redevelopment Commission on the Major Redevelopment Permit and the Coastal Development Permit. The Planning Commission will act on the Conditional Use Permit and be the final decision-maker, unless the decision is appealed to the City Council. If for example, the Planning Commission denies the portion of the project covered by the Conditional Use Permit, the entire master plan, in effect, is denied, because it is a comprehensive plan that covers the entire school. Under this scenario the applicant would have to appeal the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council, and then the City Council/Redevelopment and Housing Commission would make the final decision on the project. In addition, the project must be reviewed and approved by the Califomia Coastal Commission. The Coastal Commission maintains pemiit authority over the property because part of the project is in a portion of the Coastal Zone that is located outside of the ViUage Redevelopment Zone. IV. PROJECT PROCESSING AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW During the City's review ofthis application the Planning and Engineering Departments have identified several issues of concem with the proposed closure of Cypress Avenue. Staffs concems focus on the impacts to public parking in the beach area, public beach accessibiUty, and the continuity of community circulation, all created by the proposed closure of the pubhc street and the phasing of the master site plan. The appHcant has been unwiUing to RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN DECEMBER 7, 1994 PAGE 4 discuss these issues with staff or modify the master site plan to address staffs concems. The closure and vacation of Cypress Avenue is a central element in the design of the master site plan for the Army and Navy Academy, however, as proposed on the master site plan, staff cannot recommend approval of the project. Typically projects are not scheduled for public hearing until all issues of concem are resolved and the required environmental review has been completed for the project. In this case, the appHcant requested that the project be scheduled for a public hearing immediately after the project application was deemed complete in order to receive a determination from the appropriate decision-makers in regards to the Cypress Avenue closure issue. When staff recommends an expedient project denial based on non-compliance with either City codes, adopted land use plans, or policies, the Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) does not require environmental review. This legal premise is based on the assumption that a project can not create a significant adverse impact to the environment if the project is denied, and therefore, never physically constmcted. When staff recommends denial of a project early in the project review process, not having to perform CEQA review prior to the public hearing saves the applicant the additional money necessaiy to hire consultants to prepare further environmental studies and documents. However, because the environmental review for the project has not been conducted, it limits the decision-maker's options at the public hearing. For example, if at the public hearings the Design Review Board/Redevelopment Commission and Planning Commission/City CouncU disagree with staffs recommendation, and decide, in concept, to support the closure of Cypress Avenue, the project cannot be legally approved at the hearings. The project must be returned to staff for further processing, including the completion of the environmental review. Once the project's environmental review is completed, per CEQA, the project can be rescheduled for public hearings and further discretionary review. As proposed on the master site plan, the closure of Cypress Avenue would create a significant, unmitigated, and adverse impact on future public paridng near the beach area, therefore, an Environmental Impact Report would likely be required. In addition, the school contains buildings that may qualify as historically significant per CEQA, thus, resulting in potentially significant impacts to cultural resources. At this point in time, a cultural resource survey and analysis of the school's buUdings has not been conducted by a qualified and professional cultural historian, per the requirements of the Cify of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidehnes, nor has the project and the required study been reviewed by the Carlsbad Historic Preservation Commission. These application processing steps are associated with the environmental review of the project and are legally required. RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN DECEMBER 7, 1994 PAGE 5 V. ANALYSIS Planning Issues 1) The closure of Cypress Avenue and it's impact on future parking and access in the beach area, and the continuify of neighborhood circulation. DISCUSSION Staffs central reason for recommending denial of the master site plan revolves around the proposed closure of Cypress Avenue, therefore, this report primarily focuses on this one issue, and does not fully analyze all aspects of the project's compliance with Cify ordinances, standards, and policies. Mello II Segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program: When the master site plan is fully developed or built-out, and all the school's public street frontages are improved (Ocean Street, Pacific Avenue, Garfield Street, Beech Avenue, and Mountain View Drive), the closure of Cypress Avenue would result in the elimination of approximately 25 to 29 public parking spaces. On the current master site plan there is no proposal to replace this lost public parking. Cypress Avenue is located in close proximity to a coastal accessway that leads to the beach from Ocean Street. The elimination of a public street that provides additional roadway access to the beach area from Carlsbad Boulevard, and the future loss of public paridng spaces near a coastal beach accessway creates a significant impact on public accessibiUty to the beach. The MeUo II Segment of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program requires mitigation when public beach accessways are adversely impacted by development that burdens existing road capacity or on-street pubhc paridng areas. This project makes it more difficult to gain access to and use of the coast, therefore, the master site plan is not in conformance with the Local Coastal Program. The Planning Department has consulted with the Coastal Commission staff about the project. The Coastal staff has given the City a preliminary indication that they would not support the master site plan if it negatively impacted accessibility to the public beach accessway near Cypress Avenue or reduced public paridng in the Coastal Zone. Historically, the Califomia Coastal Commission has taken a policy position that there should be no loss of public parking in the Coastal Zone. Public and On-Site Parking: The Army and Navy Academy has the school facUity capacity for 350 students and 100 employees which, per current City paridng standards, requires 135 on-site parking spaces. Currently the school has approximately 25 on-site parking spaces which is 110 spaces short of today's parking standard. As a result of this non-conforming parking situation many of RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN DECEMBER 7, 1994 PAGE 6 the school's students, employees, and visitors park their vehicles on the public streets that surround the campus, including Cypress Avenue. The proposed master site plan indicates that Cypress Avenue would be closed in Phase 1 of the project as part of the constmction of a new academic haU, however, additional on-site parking lots west of Carlsbad Boulevard would not be constmcted until Phase 4, and 9. According to the Planning Commission and City CouncU adopted North Beach Planning and Traffic Study, dated April 1987, Cypress Avenue currently has 25 non-standard public parking spaces. Elimination of these existing 25 parking spaces in Phase 1, without constmction of required on-campus parking spaces until Phase 4, would force the students, employees and visitors, who currently park on Cypress Avenue, to park on Ocean Street, Garfield Street, Pacific Avenue, or Mountain View Drive. The master site plan's phasing, in conjunction with the proposed closure of Cypress Avenue, intensifies the use of public street parking to help satisfy the paridng demand generated by the school. Until adequate on-site parking is constmcted for the school the amount of public paridng available in the area will be affected. Qosing Cypress Avenue reduces public roadway access and public parking in this beach area, however, the closure would not significantly reduce citywide beach visitor demand to the area. The amount of useable City beaches that have dedicated public coastal accessways is relatively fixed, yet the population of North County and beach visitor demand continues to increase. The North Beach Planning and Traffic Study concluded that in this area of the City, beach parking demand will continue to exceed the supply on peak user days and that there is near and long term need for additional beach paridng in this area. Qosure of Cypress Avenue and elimination of it's public parking spaces would concentrate beach traffic on the remaining residential streets, increase the competition for the remaining parking spaces, and force beach users to park on other residential streets in the area. The influx of beach visitor vehicle and pedestrian traffic into a residential neighborhood and the resulting competition for street parking in front of private residences can be dismptive to a residential community. In comparison to the potential impacts on the predominately residential streets in the neighborhood, the public parking along Cypress Avenue is less dismptive. A majority of the street frontage is located adjacent to administrative or educational facilities that are more likely to be unoccupied during peak, beach parking periods such as summer weekends and holidays. As an example, a beach visitor can park adjacent to the school's library on Cypress Avenue, walk directly west on Cypress Avenue to the public beach accessway, while passing by the front yards of only two private residential lots. Neighborhood Circulation: The proposed closure of Cypress Avenue would increase the traffic volumes on the surrounding circulation system, including Mountain View Drive, Pacific Avenue, Ocean Street and Beech Avenue. The Mountain View Drive and Carlsbad Boulevard intersection is less than optimal because of the inability to legally tum left on Carlsbad Boulevard. In addition, the road segment of Ocean Street between Cypress Avenue and Beech Avenue is RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/CUP 92 ARMY & NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN DECEMBER 7, 1994 PAGE 7 very narrow and not fully improved. The closure of Cypress Avenue and elimination of the legal left tum onto Carlsbad Boulevard may negatively impact the Mountain View Drive and Carlsbad Boulevard intersection, and increase the traffic on Ocean Street and Beech Avenue. These traffic impacts would require mitigation, including the potential for intersection and roadway improvements at Mountain View Drive, Pacific Avenue, and Carlsbad Boulevard, or roadway improvements on Ocean Street between Cypress Avenue and Beech Avenue. Before staff would recommend approval of the closure of Cypress Avenue, these mitigation altematives must be investigated further by the applicant's traffic consultant and submitted for staff review. VI. SUMMARY This project is not in conformance with the Local Coastal Program or the General Plan, not consistent with the adopted recommendations of the North Beach Planning and Traffic Study, would adversely impact pubhc parking in the beach area, adversely impact traffic circulation in the neighborhood, and could have a potentially significant impact on cultural resources, therefore, staff recommends that the Design Review Board recommend denial of RP 94-02, and CDP 94-02, and the Planning Commission deny CUP 94-02. ATTACHMENTS 1. Design Review Board Resolution No. 216 2. Design Review Board Resolution No. 217 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3727 4. Location Map 5. Background Data Sheet 6. Disclosure Form 7. Coastal Commission Letter, dated November 8, 1994 8. Exhibits "A" - "K", dated December 7, 1994. JG.-vd October 28, 1994 SITE VILLAGE Y REDEVELOPMENT AREA BEECH AVE City of Carlsbad ARMY NAVY ACADEMY MASTER SITE PLAN RP 94-02/CDP 94-02/ CUP 94-02 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: RP 94-02/GDP 94-02/GUP 94-02 CASE NAME: Armv & Naw Academv Master Site Plan APPLICANT: Armv & Naw Academv REQUEST AND LOGATION: East and West side of Carisbad Boulevard, North of Beech Avenue. LEGAL DESGRIPTION: Lot 46 and a Portion of Lot 47 of Granville Park According to Map Thereof No. 1782, Februarv 21, 1924: Lots 58-73. 75, 76, 94-96. 98-101, 102-130, 131, 153-170, 177-198 Inclusive of Granville Park No. 2, According to Map Thereof No. 2037, Tune 18, 1927; A Portion of Block 3 of Town Garlsbad, According to Map Thereof No. 755, February 15, 1894; That Portion of Block 1 and 2 of Oceanside Addition To Carlsbad, According to Map Thereof No. 893, April 8. 1903; That Portion of Lot 1, Block "A" of Hayes Land Company Addition to Garlsbad, According to Map Thereof No. 1221. November 4. 1909: all Filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, and all in the City of Garlsbad, County of San Diego, State of Califomia. APN:203-041 -02:203-043-06; 203-010-16; 203-142-06; 203-141 -03,23; 203-051 -03; 203-052-01,02; 203-053-01 Acres: 4^ Proposed No. of Lots/Units: N/A GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation Private School (P)/Residential Medium High (RDM'l/Open Space (OS) Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed N/A Existing Zone V-R/R-3/BAOZ/OS Proposed Zone N/A Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning Requirements) Zoning Land Use Site V-R/R-3/BAOZ/OS Army & Naw Academy North R-3/OS Single-Family Residences South V-R/R-3 Park/Multi-Family Residences East T-G Railroad Corridor West OS Pacific Ocean/Beaches PUBUC FACIUTIES School District Carlsbad Water District Carlsbad Sewer District Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) N/A Riblic Facilities Fee Agreement, dated N/A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued N/A Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated N/A Other, J^^'"'^"'