HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP 203A; Costa do Sol; Specific Plan (SP)IV Qty 4 fcrfeW Hautag ftp-tat
A REPORT TO THE PI 1VMM. COMMISSION
Item No.
P.C. AGENDA OF: JANUARY 3, 1996
Application complete date: July 6, 1995
Project Planner: Jeff Gibson
Project Engineer: Mike Shirey
SUBJECT: SP 203(AVCT 92-OlfAWUD 92-OKAVSDP 93-04(A) . COSTA DO SOL
Request for recommendation of approval of a Negative Declaration,
amendment of a Specific Plan, revision of a Tentative Map, amendment of a
Planned Development Permit and Site Development Plan to: (1) Add to
Specific Plan 203, the Villa Loma and Laurel Tree combined affordable
housing projects as potentially available to satisfy the inclusionary housing
requirements for residential projects within the specific plan; (2) re-subdivide
Condominium Lot No. 115 into 7 single-family lots; (3) redesign the
recreational vehicle parking area and the recreational open space lot; and (4)
satisfy inclusionary housing requirements through participation in the Villa
Loma project, all on property generally located east of Paseo del Norte, north
of Camino de las Ondas, and south of Palomar Airport Road, in the PC Zone
in Local Facilities Management Zone 20.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3862, 3863,
3864, 3865, 3866 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration, SP 203(A),
CT 92-01(A), PUD 92-01(A), and SDP 93-04(A), based on the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
This application would change the property's approved Tentative Map, Planned
Development Permit, and Site Development Plan by replacing 40 residential condominium
units in the eastern portion of the project site with 7 single-family lots, redesign the RV
storage area and the recreational lot, and provide the required affordable housing at Villa
Loma. In addition, the proposal includes a amendment to the Affordable Housing Section
of Specific Plan 203. The amendment would establish two potential locations, Villa Loma
and Laurel Tree combined affordable housing projects, for satisfaction of inclusionary
housing requirements associated with residential projects within the specific plan. The
project is consistent with all City codes, policies, and ordinances as well as Specific Plan 203.
There are no unresolved project issues associated with this residential subdivision.
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A)/PUD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COSTA^O SOL
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGE 2
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
On November 3,1993, the Planning Commission recommended approval of a Tentative Map
(CT 92-01), Planned Development Permit (PUD 92-01), Site Development Plan (SDP 93-
04), and Hillside Development Permit (HDP 92-10) to, subdivide, grade, and construct 112
single-family homes and 40 - one, two, and three bedroom condominium units on the
gradually sloping lot located east of Paseo del Norte and directly north of Camino de las
Ondas. On March 31, 1994 the City Council unanimously approved the project. The
property has since been purchased by Greystone Homes Inc., and they are requesting an
amendment to the approved project which consists of the following changes:
1. Replacement of 40 condominium units and a small recreational area in the eastern
portion of the site with 7 single-family homes on lots ranging in size from 7,067 to
16,692 square feet;
2. Redesign of the RV storage area and open space recreational lot; and
3. Incorporation of a provision to allow the project's 21 required affordable housing
units to be located at an off-site location (Villa Loma).
The parcel totals 29.2 gross acres and has been recently graded according to the original
approved project (CT 92-01). It is located in the Coastal Zone, the Planned Community
Zone (PC), and has a General Plan Land Use designation of Residential Medium (RM).
There would be a centrally located active recreational facility containing a pool, spa,
basketball court, and a children's play area, in addition to a recreational vehicle storage area
to serve the entire project.
A portion of the approved project's 40 condominium units were designated for on-site
affordable housing. The developer is now proposing to eliminate all of the condominium
units and provide the project's required affordable housing units through the purchase of
Affordable Housing Credits in the already approved and constructed Villa Loma affordable
housing project located along El Camino Real. Villa Loma currently has 184 Affordable
Housing Credits available for purchase by developers in the Southwest Quadrant. This
request triggers the requirement to amend the project's Site Development Plan and Specific
Plan 203. The staff Combined Project Review Committee, per City Council Policy 57,
evaluated the request to purchase credits, determined that the project met the appropriate
policy criteria, and made the recommendation that the request be approved by the Housing
Commission. On November 9, 1995 the Housing Commission reviewed the proposal to
purchase credits in Villa Loma, and recommended denial of that proposal to the City
Council. Recently adopted City Council Policy 58 requires that the Planning Commission
review and recommend approval of any requests to purchase credits in Villa Loma,
therefore, the request is being processed with this application.
In addition, on November 15, 1995, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved a
request for a minor amendment to the project's Planned Development Permit (PUD 92-
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A)TOD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COSTATX) SOL
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGE 3
02(B)) which consisted of the following changes to the single-family portion of the project:
1. A change to the approved single-family floorplans; and.
2. A change to the approved single-family architectural elevations.
The approved floorplans and building elevations consist of one and two-story, single-family
homes ranging in size from 1,767 square feet to 2,546 square feet, with two and three-car
attached garages. The architecture is contemporary with tile roofs, and stucco exteriors.
The homes on the seven (7) new single-family lots would have the same floor plans and
architecture as approved by the Planning Commission on November 15th.
The proposed project is subject to the following adopted land use plans and regulations:
A. Carlsbad General Plan;
B. Specific Plan 203;
C. Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21; .
1. Chapter 21.45, Planned Development;
2. Chapter 21.53, Section 21.53.120 - Site Development Plan - "Affordable
Housing", and Chapter 21.85, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance;
D. City Council Policy for Small Lot Single Family Homes;
E. Title 20, Subdivision Ordinance;
F. Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program;
G. Growth Management (Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 20).
IV. ANALYSIS
The staffs recommendation of approval for this project was developed by analyzing the
project's consistency with the applicable State and local policies, regulations, and standards.
The following analysis section discusses compliance with these requirements in the following
format:
1. Table depicting consistency or compliance with regulations and standards; and,
2. Discussion of project specific planning issues.
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A)
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGE 4 __
JrTJD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COSTATXD SOL
A. CARLSBAD 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 Elements of the General Plan which are
particularly relevant to this proposal.
GP
ELEMENT
Land Use
Housing
Open Space
Noise
Circulation
Parks & Rec.
Public Safety
DISCUSSION
Proposed residential density of 4.14 du/net acre is consistent with GP
designation of RM 4-8 du/net acre and growth control point of 6
du/net acre. The project would be compatible in intensity,
architecture, and scale with surrounding residential development.
As required in an Affordable Housing Agreement, the project would
provide 21 dus as affordable to lower income households in an
approved and constructed offsite combined affordable housing project
(Villa Loma).
1. Constrained lands are protected in a .62 acre open space lot;
and
2. City Wide Trail Link No. 37 is aligned along the west side of
the project.
Noise Study indicates no traffic noise impacts from 1-5 and Paseo Del
Norte.
Required roadway improvements, including the local street leading to
the 7 single-family lots as shown on the tentative map.
Proposed project is required to pay park-in-lieu fees.
Proposed project is required to provide sidewalks, street lights, and
fire hydrants, as shown on the tentative map, or included as
conditions of approval.
B. SPECIFIC PLAN 203
The proposal to replace the approved residential condominium units on Lot No. 115 with
7 single-family lots does not affect the project's compliance with Specific Plan 203. The
proposed development still complies with the specific plan since the plan implements the
General Plan which allows the small lot single-family land use in the Residential Medium
(RM) designation. Small lot single-family development is consistent with the remainder of
the approved project which also includes 112 single-family lots.
The developer is also requesting that the project's affordable housing requirements be
satisfied at the Villa Loma combined inclusionary housing project located on El Camino
Real in the Southwest Quadrant. This request requires an amendment to the Affordable
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A)/PUD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COST>o SOL
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGES
Housing Section of Specific Plan 203. The amendment (SP 203(A)) would establish two
potential locations, Villa Loma and Laurel Tree, for satisfaction of inclusionary housing
requirements associated with residential projects within Specific Plan 203. Villa Loma and
Laurel Tree are both located outside of the Specific Plan boundaries. The amendment
brings Specific Plan 203 and the project into compliance with the Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance, Section 21.85.070(6). This ordinance requires that a specific plan designate sites
for the location of inclusionary housing units, including any off-site inclusionary projects,
which would include Villa Loma and Laurel Tree. A project's participation in either of
these two off-site combined inclusionary housing projects would be subject to an Affordable
Housing Agreement and final approval by the City Council.
C. CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 21:
1. Planned Development Ordinance, Chapter 21.45:
Specific Plan 203 and the Planned Community Zone (PC) both designate Chapter
21.45 as the implementing ordinance for the property. The proposed amendments
to the Planned Development Permit comply with the Planned Development
Ordinance as follows:
a. The local cul-de-sac street serving the 7 single-family lots is curved and would
have curb, gutter, and sidewalks on both sides, and have 36 feet of paving.
This exceeds the 30 foot minimum private street width standard. The local
street would be constructed to full public street width standards and have
underground utilities. These public street improvements would be adequate
to serve the vehicular traffic demand of 17 Average Daily Trips generated by
this portion of the project.
b. The amended project would provide a mixture of one and two-story homes
which have varied roof lines, and a variety of front building elevations and
front yard setback.
c. Adequate recreational vehicle storage space would be provided in one area
and be sufficiently screened from the public right-of-way and surrounding
properties with fencing and landscaping.
d. The single-family homes would have two and three-car garages which would
meet the parking and storage requirements, and guest parking would be
provided on both sides of the streets.
e. A 10 foot landscaping setback would be provided adjacent to Hidden Valley
Road and Camino de las Ondas. In addition, a six foot high masonry wall in
conjunction with heavy landscaping would be provided along the northern
property line to buffer the project from Poinsettia Community Park to the
north. The community park also contains a 20 to 25 foot landscaped setback
adjacent to the common property between the two land uses.
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A)
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGE 6
\/ttD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) -COSTJTOO SOL
f. The proposed single-family residential land use is similar in height,
architecture, and building materials to the multi-family residential
development to the south. In addition, the adjacent property to the east is
planned for residential development, therefore, the proposed small lot single-
family development would be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood.
g. The project complies with the standards of the Planned Development
Ordinance as follows:
Private Street & Driveway
Width
Lot Size
Building Separation
Street Setback
Parking: Resident:
RV Storage
Storage Space
REQUIRED
30 Feet
3,500 sq. ft.
10ft.
10 to 20 Feet
2 Covered Spaces per
Home
2,380 sq. ft.
480 cubic Feet
Per Unit
PROPOSED
30 to 36 Feet of Paving
7,067 - 16,692 sq. ft.
20 to 60 ft.
20 to 59 Feet
7 - 2 or 3 Car Garages
13,575 sq. ft.
2 and 3 Car Garages
Recreational Space
A. Common
B. Private
11,900 sq. ft.
11,900 sq. ft.
17,971 sq. ft.
53 lots with 15 ft. X 15 ft.
Rear Yards
2. Site Development Plan - "Affordable Housing", Chapter 21.53, and Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance, Chapter 21.85:
The developer is proposing to provide the project's required affordable housing units
through the purchase of Affordable Housing Credits in Villa Loma. There are
currently 184 Affordable Housing Credits in Villa Loma available for purchase by
developers in the Southwest Quadrant. This entire project would have an
inclusionary housing requirement of 21 dwelling units which leaves a balance of 163
credits in Villa Loma. Recently adopted City Council Policies No. 57 and 58 require
that a staff Combined Project Review Committee evaluate requests to purchase
credits and that the Planning Commission and the Housing Commission make a
recommendation to the City Council on the purchase/sale of any Affordable Housing
Credits in Villa Loma. The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance designates the City
Council as the final decision-maker on this matter and it is their exclusive prerogative
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A)OTD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COSTx) SOL
JANUARY 3, 19%
PAGE?
to determine whether or not it is in the public interest to allow the project to
participate in a combined project such as Villa Loma.
The staff Combined Project Review Committee evaluated the request to purchase
credits, determined that the project met the appropriate policy criteria, and made the
recommendation that the request to purchase credits be approved. In summary the
committee stated that, "Consensus was reached that, while the feasibility argument
regarding Costa Do Sol on-site proposal is difficult to validate, the advantages of
using existing "excess units" in a quality project supports the request to buy credits.
The purchase of credits also recovers City investment in the Villa Loma project as
anticipated in the financing plan".
The Housing and Redevelopment Department recommended approval of the credit
purchase request to the Housing Commission, based on the Combined Project
Committee's findings. On November 9,1995 the Housing Commission recommended
denial of this project's request to purchase credits in Villa Loma based on the desire
to see the affordable units constructed on-site as part of the approved "for-sale"
condominium project located on Lot 115 (CT 92-01). City Council Policy No. 58 also
requires that the Planning Commission review and make a recommendation to the
City Council on requests to purchase credits, and if applicable, place appropriate
conditions on the project to implement the credit purchase. The staff Combined
Project Review Committee's recommendation/worksheet and a copy of City Council
Policy No. 57 and 58 are attached to the staff report. Also based on the findings and
recommendations of the Combined Project Review Committee, the Planning
Department is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend approval
of the request to purchase credits in Villa Loma.
To reflect the proposed change from affordable condominium units located on-site
to the purchase of Affordable Housing Credits in Villa Loma, the project's Site
Development Plan (SDP 93-04) must be amended. This amendment includes a new
affordable housing condition in Site Development Plan Resolution No. 3865 in order
to implement the Affordable Housing Credit purchase. When a project is approved
with the Credit purchase condition, a reservation of the Credits is made for the
project.
D. CITY COUNCIL POLICY FOR SMALL LOT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES:
This City Council policy provides guidelines to encourage the quality development of small-
lot (less than 7500 sq. ft.) single-family projects. The intent of the guidelines is to ensure
that the homes have building articulation on all four sides and will not appear as "row"
housing. They are primarily designed to apply to projects where there is a predominance
of two-story units. The project complies with these guidelines as illustrated on Exhibit "A"-
"U", dated January 3, 1996. The various homes contain one-story roof elements, proposed
side yard setbacks equal or exceed seven feet, structures would be separated by at least 18
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A)/PUD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COSTA DO SOL
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGE 8
feet, the homes would have offsetting building planes on all four sides, and all have varying
roof elements.
E. SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE, TITLE 20:
The proposed resubdivision of Condominium Lot No. 115 into 7 single-family lots would
comply with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Title 20 as follows:
1. Full public street improvements would be provided on the local cul-de-sac street
leading to the 7 single-family lots, and along the Hidden Valley Road and Camino
de las Ondas street frontages. These improvements would include curb, gutter,
sidewalks, and underground utilities;
2. The residential lots would meet the 35 to 45 foot lot frontage requirement. The
residential development complies with all city policies and standards, including yard
setbacks and building height, without the need for variances from development
standards;
3. Adequate sight distance for vehicles would be provided at the intersection of the
proposed local cul-de-sac street and Hidden Valley Road;
4. The proposed change from 40 multi-family condominium units to 7 single-family
units reduces the project's Average Daily Trips, and results in less demand on the
surrounding traffic circulation system. The local cul-de-sac street leading to the 7
single-family lots would have 36 feet of paving and connect to Hidden Valley Road
which is a non-loaded collector street. The proposed street system is adequate to
handle the project's pedestrian and vehicular traffic and accommodate emergency
vehicles;
5. The 7 single-family lots would gravity sewer south into the existing sewer system
located in Camino de las Ondas which leads to the North Batiquitos Sewer Pump
Station. The reduction of dwelling units from 40 to 7 also lessens the demand on the
existing sewer system;
6. Adequate drainage facilities would also be provided. The lots would drain into the
cul-de-sac street which drains into Hidden Valley Road, and then north into the
existing drainage system that flows towards Batiquitos Lagoon. The drainage
requirements of Specific Plan 203, City ordinances, and Mello II have been
considered and appropriate drainage facilities have been designed and would be
secured. In addition to City Engineering Standards and compliance with the City's
Master Drainage Plan, National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
standards will be satisfied to prevent any discharge violations;
7. The existing graded building pad for Lot No. 115 is adequate to accommodate the
single-family homes and RV storage area without significant additional grading;
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A),
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGE 9
iWD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COSTTTOO SOL
8. The design of the subdivision provides, to the extent feasible, for future passive or
natural heating or cooling opportunities in the subdivision, in that primary building
orientation, including the placement and separation of the homes, in combination
with the proposed variety of floor plans and the dominant wind/solar radiation
patterns, will allow utilization of natural heating and cooling opportunities; and,
9. The exactions imposed on the Developer are to mitigate impacts caused by or
reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the degree of the exaction is in
rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project. These exactions include
public facility and circulation impact fees, and street frontage, sewer, and drainage
improvements to meet the demand created by the subdivision.
F. MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM:
The proposal to replace the approved residential condominium units on Lot No. 115 with
7 single-family lots does not affect the project's compliance with Mello II. The original
project, CT 92-01, has a valid Coastal Development Permit issued by the Coastal
Commission and Lot No. 115 has already been graded. There would be no significant
changes to the approved drainage facilities, and erosion control and landscaping has been
provided as part of the grading for the original project. The proposed change from larger
scale multi-family residential structures to smaller scale single-family homes further reduces
potential visual impacts when the project is viewed from the public roadways, therefore, the
changes are consistent with the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program.
G. GROWTH MANAGEMENT:
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 20 in the
Southwest Quadrant. The project's total dwelling units would be reduced by 33 units and
result in less impact on public facilities. The impacts on public facilities created by the
project and compliance with the adopted performance standards are summarized as follows:
FACILITY
City Administration
Library
Waste Water Treatment
Parks
Drainage
Circulation
Fire
IMPACTS
413.7 sq. ft.
220.6 sq. ft.
120 EDU
.83 ACRES
BASIN 3
1,190 ADT
Station # 4
COMPLIANCE WITH
STANDARDS
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
203(A)/CT 92-01(A^lSP
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGE 10
'UD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COSTA DO SOLTA1
FACILITY
Open Space
Schools
Sewer Collection System
Water Distribution
System
IMPACTS
4.3 ACRES
CUSD
120 EDU
26,400 GPD
COMPLIANCE WITH
STANDARDS
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
V.
The project is 53.3 dwelling units below the Growth Management Dwelling
unit allowance of 17232 dwelling units for the property.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project site is located within the boundaries of Specific Plan 203 which covers the 640
acre Zone 20 planning area. The direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental impacts
resulting from the future residential development and buildout of Specific Plan 203 have
been discussed and evaluated in the certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR 90-
03) for the plan. Additional project level studies for the original Tentative Map (CT 92-01)
were conducted, including a geotechnical/soils investigation, biological analysis, traffic study,
archaeology evaluation, sewer study, and a drainage study. These studies provided more
focused and detailed project level analysis and indicated that additional environmental
impacts beyond what was analyzed in Final EIR 90-03 would not result from development
of the property.
The requested changes in the Tentative Map (CT 92-01(A)), Planned Development Permit
(PUD 92-01(A)), and Site Development Plan (93-04(A)), including the reduction in the
number of total dwelling units from 152 to 119 units, would not create any additional
environmental impacts that have not otherwise been evaluated in the Final EIR that covers
the property. The reduction in the total number of dwelling units further reduces any
potential visual, air quality, traffic, public service, and resource impacts that may result from
implementation of the project. Since a Final EIR was certified for Specific Plan 203 and
the requested amendments to CT 92-01 are consistent with the plan, the CEQA Guidelines
under Section 15182, "Residential Projects Pursuant to a Specific Plan", states that if a public
agency has prepared an EIR on a specific plan after January 1, 1980, no EIR or Negative
Declaration need be prepared for a residential project undertaken pursuant to and in
conformity to that specific plan.
Additional environmental review for the minor amendment to the Affordable Housing
Section of Specific Plan 203 was conducted, and based on an Environmental Impact
Assessment, die Planning Director has determined that no significant environmental impact
will result. Subsequently a Negative Declaration was issued for the project, dated
September 5,1995. The designation of Villa Loma and Laurel Tree as combined affordable
SP 203(A)/CT 92-01(A)TOD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A) - COSTA DO SOL
JANUARY 3, 1996
PAGE 11
housing projects as potentially available to satisfy inclusionaiy housing requirements for
residential projects within Specific Plan 203 is consistent with the Inclusionaiy Housing
Ordinance. In addition, there is no physical development involved with the affordable
housing designations, therefore, the minor amendment does not create any environmental
impacts. CEQA compliance and all environmental impacts associated with the physical
development of the two combined affordable housing projects has already been evaluated
and considered during the project approval process. Laurel Tree has been approved by the
City Council and Villa Loma is partially constructed.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3862
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3863
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3864
4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3865
5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3866
6. Location Map
7. Background Data Sheet
8. Local Facilities Impact Assessment Form
9. Disclosure Form
10. Council Policy No. 57
11. Council Policy No. 58
12. Project Review Committee Results, dated October 31, 1995
13. Full Size Fjdiibits "AH-"U", dated, January 3, 1996.
JG:kr
RALOMAR AWORT RD
CAMMO DE LAS OMMS
COSTA DO SOL
CT 92-01 (A)/PUD 92-01 (A)/
SDP 93-04(A)/SP 203(A)
BACKGROUND DATA SHEET
CASE NO: CT 92-01(AWUD 92-OKAVSDP 93-04(AVSP 203(A)
CASE NAME: Costa Do Sol
APPLICANT: Grevstone Homes Inc.
REQUEST AND LOCATION: 7 single-family homes
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Parcel 2 of Map 6136. City of Carlsbad, filed and recorded San
Diego County Recorder's office. July 6. 1977
APN: 214-140-40 Acres 29.2 Proposed No. of Lots/Units 119 Lots
GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING
Land Use Designation Residential Medium
Density Allowed 6 du/acre Density Proposed 4.14
Existing Zone PC Proposed Zone N/A
Surrounding Zoning and Land Use: (See attached for information on Carlsbad's Zoning
Requirements)
Zoning Land Use
Site PC Vacant
North PC/CUP Community Park Vacant
South RD-M Multi-Family
East RD-M-Q Vacant
West PC Multi-Family
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District Carlsbad Water District Carlsbad Sewer District Carlsbad
Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity) 120 EDU
Public Facilities Fee Agreement, dated April 28. 1995
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Negative Declaration, issued N/A
Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated Final EIR 90-03. September 14. 1993
Other, N/A
JGJcc
CITY OF CARLSBAD
GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
LOCAL FACILITIES IMPACTS ASSESSMENT FORM
(To be Submitted with Development Application)
PROJECT IDENTITY AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT:
FILE NAME AND NO: COSTA DO SOL - CT 92-01(A)/PUD 92-01(A)/SDP 93-04(A)/SP 203(A)
LOCAL FACILITY MANAGEMENT ZONE: JO GENERAL PLAN: RM ZONING: PC
DEVELOPER'S NAME: GREYSTQNE HOMES INC.
ADDRESS: 495 EAST RINCON.SUITE 115. CORONA. CA 91719
PHONE NO.: J714) 273-9494 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO: 214-140-40
QUANTITY OF LAND USE/DEVELOPMENT (AC., SQ. FT., DU): 29.2 GROSS ACRES/119
ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE: N/A
A. City Administrative Facilities: Demand in Square Footage = 413.7
B. Library: Demand in Square Footage = 220.6
C. Wastewater Treatment Capacity (Calculate with J. Sewer) N/A
D. Park: Demand in Acreage = 0.83
E. Drainage: Demand in CFS = N/A
Identify Drainage Basin = N/A
(Identify master plan facilities on site plan)
F. Circulation: Demand in ADTs = 1190
(Identify Trip Distribution on site plan)
G. Fire: Served by Fire Station No. = NO. 4
H. Open Space: Acreage Provided - 4.3
I. Schools: YES
(Demands to be determined by staff)
J. Sewer: Demand in EDUs - 120
Identify Sub Basin - N/A
(Identify trunk line(s) impacted on site plan)
K. Water: Demand in GPD - 26.400
L. The project is 53.3 units below the Growth Management Dwelling unit allowance.
JGkc
of Carlsbad
Rlainning Department
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
APPLICANTS STATEMENT Of DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTEREST ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIREDISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART of THE cmr COUNCX. OR ANY APPOINTED BOARD. COMMISSION OR COMMITTEE.
(Pl««a« Prim)
*•-.. -. - -J
The following information must be disclosed:
1 Applicant APR 2 8 1235
List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest fn the application.
9/7/9
2. Owner
List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved.
AS.
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names and addresses
of ail individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the
partnership.
4.If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names and
addresses of any person serving as officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of
the trust
FRM0001 12/91
2O75 Las Palmas Oriv« • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-1576 • (619) 438-1161
Disclosure Statement Page 2
5. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards,
Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months?
'es No j/_ If yes, please indicate person(s)Yes
P«r»cn « defined at: 'Any individual, firm. copartnereNp, joint venture, mormon, •oclal club, fraternal organization, corporation. ertate, truat receive
syndicate, fti* and any other county, city and county, city municipality, diatriet or other political uibdMeion, or any other group or combination acting w
unit'
(NOTE: Attach additional pagM aa n«c«ss«ry.)
Signature of Owner/date
Print or type name of owner
/x^
applicant/date
Print or type name of applicant
FRM0001 12/91
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
Policy No. 57.
Date Issued
Effective Date
Cancellation Date _
Supersedes No.
General Subject:
Specific Subject:
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Off-site and Combined
Inclusionary Housing Projects
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File.
BACKGROUND
The City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.85) establishes certain requirements under
which residential developers must provide housing that is affordable to lower-income households as a
condition of project approval and permit issuance.
The Ordinance provides that inclusionary units "should be built on-site and, wherever reasonably possible,
be distributed throughout the project site." The Ordinance also provides that "circumstances may arise...
in which the public interest would be served by allowing some or all of the inclusionary units associated with
one project site to be produced and operated at an alternative site or sites." This alternative is described
as a "Combined Inclusionary Housing Project" or "Combined Project". The Ordinance, hi addressing
Combined Projects, states that "it is the exclusive prerogative of the final decision making authority of the
City to determine whether or not it is hi the public interest to authorize the residential sites to form a
Combined Inclusionary Housing Project."
PURPOSE
It is the purpose of this policy to establish the criteria which will be utilized hi order to make the necessary
finding that off-site satisfaction of an inclusionary housing requirement, when proposed through a Combined
Project, is in the public interest.
POLICY
The following criteria will be applied in order to make the necessary public interest finding. Each criteria
is defined in terms of specific questions which, when affirmatively answered, would support an off-site
option:
Page 1 of 4
Policy No. 57
CITY OF CARLSBAD Date Issued
Effective Date
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT Cancellation Date
Supersedes No. _
General Subject: AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Specific Subject: Off-site and Combined
Inclusionary Housing Projects
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File.
1. Feasibility of the On-site Proposal.
> Are there significant feasibility issues due to factors such as project size, site constraints, and
competition from multiple projects that make an on-site option impractical?
>• Will an affordable housing product be difficult to integrate into the proposed market
development because of significant price and product type disparity?
>• Does the on-site development entity lack the capacity to deliver the proposed affordable
housing on-site?.
2. Relative Advantages/Disadvantages of the Off-site Proposal
>• Does the off-site option offer greater feasibility and cost effectiveness than the on-site
alternative, particularly regarding potential local public assistance and when applying the
City's Affordable Housing Financial Assistance Policy.
> Does the off-site proposal have location advantages over the on-site alternative, such as
proximity to jobs, schools, transportation, services; less impact on other existing
developments, etc.?
* Does the off-site option offer a development entity with the capacity to deliver the proposed
project?
* Does the off-site option satisfy multiple developer obligations that would be difficult to satisfy
with multiple projects?
Page 2 of 4
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
Policy No. 57
Date Issued
Effective Date
Cancellation Date _
Supersedes No.
General Subject:
Specific Subject:
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Off-site and Combined
Inclusionary Housing Projects
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File.
3. Advancing Housing Goals
»• Does the off-site proposal advance and/or support City housing goals and policies as
expressed in the Housing Element, CHAS and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance?
It is likely that off-site proposals will involve "mixed" results with the application of the above criteria. The
"public interest" finding shall be made when a Combined Project Review Committee made up of the City
Manager, City Attorney, Community Development Director, Financial Management Director, Planning
Director, Housing & Redevelopment Director, and the Mayor (ex-officio), reaches consensus that a proposal
substantially and affirmatively satisfies the above criteria and that this conclusion can be appropriately
documented through the use of a Combined/Off-site Project Evaluation Assessment Worksheet. (Attachment
1).
PROCEDURE
1. Projects with an inclusionary housing obligation will be processed according to the requirements of
the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
2. Project approvals must be conditioned with the option to propose an off-site method (i.e., Combined
Project) of satisfying the inclusionary obligation. A project proposing an off-site option may or may
not also propose an on-site option.
3. Prior to final map or issuance of building permits, applicants must submit an Affordable Housing
Agreement as described in the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance which specifically describes any off-
site proposal.
4. Off-site proposals in the form of a draft Affordable Housing Agreement will be reviewed by the
Combined Project Review Committee and it will be determined if the necessary findings can be made
by staff.
Page 3 of 4
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
Policy No. 57_
Date Issued
Effective Date
Cancellation Date _
Supersedes No.
General Subject:
Specific Subject:
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Off-site and Combined
Inclusionary Housing Projects
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File.
5. Staffs findings and recommendation, including the Combined/Off-site Project Assessment
Worksheet, will accompany the Affordable Housing Agreement to the Housing Commission for
action.
6. Prior to final map or issuance of building permits, the proposed Affordable Housing Agreement
will be considered by City Council along with the recommendation of staff and Housing
Commission.
7. .City Council will be the final decision making authority in determining whether an off-site
proposal is in the public interest and permitting this option.
Page 4 of 4
\NOCOFF-SITE ANJ1COMBINED INCLUSIONARY HOUSli
ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
ROJECT
BACKGROUND
1 . Off-site or Combined Project Name:
2. Applicant Name and Address:
3. Description of Project with Inclusionary Housing Obligation:
4. Proposed On-site Project Description (if any):
5. Proposed Off-site Project Description:
6. Description of On-site Project Constraints:
SUMMARY OF ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
1 . Feasibility of the On-site Prooosal.
a. Are there significant feasibility issues due to
factors such as project size, site constraints,
and competition from multiple projects that
make an on-site option impractical?
Brief Narrative:
b. Will an affordable, housing product be difficult
to integrate into the proposed market
development because of significant price
and product type disparity?
Brief Narrative:
c. Does the on-site development entity lack the
capacity to deliver the proposed affordable
housing on-site?
Brief Narrative:
ASSESSMENT CONCLUSION
(Check appropriate box)
DOES NOT SUPPORT SUPPORTS OFF-SITE
OFF-srre PROPOSAL INCONCLUSIVE PROPOSAL
ATTACHMENT "1" TO COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT NO. 57
^JMMARYOF
ASSESSMENT CRTTERIA
2. Relative Advantaqes/Disadvantaaes of the Off-
site Proposal.
a. Does the off-site option offer greater feasibility
and cost effectiveness than the on-site
alternative, particularly regarding potential
local public assistance and when applying the
City's Affordable Housing Financial Assistance
Policy?
Brief Narrative:
b. Does the off-site proposal have location
advantages over the on-site alternative, such
as proximity to jobs, schools, transportation,
services; less impact on other existing
developments, etc.?
Brief Narrative:
c. Does the off-site option offer a development
entity with the capacity to deliver the
proposed project?
Brief Narrative:
d. Does the off-site option satisfy multiple
developer obligations that would be difficult
to satisfy with multiple projects?
Brief Narrative:
3. Advancing Housing Goals
a. Does the off-site proposal advance and/or
support City housing goals and policies
expressed in the Housing Element, CHAS
and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance?
Brief Narrative:
ASSESSMENT CRITER^
ASSESSMENT CONCLUSION
(Check appropriate box)
DOES NOT SUPPORT
OFF-SITE PROPOSAL INCONCLUSIVE
SUPPORTS OFF-S/7E
PROPOSAL
Page 1 of 4
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
Policy No. 58
Date Issued September 12. 1995
Effective Date Sept. 12. 1995
Cancellation Date
Supersedes No.
General Subject:AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Specific Subject: Sale of Affordable Housing
Credits
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File.
PURPOSE
To establish a policy to be followed by City Council and City staff in selling Affordable Housing Credits,
controlled by the City, to developers who will use the Credits to satisfy obligations to provide affordable
housing pursuant to the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.85).
BACKGROUND
In the development of the 344-unit affordable housing project known as Villa Loma in the Southwest
Quadrant of the City, the developers and the City created a project which may be treated as a Combined
Project as defined in the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. With City Council approval, Combined
Projects allow "some or all of the inclusionary units associated with one residential project site to be
produced and operated at an alternative site". The "alternative site" becomes a Combined Project. Villa
Loma was conceived and developed with City participation based on the creation of 184 excess affordable
housing units which would be available to satisfy other developers' inclusionary housing obligations thus
making it a potential Combined Project. City financial participation in the project was also based on the
concept of recovering costs through the sale of the excess units. Furthermore, Villa Loma was structured to
give the City control of these units (Affordable Housing Credits or "Credits") and their sale to potential
Combined Project participants. Therefore, it is necessary to establish a policy to guide the City in the
effective implementation of these Affordable Housing Credit sales transactions.
POLICY
Two basic factors will be considered in a Credit sale transaction - the financial aspect, which is the Credit
pricing — this determines cost to a purchaser and revenue to the City; and the affordable housing aspect,
which is the use of this mechanism to satisfy a developer's obligation under the Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance. Based on these considerations, the following will guide Credit sales:
Page 2 of 4
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
Sept. 12. 1995
Policy No. 58
Date Issued
Effective Date Sept. 12. 1995
Cancellation Date
Supersedes No.
General Subject:AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Specific Subject: Sale of Affordable Housing
Credits
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File.
Price. The Credit price will be determined according to the following formula which divides the local
financial contribution provided to the Villa Loma project by the total number of Credits available.
The local financial contribution consists of all City financial assistance provided to the project (either
as loans or expenditures for land including accrued interest on such amounts for the period of time
they are outstanding); and the local developer contribution to the project provided in order to satisfy
an affordable housing obligation):
Affordable Housing Credit Pricing Formula
Local Financial Contribution
+ Number of Affordable
Housing Credits Available
City Contribution $4.2 Million*
Developer Contribution
(Aviara Land Associates) .9
TOTAL $5.1 Million
184
Unit Price of Affordable
Housing Credits (Rounded
to nearest $1.000)*
$28,000*
* To be adjusted with the addition of interest.
Terms of Purchase and Sale, The commitment to purchase and sell Credits will be accomplished
through an Affordable Housing Agreement as required by the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. This
Agreement will contain the terms of the Credit sale and will acknowledge the satisfaction of an
affordable housing obligation through participation in a Combined Project (Villa Loma).
Page 3 of 4
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT
Policy No. 58
Date Issued Sent. 12. 1995
Effective Date Sent. 12. 1995
Cancellation Date
Supersedes No.
General Subject:
Specific Subject:
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Sale of Affordable Housing
Credits
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File.
Selection of Purchasers. The following procedure will apply to the selection of purchasers and
allocation of Credits:
1. Project Review. Staff, through the Combined Project Review Committee (see Council Policy
No. 57) will review all applications and approved projects with inclusionary requirements and
determine which projects will be recommended to satisfy their obligations through the
purchase of Credits. If the number of acceptable projects have affordable housing
requirements which exceed the available number of Credits, projects will be ranked and
allocated Credits accordingly. Projects will be reviewed and ranked using the following
criteria:
a) The immediacy of the need to satisfy an affordable housing obligation with respect to
the market rate project that is generating the obligation.
b) The readiness and capacity of the developer to enter into an Affordable Housing
Agreement and perform under its terms.
c) The acceptability of the Combined Project as an off-site option in lieu of the
satisfaction of the affordable housing obligation on-site with respect to the project that
is generating the obligation (see Council Policy No. 57).
2. Electing to Purchase Credits. Developers will be notified of staffs recommendation to permit
the purchase of Credits and given the opportunity to accept or reject this option.
3. Reservation of Credits. Developers wishing to use the option of purchasing Credits must have
. their projects approved with conditions allowing this option. In addition to Planning
Commission approval, the recommendation of the Housing Commission will be required for
the Credit purchase option of satisfying the Inclusionary Housing Obligation. When a project
is approved (e.g., tentative map) with the Credit purchase condition, a reservation of the
Credits is made for the project.
Page 4 of 4
Policy No. 58.
CITY OF CARLSBAD Date Issued Sept. 12. 1995
Effective Date Sent. 12. 1995
COUNCIL POLICY STATEMENT Cancellation Date
Supersedes No.
General Subject: AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Specific Subject: Sale of Affordable Housing
Credits
Copies to: City Council, City Manager, City Attorney, Department and Division Heads,
Employee Bulletin Boards, Press, File.
4. Affordable Housing Agreement. Within sixty (60) days of the approval of the Credit purchase
condition, the developer must deliver to the Housing and Redevelopment Director a signed
Affordable Housing Agreement in the form prescribed by the City with a non-refundable
deposit in an amount equal to 10% of the total Credit sale price. The Affordable Housing
Agreement will be scheduled for City Council consideration and, if and when approved, will
be executed by the City. The Affordable Housing Agreement will require payment of the
balance of the purchase price upon execution and prior to final map or issuance of a building
permit.
5. Failure of Developer to Perform or Denial of Purchase Option. If the developer is unable to
perform as required, or is denied the option of purchasing Credits, the Credits will be made
available to another project(s), subject to this process.
6. This policy is subject to all other requirements of the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance.
OCTOBER 31, 1995
TO: POLICY 57/58 PROJECT REVIEW COMMITTEE
FROM: Housing & Redevelopment Director
MEETING SUMMARY, OCTOBER 12, 1995, TO REVIEW A REQUEST BY 6REYSTONE
HOMES, INC. (COSTA DO SOL) TO PURCHASE AFFORDABLE HOUSING CREDITS
IN THE VILLA LOMA PROJECT
Attending: Raymond Patchett, City Manager
Jim Elliott, Financial Management Director
Marty Orenyak, Community Development Director
Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director
Jane Mobaldi, Deputy City Attorney
Evan Becker, Housing & Redevelopment Director
After reviewing the role of the Committee, the Committee reviewed
and discussed the Housing & Redevelopment Director's recommendation
and the "Assessment Worksheet." The Housing & Redevelopment
Director indicated to the Committee that the applicant had signed
an Affordable Housing Agreement to proceed with their approved on-
site affordable project, but was requesting that they be permitted
to purchase affordable housing credits as an alternative.
The Committee discussed the applicant's claim that a relatively
small on-site affordable project would have questionable
feasibility. Several members indicated that this could be said of
most affordable projects needing subsidies. The Housing &
Redevelopment Director indicated that the scale of the project
could make subsidy requirements greater and that in the competition
for subsidies, including competition from other Carlsbad projects,
this project might have a difficult time.
It was noted that the homeownership and mixed-income aspects of the
on-site proposal were positives.
Discussion of the overall status of inclusionary projects in the
Southwest Quadrant indicated that almost 500 units could be
completed or under construction in 1996 (Villa Loma and Laurel
Tree); and that another approved on-site project (Sambi) would be
coming forward shortly. Consensus was reached that, while the
feasibility argument regarding the Costa Do Sol on-site proposal is
difficult to validate, the advantages of using existing "excess
units" in a quality project supports the request to buy credits.
The purchase of credits also recovers City investment in the Villa
Loma project as anticipated in the financing plan.
EVAN E. BECKER
Housing & Redevelopment Director
ar
OFF-SITE COMBINED INCLUSIONARY HOU,
ASSESSMENT WORKSHEET
PROJECT
1. Applicant Name and Address: ureystone Homes, Inc., Ann: Luis Trujillo
495 East Rincon, Suite 115
Corona, CA 91719
2. Off-site or Combined Project Name: Villa Loma Apartments
3. Description of Project with Indusionary Housing Obligation: Costa Do Sol, CT 92-01, is a
proposed 152-unit project with a 23-unit affordable housing requirement. (See Attachments 1 & 2)
4. Proposed On-site Project Description (if any): Costa Do Sol, SDP 93-04, is a 40-unrt
condominium project combining 23 affordable units and 17 market units. The affordable units
range from one to three bedrooms, and would range in maximum price from approximately
$72,000 to $109,000.
5. Proposed Off-site Project Description: Villa Loma (formerly La Tenraza) Apartments is a 344-unit
apartment development in which all units are restricted and affordable to households with incomes
not exceeding 60% of San Diego County Median. The project contains a distribution of 1, 2, 3
and 4 bedroom units. Units are scheduled to be occupied in October, 1995.
Villa Loma is being developed by La Terraza Associates, a limited partnership in which Bridge
Housing Corporation is the Managing General Partner.
Villa Loma was financed with assistance from the City of Carlsbad and the Carlsbad
Redevelopment Agency. The assistance was structured in such a way as to create affordable
units which would be marketed exclusively by the City to other developers in order to satisfy an
affordable housing obligation. Thus, Villa Loma Apartments is a Combined Project according to
the Indusionary Housing Ordinance, and developers may propose to participate in this as an "off-
site" method of satisfying an affordable housing obligation.
Participation in Villa Loma Apartments by the applicant would be in the form of a purchase of
Affordable Housing Credits under terms established by City Council Policy Number 58.
6. Description of On-site Project Constraints: (Also see Attachment "3", applicant letter of August
25, 1995). In proposing an on-site affordable project, the applicant has identified constraints
which they feel would affect the project's feasibility. These include the uneconomical size of the
affordable project; and potential conflict created by the significant price difference between the
affordable units and the proposed market units. In addition to these constraints, the applicant
feels that the location of the Villa Loma project is superior to their on-site location.
WORKSHEET
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
1. Feasibility of the On-site Proposal.
a. Are there significant feasibility issues due to
factors such as project size, site constraints,
and competition from multiple projects that
make an on-site option impractical?
/ASSESSMENT CONCLUSION
(Check appropriate box)
DOES NOT SUPPORT
OFF-SHE PROPOSAL J^NCWSNE
SUPPORTS OFF-SITE
PROPOSAL
X
Attachment "1" to Council Policy Statement No. 57
ASSESSMENT COTERM
ASSESSMENT CONCLUSION
(Check appropriate box)
DOES NOT SUPPORT
OFF^SfTE PROPOSAL INCONCLUSIVE
SUPPORTS OFF-SHE
PROPOSAL
WORKSHEET
Brief Narrative: The on-site affordable project is of marginal size as a condominium project. Although it is difficult
to quantify the economic implications, it will likely be difficult for the market units in this project to absorb the
economic subsidy requirement of the affordable units. Based on the estimated restricted purchase prices of the
affordable units and an estimated unit cost of $140,000, the applicant will be facing an average subsidy
requirement of approximately $40,000 per unit. Unlike rental projects, for-sale units do not have significant
subsidy programs available from federal or other sources. The likely sources of subsidy would be the developers
and/or the City/Redevelopment Agency.
b. Will an affordable housing product be difficult
to intearate into the proposed market
development because of significant price
and product type disparity?
X
Brief Narrative: The integration of the 23 affordable units into the proposed 40-unit condominium project is a
desirable approach, and price disparities, while significant, are less of a concern because all units are for-sale
condominium product. The affordable condominiums will be priced well below the single family product which
is estimated at the mid $200,000's. The fact that the affordable component is for-sale somewhat neutralizes
this disparity between the condominium and detached product.
c. Does the on-site development entity lack the
capacity to deliver the proposed affordable
housing on-site?
X
Brier" Narrative: The Developer is not experienced in the development of affordable housing and has not
established a relationship with an affordable housing developer.
2. Relative Advantages/Disadvantages of the Off-
site Proposal.
a. Does the off-site option offer greater feasibility
and cost effectiveness than the on-site
alternative, particularly regarding potential
local public assistance and when applying the
City's Affordable Housing Financial Assistance
Policy?
Brief Narrative: The Villa Loma project is under construction and has known feasibility. Villa Loma would
likely offer a significantly lower cost to the applicant than the potential subsidy required to construct the on-site
affordable units. The applicant's participation in Villa Loma would permit the recovery of City investment
provided to the project; conversely, the developer's on-site project would create the demand for additional new
subsidy from some source.
b. Does the off-site proposal have location
advantages over the on-site alternative, such
as proximity to jobs, schools, transportation,
services; less impact on other existing
developments, etc.?
X
Brief Narrative: The Villa Loma location has advantages over the on-site project in terms of proximity to jobs
and project amenities. The proposed on-site project location is at least equivalent in terms of proximity to
schools, parks and services. Villa Loma is a self-contained affordable development with little impact on other
communities. The on-site proposal could be a source of real or perceived impact on the single-family and
condominium communities into which it is integrated.
^P WORKSHEET W
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
c. Does the off-site option offer a development
entity with the caoacitv to deliver the proposed
project?
Brief Narrative: The Villa Loma project is beina t.
specialized affordable housing developer.
d. Does the off-site option satisfy multiple
developer obligations that would be difficult
to satisfy with multiple projects?
Brief Narrative: Villa Loma will likely be satisfy/in
project would be one of several (including Laurel
the Southwest Quadrant competing for scarce fin
obtain funding. The Villa Loma project has alrea
subsidy financing.
3. Advancing Housing Goals
a. Does the off-site proposal advance and/or
support City housing goals and policies
expressed in the Housing Element, CHAS
and Inclusionary Housing Ordinance?
Brief Narrative: The proposal to participate in th(
Project supports an affordable project that is targ
Element and CHAS larger rental units for low inct
the applicant's participation will provide additiona
housing development.
Although the proposed on-site project is for-sale,
affordable units (and perhaps more) in the South
housing policy, this may suggest the need to use
additional new construction.
SUMMARY
ASSESSMENT CONCLUSION
(Check appropriate box)
DOES NOT SUPPORT
Of^STTE PROPOSAL INCONCLUSIVE
SUPPORTS OFF-S/JE
PROPOSAL
X
Developed and managed by a highly experienced and
X
j multiple developer obligations. The proposed on-site
Tree Apartments and the Sambi/Seaside Heights Project) in
ancial assistance. This means that it would be difficult to
dy been financed; it would not be competing for remaining
X
3 Villa Loma Apartments as a Combined Affordable Housing
eted to the highest priority need identified in the Housing
ome households. The recovery of City investment through
f resources which are needed to assist further affordable
it would be following closely the construction of almost 500
west Quadrant. From the standpoint of the City's inclusionary
existing 'excess' affordable units before supporting
DOES NOT SUPPORT
OFF-SITE PROPOSAL
2
INCONCLUSIVE
1
SUPPORTS OFF&TE
PROPOSAL
5