Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutV 01-04; Arroyo Vista; Variance (V)Tile City of Carlsbad Planning Department P.C. AGENDA OF: November 7,2001 A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Application complete date: June 25,2001 Project Planner: Christer Westman Project Engineer: Jeremy Riddle Item No. @) SUBJECT: SDP 01-06/PUD 90-04(AW 01-04 - ARROYO VISTA - A Site Development Plan to approve floor plans and elevations for 155 single-family residential homes on approved lots that are a minimum 7,500 square feet; proposed fence design and location; RV storage area design; and; a Minor Amendment to the project’s Planned Unit Development to allow reduced fkont yard setbacks on the 6 1.17 acre site generally located east of Rancho Santa Fe Road and north of Calle Acervo in Local Facilities Management Zone 1 1. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 5060, 5061, and 5097 APPROVING a Site Development Plan, Minor Planned Unit Development Amendment, and Variance. 11. BACKGROUND This item was scheduled on October 17,2001, but was continued because a single inconsistency with the Planned Development Ordinance was identified just prior to the hearing. After discussing possible solutions to recti@ the inconsistency, it was determined that a variance could be and has been included in the project application. The issue is that when a project includes ten or more structures in a row the Planned Development Ordinance requires separation between those structures determined by their number of stories. The separation between three and two-story structures is 20 feet. The separation between two-story and single story structures is 15 feet. The separation between two single story structures is 10 feet. Although separation between two two-story structures is not specifically identified in the Planned Development Ordinance, an Administrative Policy was established to require 20 feet of separation between two-story structures when they are part of a row of ten or more structures on a single street. The Arroyo Vista subdivision was approved with five rows of lots greater than ten. Subsequently, homes were proposed for the subdivision and located within each of the residential lots using the R-1 side yard setback standard of ten percent of the lot width versus based on their number of stories. Special circumstances apply to the subject property in that the site’s natural topography dictates several approaches to subdivision design including longer streets which run parallel to the hillside contours versus perpendicular to the hillside contours. Longer streets result in longer rows of residential lots. Reducing the overall development area by reducing lot sizes to a SDP 01-06/PUD 90-04(A), J 01-04 - ARROYO VISTA November 7,2001 Page 2 minimum 7,500 square feet versus 10,000 square feet was preferred because of the hillside terrain. Although the project lots were established by Planned Unit Development, the proposed building separation is consistent with the R-1 standard of side yard setbacks equal to ten percent of the lot width. Adjacent subdivisions have been developed with similar street configurations without benefit of 20 foot separation between two-story buildings. A strict application of the zoning ordinance could therefore be determined to deprive this property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity under the R-1-10,000 and PC zoning classifications. Additional special circumstances apply to the subject property in that the project is not subject to the Small Lot Architectural Guidelines, however, the project’s buildings have been designed and distributed throughout the subdivision to implement the guidelines to a great degree. The guidelines were established by City Council Policy and are another approach to providing visual relief when there are several homes in a row on a single street. Plans one and two have entirely single story edges and together constitute more than 20 percent of the project. The remaining Plans three, four, five and six all have single story elements over the front 20 percent of the building. All of the proposed homes have four building planes along the front. More than 66 percent of the proposed homes have an average 8.5 foot side yard facade change. Further more, no home is proposed with three garage spaces side-by-side. All of these elements reduce the visual impact of ten or more two-story units in a row on a single street. An other special circumstance applies to the subject property since the project is subject to a Planned Development Ordinance which is currently being revised to eliminate the “ten in a row” requirement and replace it with architectural standards which will satisfy the intent of reducing the visual impact of several two-story buildings in a row. As a result of architectural design and the inclusion of several single story edge and single story floor plans the project complies with many of the draft replacement architectural standards. More than 20 percent of the proposed homes have a single story building edge. Other than volume ceilings at entries, all proposed homes are single story along the fiont. No home is proposed with a three-in-a-row car garage. Finally, more than 75 percent of the homes are proposed with visible front doors. Support for the requested variance may be derived fiom the Small Lot Architectural Guidelines which determined that on a case by case basis the decision makers should determine if the intent is met to ensure that the project does not appear “boxy” or as “row housing.” As provided in the foregoing findings the project substantially conforms to the intent of reducing the visual impact of ten or more two-story structures in a row. on the same street and Staff can support the requested variance. A resolution for the approval of a vaiiance has been included in the Planning Commission’s packet. Denial of the variance will require the applicant to take an alternate course of action including but not limited to the design of new floor plans for the rows of lots in question, drop development on key lots to create a break and therefore eliminate “ten in a row”, andor relocate more single story plans (Plans one and two) to the rows of lots in question. SDP 01-06PUD 90-04(A~ v 01-04 - ARROYO VISTA November 7,2001 Pane 3 ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2. 3. 4. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5060 (SDP) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5061 (PUD) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5097 (V) Staff Report dated October 17,2001 with attachments