HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-07-15; Planning Commission; Resolution 34170 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3417
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING A PLANNING
DIRECTOR'S DECISION DENYING A PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF
RESIDENTIAL PUD LOTS LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST
CORNER OF HOOVER AND ADAMS STREET.
CASE NAME: MELLGREN
THREE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES ON THREE PROPOSED
CASE NO: PUD 91-2
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to wit:
Lot 1 in Block "D" of Bellavista, in the City of Carlsbad, County
of San Diego, State of California; According to Map thereof NO.
2152, Filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County, March, 7, 1929.
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission; and
i I
13 /I WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided by Title
14
15
a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and 16
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 15th day of July, 1992, holc
21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
17 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimon)
I* /I and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered al
19 II
2o 11 factors relating to the appeal of the Planned Development Permit.
21 !I NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning CommissioI
22
A) That the above recitations are true and correct. 23
as follows:
24
25
26
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commissio
UPHOLDS the Planning Director's decision denying PUD 91-2, based on th
following findings:
27 ....
28 -.--
....
0 0
1 Findins:
2
3
1. The project does not meet the intent of the Planned Development ordinance
findings under Section 21.45.072:
Chapter 21.45 and the Planning Commission cannot make the following required
4
5
6
7
A) Subsection (a)(l): The project does not comply with an adopted land use
plan for the area - Policy 8.3 of the Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan:
i. The building height for two of the proposed homes exceeds the crown
height of Adams Street which is prohibited by the plan.
8
9
20
11
ii. Any development proposed along this portion of the lagoor
(Hedionda Point) shall be designed so as to minimize disturbance ol
natural landforms, and shall be developed in a manner that assures ifi
compatibility and harmony with natural landforms through the use 01
such architectural techniques as terraced or pole foundations and z
variation of roof lines to complement the topography.
12
13
14
15
16
The project provides some foundation terracing, however the terrace!
are minimal and aligned such that grading impacts are no;
significantly reduced. The homes have a variation in roof line
slope and topography of the site. The building roof lines are no'
stepped down the slope, but rather, there are vertical two-stoq
building elevations and architectural towers massed adjacent to tht
top of a fill slopes.
however the variation and building elevations do not relate to tht
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
B) Subsection (a) (4), (5) and (9): The proposed planned development does no
meet all of the design criteria set forth in Section 21.45.080, or the minimun
development standards set forth in Section 21.45.090:
i. The required 30 foot wide private driveway is not well integrated int(
the site, is not designed for efficient and safe flow of vehicles, an(
does not extend all the way to the garages of the dwelling units. T~I
private street dead ends at a six foot high retaining wall and nc
landscaping is provided to visual soften the walls. The guest pafkin;
is dispersed parallel along the north side of a 12 percent driveway an would be difficult to access given the slope and disjointel
configuration of the driveway.
C) Subsection (a)(6): The proposed project is not designed to be sensitive ti
and blend in with the natural topography, (See the discussion under th
Agua Hedionda Land Use Plan and the Hillside Development Ordinance).
27
28
....
PC RES0 3417 2
%C e e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
2. The utilization of a planned development for this site permits a reduced lot si
which would allow one additional lot. This creates a higher intensity
development on the slopes than otherwise would be pennitted by the under19
subdivision that is more sensitive to the slope; (2) minimal grading and disturbanc
of the natural slope; and (3) a design that blends in with the natural topopp
of the site.
zoning without, in return, providing: (1) a superior or creatively design
3. The purpose of the Planned Development Ordinance is to allow the creation of la
smaller than the 15,000 sq. fi. lot size required by the underlying R1-15,000 ZOI
(single family) when the size and clustering of those proposed lots results
development and grading that minimizes alteration of the land, maintains significa
resources, and creates a superior design solution. This project accomplishes no1
of these objectives. The project site has over 210 feet of frontage on Hoover Stre
which is a dedicated public right-of-way. There is ample and suitable acce
provided to the site to accommodate a hillside site sensitive standard single-fami
subdivision with 15,000 sq. ft. lots.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Plannir
12
13
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 15th day of July, 1992, by tl
14 li following vote, to wit:
15
16
17
18
AYES: Chairperson Erwin, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schram
Noble & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioners: Savary & Welshons.
19 11 ABSTAIN: None.
I 20
21
22
23
24 ATTEST:
,/pp 7" 4 u - -
TOM ERWIN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
25
26 PLANNING DIRECTOR
27
28
PC RES0 3417 3