Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-07-01; Planning Commission; Resolution 4293f 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4293 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SDP 97-02 TO ALLOW THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 50 UNIT AFFORDABLE APARTMENT PROJECT AND 28 SECOND DWELLING UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF EL CAMINO REAL AND COLLEGE BOULEVARD IN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 15 CASE NAME: TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK CASE NO.: SDP 97-02 WHEREAS, CanAm Properties, LLC, “Developer”, has filed a application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by CanAm Propertie “Owner”, described as A portion of Lot “B” of Rancho Agua Hedionda in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, per Map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of Said County, November 16, 1896 and Lots 1-10 of CT 83-36 per Map No. 11242 as recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County May 23,1985. (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Site Devel ‘Plan [Amendment] as shown on Exhibit(s) “A”-“FFF” dated May 20, 1998, on filc Planning Department, TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK - SDP 97-02, as provided by 21 .OG/Section 21 S3.120 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 3rd day of June I! 17th day of June 1998, and the 1st day of July 1998, hold a duly noticed public he: prescribed by law to consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all te and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered a1 relating to the Site Development Plan. 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 0 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the : Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the P Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of TERRACES AT S CREEK - SDP 97-02, based on the following findings and subject following conditions: Findings: 1. That the requested use is properly related to the site, surroundings and enviro settings, is consistent with the various elements and objectives of the General P’ not be detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the area i the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroun traffic circulation, in that the 50 unit affordable apartment project and the 28 dwelling units are consistent with the Planned Development and Hillside Or design and development standards. The project is also consistent w Inclusionary Housing and Affordable Housing Ordinances due to its inte into a market rate subdivision and proximity to El Camino Real and Boulevard, as well as, employment centers of the City’s Industrial Corrido closest residential subdivisions are mobile home parks which are compatit apartments and small lot subdivision with second dwelling units. The dwelling units have ample open space surrounding each dwelling, and the a the apartment project is provided directly off a collector street intersecti~ College Boulevard, so that apartment traffic will not be required to ci through the single family neighborhood. The 78 dwelling units which affordable to lower income households is consistent with Policy 3.6a of the E Element in that it represents 30% of the total units in the project. The pr density increase (and density transfer from the excess dwelling unit b: consistent with Policy 3-71 allowing discretionary consideration of density i through processing a site development plan in accordance with and implemel Chapter 21.53.120 of the Zoning Ordinance for affordable housing projects size. 2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the that all required setbacks have been maintained, adequate parking 01 provided, and recreational open space has been provided. 3. That all yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary ti the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood provided and maintained, in that the apartment site is situated on its own lot ser by a collector street and open space from other development. The second d units have been incorporated into the proposed single family dwelling uni PC RES0 NO. 4293 -2- i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 e 0 manner that does not allow them to be distinguished from standard sing1 units. 4. That the street systems serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle E generated by the proposed use, in that ingress and egress to the apartment site. Conditions: 1. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require Developer to make, all co. and modifications to the Site Development Plan document(s) necessary to ma internally consistent and in conformity with final action on the project. Devc shall occur substantially as shown in the approved Exhibits. Any proposed devc different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. 2. Approval of SDP 97-02 is granted subject to the approval of EIR 98-01, GPA 96 96-01, SP 190(B), LFMP 87-15(B), CT 96-02, PUD 96-02, HDP 96-02, SUI SUP 96-02 and SUP 96-03. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or a building permit for any affordable apartment units or second dwelling units, the Developer shall entel Affordable Housing Agreement with the City pursuant to Chapter 21.85 of the ( Municipal Code. NOTICE Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” t dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for conven “feedexactions.” You have 90 days from date of final City Council approval to protest imposition ( feedexactions. If you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set 1 Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the protest and any other required informati the City Manager for processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3 Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, rev aside, void, or annul their imposition. You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/e> DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor pl zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection u project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any feedexactions of which you have previously bee a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously ot expired. ~... PC RES0 NO. 4293 -3 - , ** 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 9 * PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the . Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 1st day of July 1998 following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners Heineman, Monroy an Compas NOES: Commissioners Nielsen, Savary and Welshons ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BAILEY NOBLE, Chairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: Planning Director PC RES0 NO. 4293 -4-