Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1973-08-07; City Council; 2095; Request for a change of zoneV N* • <7THE CITY OF CARLSPAD, CALIFORNIA /-_,. , C.C. Meettncf of Agenda Bill NO. &.ts ff5"~ ' pateAugust 7. 1973 Ref-rred To: CITY COUNCIL Subject: Request for a Change of Zone from R-2 & R-3 Submitted By: to RD-M from F. JAMES BEAR; to allow for condominium development PLANNING {' on property generally located easterly of and adjacent to ' COMMISSION Carlsbad Blvd. and between Tamarack Ave. and Sequoia Ave, "' t.o be. known as SEAVIEW CONDOMINIUMS. (ZC-117)' • " Statement of the Matter At their regular meeting of July 24, 1973, the Planning Commission did.hear a' ' request for a change of zone from R-2 & R-3 to RD-M, and a Final Environmental Impact Report for F. J. Bear. This project consists of two separate parcels. After holding a duly noticed public hearing, and considering all persons wishing 'to speak, the Planning Commission did accept the Final EIR as presented. Planning Commission Resolution No. 932 was adopted approving the change of zone request from R-2 & R-3 to RD-M on subject property, for the reasons as presented in the Staff Report. Exhibit 1. Certification of ownership 2. Staff Report dated July 24, 1973 - 3. Petition AGAINST this project. 4. E.I.R. Report for Seaview Condominiums prepared -by .Rick Engineering Co. 5. Applicant's exhibits (Map) . '/,,%''6. Planning Commission Resolution No. 932 adopting zone change(ZC-117j 7. City Council Resol ution^* 8. Staff Recommendations : Approval per reasons as stated in Resolution No. 932. AS No.Date: August 7, 1973 City Man ager ' s Recommendation Concur Counci. 1 ' Ac tion -2- 0. -R AND/OR OWNER'S AUTHORIZED . £MT AFFIDAVIT STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) CITY OF CARLSBAD ) ss I, (We) F> James Bear being duly sworn depose and declare to the best of my - . (my, our) true and correct under the penalty of purjury: jcnowledge that the foregoing is EXECUTED AT Carlsbad, California (City)(State) DATE -March 22,. 1973 (Year)(Month) APPLICANT, OWNER AMD/OR OWNER'S AUTHORIZED AGENT: F. James Bear (Print Name) .r (Signature) P. O. Box 7464 (Mailing Address) San Diego, California 92107 ' ' (City and State)(I (714) 232-2282 (Area Code) (Telephone Number]" City of Carlsbad Planning Department Analysis for July 24, ,1973 TO: REPORT ON: CASE NOS. APPLICANT: Planning Commission Consideration of E. I. R. " " Change of Zone " " Tentative Map Eis-ni ZC-117 ' CT 72-3 F. J. Bear for ,Seaview Condominiums P. 0. Box 7464" : San Diego, CA 92107 I. General Information General RequestA. to the City R-3 and R-2 Council to RD-M condominium complex and portions of Lots Palisades. Lot 18 of property is already zoned That the Planning Commission recommend that an EIS, a change of zone request from and a tentative map for a 51 dwelling unit be located on lots 1 and 2, Block I 1-6-and Lots 19 and 20, Block H, Map of Block I which is included in the subject RD-M. . 8- Background: The subject property consisting of two separate parcels, one located easterly of and adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard between Tamarack Avenue and Sequoia Avenue and the second at the southeast corner of the intersection of Sequoia Avenue and Carlsbad Boulevard. The first parcel has a frontage on Carlsbad Boulevard of"250 feet, a frontage on Tamarack Avenue of approximately 189.72 feet and contains a gross area of 0.93 acres. With the required 42 feet of dedication on Tamarack Avenue, the net acreage of this parcel is 0.75 acres. The second parcel has a frontage on Carlsbad Boulevard of approximately 100 feet, a frontage on Sequoia Avenue of approximately 135 feet and contains an area of approximately .31 acres. In that no additional dedications are required on this second parcel, the total net area of the subject property would be 1.06 acres. The applicant is indicating on the tentative mao that certain portions of Carlsbad Boulevard are to be abandoned. At present, the staff can find no justification for such an abandonment; particularly since the City has indicated that the presently L jsed portions of Carlsbad joulevard would be utilized for recreation purposes, such as bridal paths, rest areas, etc.. Such araas would enhance the recreational activities that occur in the beach area. While the area indicated to be abandoned by the applicant does consist largely of slope, staff believes that certain recreational ' ourposes could be located in that area. In addition, a substantial amount of utility facilities are located in the area in question and the abandonment of the area may neces- sitate the relocation of these facilities. The applicant is also indicating on the tentative map that an additional 21 feet of right-of-way is to be dedicated along Tamarack Avenue. The present right-of-way is 60 feet. The ultimate right-of-way is to be 102 feet.:Eased upon studies conducted by the engineering department, the total additional right-of-way between Carlsbad Boul.evard and the railroad " right-of-way to the east is to be taken along the south '•• side of Tamarack Avenue. Thus the tentative map does not show the necessary right-of-way along Tamarack Avenue. A total of four residences presently exist on the subject property. The proposed development would require the demolition of these structures which would result in the displacement of approximately 20 persons. . ' C. Zoning arid General Plan: - 1• Zoning Existing: R-3, R-2, RD-M Proposed: RD-M (TM w 51 d.u.) Adjacent: -North - C-l & R-3 . South - R-3 East - RD-M, R-3, R-2 West - L-C 2. General Plan: The land use-amendment No. 1 to the adopted General Plan indicates the subject property to be potential medium density residential with from 0-50 dwelling units per net acre. The density proposed by the applicant is 50 d.u./ net acre. This is based upon a net acreage of 1.06 acres. D. Public Notification: The required public notices have been published and mailed regarding these items. II. Consideration of E.I.R. No. 'Til A. ' 'Summary: A draft E.I.R. was received by staff on May 7, 1973 and a letter indicating deficiencies was mailed to the author of the report on May 23, 1973. Staff did receive a letter of amendment on June 15, 1973. Staff did accept the draft E.I.R. entitled "Seaview" and the subsequent amendment dated June 14, 1973 as an adequate draft E.I.R. In that substantial development does exist on the site and in that the property is located in an area of substantial development, staff is of the opinion that the environmental impact is of less significance than if the project were located in an un- developed area. The draft E.I.R. and the amendment substantially addresses the maj^r concerns with regard to the environment. Any areas .of the draft considered weak in any way are further elaborated upon below. B- Acceptability of Draft E.I.R: The draft E.I.R.,with the amendment, titled "Seaview" prepared by the Rick Engineering Co. was accepted by the Planning Department as an appropriate preliminary E.I.R. This-report was forwarded to the following agencies for comments and any responses are attached to this report: 1. County of San Diego Parks & Recreation .Department 2. State of California Division of Highways 3. State of California Parks & Recreation Department 4. San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board 5. Comprehensive Planning Organization 6. San Diego Coast Regional Commission 7. City Engineering Department . 8. Carlsbad Unified School District C. Final E.I.R. No. Til: The draft E.I.R. as amended is used substantially in this final report. . ••'. 1. P roj ect Des'cr I p tton: The project description as outlined in the draft E.I.R. on pages 1-3 and as enlarged on pages 1-2 of the amendment, along with all maps and the aerial,, which is somewhat out of date, does adequately describe the project as proposed by the applicant. 2. Envirorimental "Setting: The environmental setting as explained on pages 3-6 of the draft E.I.R. and pages 2-4 of the amendment letter is adequate but should also include the following: a. Geological 'setting - The erosion potential appears to have a high potential. Special mitigating measures will be required to preserve the 10-15 feet high existing bank. b. Visual setting - Because of the rise in elevation of the site and the proposed use of two-story structures, staff believes that the potential visual impact of this development to some of the State Beach areas is significant. ' c. 'Existing and Planned land 'uses - The proposed density is 50 dwelling units per net acre which is at the maximum permitted by the General Plan amendment. 3. Environmental Impacts - The impacts expressed on pages 6-10 of the draft E.I.R. and enlarged on page. 4 of the amendment do adequately indicate the affects of the project except for the following: a- Traffic - the current city traffic studies indicate that the present traffic volume on Carlsbad Boulevard is 8700 vehicles per day; not the indicated 4160 trips per day The trips per day generated by the proposed project will range from 510 to 1275 trips per day. b. ^ommun 1 ty Servi ces - B'aseo upon the author's estimate of 1.5 children per unit, stafr potential number of school children will number of 8. With a potential number of it's estimated that there will aged chi1dren . believes that the exceed the indicated children of 76 be at least 50 school The indicated abandonment of right-of-way along Carlsbad Boulevard should be considered a significant impact of community services, since utilities will have to be relocated and a loss of potential recreational areas will be less. In addition, the lack of the full dedication of right-of-v/ay along Tamarack Avenue will potentially have an impact on the circulation of the whole area. Both effects are considered to be sufficiently adverse to not permit them to occur. 4. effects on along with report. Adverse Environmental Effects: The list of adverse is considered adequatepage 11 of the the discussion draft E.'I.R. presented under section 3 of this on page 5. 12 'H j_ti_g_ati ng Mea sures: The mitigating measures outlined of the draft E.I.R. should be enlarged to include: a. Specific methods to preserve the existing unstable slope along Carlsbad Boulevard such as the use of appropriate landscaping and substantial setbacks. b. The abandonment of access rights to Carlsbad •Boulevand and Tamarack Averme •with Sequoia Avenue becoming a cul-de-sac ending at the subject property. This would increase the useable open area on the site and improve the visual appearance of the development from Tamarack and Carlsbad Boulevard. In addition, the potential public use of the undeveloped right-of- way along Carlsbad Boulevard would be preserved. 6. Alternative to the Proposed Action: proposed on pages 13-14 of the draft E.I.R. and the amendment should be enlarged to include the alternative outlined under subpoint b of section The alternatives on page 4 of potential 5 of this report, 7. The Relationship Between Short Term and Long Term Effects The explanation adequate. given on page 15 of the draft E.I.R. is considered 8. on page 16 considered 9. in an area the growth Irreversi ble Envi ronmental Changes : of the draft adequate. E.I.R. and pages 4-5 of The changes shown' the amendment is Growth Inducing Impacts: In that the parcel is located of substantial development, staff would not consider inducing impacts of the project as being significant. 10. Boundary of Area Affected by the Project: In that the project is located in an area of "substantial deve'l oprcent and residential development does already exist on the site, the boundary outlined on page 18 of the draft E.l.R. is considered adequate. In addition, the parcel is within the Coastal Zone and will be evaluated by the Coastal Commission. D. Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the final E.l.R. be approved to include: 1. The draft E.I.R. 2. The amendment letter 3.. Staff's comments herein , 4. Any response -received from notification ''•".•'- 5. Any input received during the public hearing Justification is based upon: 1. These materials do adequately express the total significant effect of the proposed development on the environment. III. Consideration; of Change of Zone No. 117: A- Specif"rc Requ est: A portion of the subject parcel is presently zoned RD-M. The applicant is requesting that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the remainder of the property be changed from R-3 and R-2 to RD-M. Based upon a net acreage of 1.06 acres, the maximum permitted dwelling units, as limited by the general plan, would be 51 dwelling units. Circulation to the site would be provided from Tamarack Avenue and Sequoia Avenue. B. 'Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that a change of zone to make the total property zoned RD-M be approved. Justification is based upon: 1. The RD-M Zone district by its restrictions guarantees conformance to the General Plan commitment for the property. 2. The subject site is considered adequate in size and location for most of the permitted uses in the RD-M Zone. IV. 'Consideration of Tentative Map No. CT 72-38 A. Specific Request: The tentative map is to consist of two lots upon which a total of 51 dwelling units are proposed. A 21 foot dedication along Tamarack Avenue and an approximate 14 foot abandonment along Carlsbad Boulevard is indicated to occur as a part of the Tentative Map. B- Staff acommendation : That the ,-ntative Map be denied. Justification is based upon: 1. Non-conformance to the General Plan in terms of circulation in that an inadequate width o.f Tamarack Avenue is proposed . 2. Non-conformance with the Municipal Code in that inadequate street widths are proposed and an inappropriate abandonment is proposed. 3. Mon-conformance to the State Map Act in that the tentative map is: a. not consistent as to design and improvements with the General Plan. b. in conflict as to design and improvements with existing rights-of-way. C. 'Alternative Proposal: Staff in its evaluation of the subject tentative map is of the opinion that it would be feasible to abandon Sequoia Avenue on the subject property if the following were provided: 1. A turn-around built to City standards 2. Utility easements and pedestrian access from the end of Sequoia Avenue to Carlsbad Boulevard. 3. The widening of Tamarack Avenue by an additional 42 feet in that this revision is such a significant change to the proposed project which would require substantial revision to the E.I.R. and the tentative map and the applicant may require additional study before pursuing this alternative, staff is recommending that the present tentative map be denied. PAUL A. WILLIAMS, Associate Planner Page No. Orts July 20, 1973 PETITION AGAINST ZONE CHANGE TO ALLOW A 51 UNIT CONDOMINIUM Project Ssaview, F.J. & Suzanne Bear Case No. ZC-11? Case No. CT-723S Regarding zone change frora R-2 & R3 to RD-M to allow a 51 unit condominium. We the undersigned legal property owners do hereby wish to have it be known that we are against (negative) with regards to this zone change to allow a 51 unit condominium. This proposed project would in our opinion create a more serious parking problem on side streets, due to the law regarding no parking on Carlsbad Blvd. which is the main highway and also the entrance to state public beach that fronts the proposed project. This project would in our opinion create a "Chinese ¥all" style of beachfront development that blocks the view. New structures of this magnitude would change the character of the older, smaller existing single faraily residences and apartment type neighborhood and encourage wall- to- wall construction of larger buildings. All of ths above nentioned items would have a Environmental Impact on the entire general beachfront araa. .,_,-___,,,__ -It ^ July 20, 1973 PSTION AGAINST ZONE CHANGE TO ALLOW A 51 UNIT CONDOMINIUM Project Ssaview, F.J. & Suzanne Bear Case No. ZC-117 Cass No. CT-723# Regarding zone change from R-2 & R3 to RD-M to allow a 51 unit condoDjiniua. / 3 - / T, </31 7) QC -/0 :.-7 / 7 ••^{.-'-<«:-*-' 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 PLANNING'COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO.932 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-3 AND R-2 JO 3-M. ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EASTERLY OF AND UIENT TO CARLSBAD BOULEVARD BETWEEN TAMARACK AVENUE AND SEQUOIA AVENUE, TO BE KNOWN AS SEAVIEW CONDOMINIUMS. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad did hold a duly noticed Public Hearing on July 24, 1973 to consider a request for a change of zone from R-2 and R-3 to RD-M, on property generally located easterly of and adjacent to CArlsbad Boulevard between Tamarack Avenue and Sequoia Avenue, by applicant F. J. BEAR, and property, further described All those portions of Lots 1 through 6 inclusive, Lot 19 and 20, Block H, Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Palisades, according to Map thereof No. 1747 on file in the Office of the County Recorder, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider the Final Environmental Impact Report for this project and approved same as presented, and; WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering the testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons who desired to be heard, said Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist which make the approval of a zone change necessary to carry out the provisions and general purpose of Title 21: 1. The RD-M zone district by its restrictions, guarantees conformance.to the General Plan commitment for the property. 2. The subject site is considered adequate in size and location for most of the permitted uses in the RD-M Zone. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, that it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of the adoption of an amendment to Title 21 for a zone change from R-2 and R-3 to RD-M. XX XX XX 1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning 2 Commission held on the 24th day^of July, 1973, by the following vote, 3 to wit; 4 AYES: Commissioners Jose, Forman, Casler, Wrench, Palmateer & Little. 5 NOES: None 6 ABSTAIN: Commissioner Dominguez 7 | ABSENT: None 8 9 10 11 E. W. DOMINGUEZ, 12 Chairman 13 I ATTEST: 14 15 DONALD A. AGATEP, 16 j Secretary 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 -2- A L l-->-l-t--rl4> 0 Q to _ <3 0• * 8 £ < 0)0 <O'u. ^ S |° iS§> > o m o ^ 3^ jl S) 0i z l °o £ *~ mz o (/i > H <r >• °1- o O 4 5 I 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 RESOLUTION NO. 3181 CT A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS AND DECISION REGARDING CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-3 AND R-2 TO RD-M ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED EASTERLY OF AND ADJACENT TO CARLSBAD BOULEVARD BETWEEN TAMARACK AVENUE AND SEQUOIA AVENUE, TO BE KNOWN AS WHEREAS, on July 24, 1973, a duly advertised public hearing was held before the Planning Commission in the manner prescribed by law to consider a change in zone from R-3 and R-2 to RD-M on property generally located easterly of and adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard between Tamarack Avenue and Sequoia Avenue, by applicant F. 0. Bear, and property further described as: All those portions of Lots 1 through 6 inclusive, Lot 19 and 20, Block H, Lot 1 and Lot 2, Block 1, Palisades, according to Map thereof No. 1747 on file in the Office of the County Recorder, City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California. WHEREAS, at the conclusion of said hearing, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, adopted Resolution No. 932 recommending said zone change which is herewith referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, on August "/th , 1973, the City Council held a public hearing on the matter, received all recommendations and heard all persons interested in or opposed to the proposed change of zone; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the require- ments of the "City of Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972", and an Environmental Impact Report was filed and discussed at a duly noticed public hearing held by the Planning Commission and City Council and was approved as presented; O !4 ii ji t>\\<-•> i •|| ii 5 il 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 *% I 15 "3 ; §o|i 16 2! v ili SE i|«? 17O -5 -! J- ' Q CO ^S~81111 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NOW, THEREFORE, 8E IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the findings of the Planning Commission contained in the aforementioned Resolution No. 932 constitute the findings of the Carlsbad City Council. 3. That the approval of the proposed change of zone classification is necessary to carry out the general purpose of Title 21 of the Municipal Code. 4. That the City Council of the City of Carlsbad intends to adopt an ordinance to effectuate the proposed change of zone. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council on the -ffth day of August , 1973, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Councilmen Dunne, McComas, Lewis and Chase. NOES: None. ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Councilman Frazee. DAVID M. DUNNE, Mayor ATTEST: MARGARET"E. ADAMS, City Clerk (seal) 2.