HomeMy WebLinkAbout1974-06-18; City Council; 1054-3; Covington Conimark: Specific Plan•THE CITY OF C A R L S B A V, C A L I F' O R N X A
'Supplement No. 3 . 1Q7.
Agenda Bill No. 1Q54 . ' ' ' Pa to: June 18 ' 1974
Referred To: • •
Subject: . Submitted By:
?M!?CksSS£ W2SWCovington-Coninmark . ,
'Statement of the Matter
Agenda Bill No! 1054 was presented to the City Council May 21, 1974 The Council
continued the matter to June 18, 1974 to allow the General ^Plan Land Use Element
to be heard by the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission has held several
Public hearings on the proposed General Plan Land Use. Element Revision.- The
Commission is scheduled to make a recommendation to the City Council on. June 11, 1974. ,
The applicant submitted his request for rezoning to Planned Co™11""^ j[^ Jone
without identifying proposed Master Plan as required by the Planned Conmu ty P-C)wouOrdinance. The proposed Specific Plan as submitted may act as the Master Plan if the
.Specific Plan is submitted concurrent with the rezoning request.
Exhihit
1. Staff report to City Manager dated May 14, 1974
staff Recommendations to the City Manager
That the Council grant a Change of Zone to P-C (Planned Community). The Council may
then require Land Use and densities to conform to Land Use and Density recommendations
of ^adopted- Revised Land Use Element of the General Plan. If ^e Council requires
conformance to the proposed General Plan densities, I would recommend the Specific
Plan be returned to the Planning Commission for re-design.
A-3 No. Date: June 18, 1974
City Manager's Recommendation
The Planning Commission has completed its review of
the Land Use Element of the General Plan and will be
forwarding to the Council, as part of that Plan, a
recommendation of 10 units to the acre on land affected
by this Tentative Map. If it appears that a new countcil-
man will be seated by this Council meeting, the staff
will make arrangements to see that he or she has access
to all the previous tapes of Council meetings on this
matter. If Council approves the matter, it should be
referred to the City Attorney for preparation of the
necessary documents.
Council'Action
6-18-74 The staff was instructed to prepare the necessary documents
granting the zone change. The staff was also nnstructed to
prepare the necessary documents approving the Master Plan,
Specific Plan and tentative map.
May 14, 1974
TO: CITY MANAGER
FROM: PLANNING DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: Reassessment of ZC-101. SP-102 and CT 73-1 (Covington-Coni'nmark)
The recently adopted Open Space and Conservation Element established as a goal the
desires of the City to discourage incompatible developments in areas that should
be preserved or regulated for scenic, etc. purposes. The Open Space Element was
established to provide visual amenities in prime open space areas wherever possible.
The Element also proposed policies which would encourage the designation and im-
provement of public walkways and scenic corridors along the boundaries of any
natural resource (Agua Hedionda Lagoon). The proposed Covington-Coninmark de-
velopment then, has an obligation to meet the goals and policies of the Open Space
and Conservation Element.
Recently adopted Ordinances which would implement the Open Space and Conservation
Element are directed specifically to the preservation of the scenic corridors
and other scenic amenities related to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The Scenic
Preservation Overlay Zone establishes the City's intent to regulate areas possessing
outstanding scenic qualities and also create buffers between incompatible land
uses. Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone requires that special treatment be given
to hillsides, beaches, lagoons, etc., and that considerations established within
any development must meet a minimum set of developmental standards; for example:
Section 21.40.110 - Paragraph C: prescribes landscape requirements and
City review of the plans.
Paragraph D: requires the review of plans and establishes
acceptable architectural styles.
Paragraph E: requires the establishment of deeper
setbacks than normally allowed so as to maintain the
integrity of the scenic corridor.
Paragraph F: requires that sidewalks be established wider
than normal which would allow views through the project
to the natural corridor.
Paragraph G: asks that height limitations be reduced to
maximize view potentials.
-2-
The Planning Commission has recommended to the City Council a second Open Space
Zone called the Coastal and Lagoon Overlay Zone. The purpose of this zone is
to provide for views, public access, and the use of the Coastal and Lagoon re-
sources of the City. An additional requirement is to encourage compatibility of the
public and private use of the land in beach and lagoon areas. Like the Scenic
Preservation Overlay Zone, the Open Space and Conservation Overlay Zone requires
that height and setback requirements be manipulated to ensure compliance with the
goals and policies of the Open Space and Conservation Element. The Coastal and
Lagoon Overlay zone also stipulates that Agua Hedionda Lagoon should be preserved
as a visual as well as an active waterway resource. The proposed Coastal and Lagoon
Overlay Zone requires that development maximize public use of the coastline and of
lagoon shorelines. Development should also maximize provisions for public access
and public view to all water areas. The Coastal and Lagoon Overlay Zone has not
been adopted by the City Council, but the intent of the proposed zone is consistent
with Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone requirements and the goals and policies of the
Open Space Element.
The applicant, Covington-Coninmark, is requesting a change of zone from R-l-15,000
to Planned Community, on 12.9 acres on the lagoon side of Adams Street and south-
east of Hoover Street. The project involves the construction of 190 units. Proposed
present density is 14.7 d.u./acre. The existing General Plan permits a maximum of
30 d.u./acre. The General Plan being revised by the staff and respective citizen
committees is proposing a decrease in residential densities to 10 d.u./acre. The
applicant is also proposing to develop substantial recreational amenities on-site.
In addition, he is proposing to improve a 40-50 ft. corridor along the lagoon
frontage. The corridor will be accessible to the public for pedestrian, bicycle
and emergency maintenance. The applicant is proposing to provide an improved access
to the waters edge along the projects' northerly boundary by developing Hoover Street
to its designed width.
The Covington-Coninmark proposal accomplishes a majority of the goals and policies
discussed in the Open Space and Conservation element. It also basically meets the
requirements of the Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone and the desired intent of the
Coastal and Lagoon Overlay Zone. There are considerations which warrant re-
evaluation if the project is to proceed:
A. The applicant has expressed his willingness to provide public access
to the lagoon frontage by:
1. The improvement of Hoover Street to the lagoon edge, and the
possibility that the proposed launching ramp could be used by the
public. The Parks and Recreation Director and Commission, have in-
dicated the desirability of a public launching ramp and parking at
the terminus of Hoover Street.
2. A proposed pedestrian walkway/stairway, can be included on the
southeast boundary to increase the public's accessibility to the
Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and beach.
B. The applicant indicated on his Specific Plan and Tentative Map the
designation of a pedestrian walkway and bicycle path along the entire
frontage of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. To maximize access to this walkway,
it will be necessary to relocate the proposed recreational marina southerly
so as not to restrict public accessibility to the proposed walkway.
-3-
C. Adams Street is being proposed as a Scenic Route in the Circulation
Element. To be consistent with the Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone and
the goals and policies of the Open Space Element, the applicant and the
City must consider potential redesign which would maximize the views and
the scenic qualities of the Adams Street/Agua Hedionda Lagoon area.
Redesign should consider as a minimum the following:
1. The elimination of one of the buildings fronting Adams Street
( 8 d.u..). In place of the building, a public vista/turn-out,
would be built providing an unimpeded view of the lagoon.
2. The redesign would also consider re-positioning of the remaining
six (6) structures fronting Adams Street, so as to increase the
separation between buildings, and thereby increasing visual access
along the Adams Street frontage. The proposed relocation of structures
may necessitate a potential elimination of 10 additional dwelling units.
An alternative to the relocation of the structures is the elimination
of an additional 8 dwelling units from the 2nd structure southeast of
Hoover Street.
If the City is to meet the adopted Open Space and Conservation Element goals and
policies directed to visual access and scenic corridors, the preceding action
is necessary.
The total decrease of 17 to 20 dwelling units to preserve visual and scenic
amenities, would reduce the overall project density from 14.7 d.u./acre to
13.25 d.u./acre.
The proposed development, if amended to provide for visual/access and public
access, would meet the goals and policies of the Open Space and Conservation
Element. In my opinion, the revisions as outlined in this report would satisfy
the Open Space and Conservation goals and policies. The approval of this
development as redesigned would set the standard for development along Adams
Street/Agua Hedionda Lagoon, and not allow the depletion of access to a natural
resource.
An alternative to the redesign of the project is the consideration of the General
Plan amendment with respect to residential density and circulation. If the City
Council adopts the position that the proposed redesign should not take place until
after the General Plan is amended, the developer should be instructed to redesign
his project so as to minimize density (i.e., approximately 10 d.u./acre)
and maximize visual and physical access to the lagoon as outlined in the preceding
discussion.
I would recommend the Council request the Developer to redesign the project as
outlined and grant the requested zone change to P-C. The Specific Plan and Tentative
Map would be returned to the Planning Commission for redesigned as outlined above.