HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-04-04; City Council; 5396; 16 Unit Condomiuium- Pearl/O'HaraCITY OF CARLSBAD.' .'
AGENDA BILL MO..
!
DATE: April 4, 1978
.;
DEPARTMENT: Planning
Initial:
Dept. Hd. _
City Atty V
City Mgr.L
SUBJECT:
Case: CT 77-14,. Approval of one lot 16 unit condominium
Applicant: Pear Iman/O1 Kara
STATEMENT OF THE MATTER
* •
The subject site is a 1.3 acre parcel situated on the west side of
Gibraltar Street' backing on to the La Costa Golf Course. The applicant
wishes to consolidate four existing lots into one lot and construct a
16 unit condominium. The applicant has submitted building plans that
incorporate the desires of the City Building Official as to the construction
of condominiums . '
The project is in the Leucadia County Sewer District and sewers are
presently available for the project as per letter from the district dated
December 20, 1977. School agreements have been reached. The project
is a well-designed condominium, providing privacy, sufficient occupant
parking, open space and reacreation area, all within a relative high density
design. The property has a great deal of street frontage in relation to
depth, and therefore has a relatively large amount of street parking
immediately available for visitors.
Planning staff recommended approval with conditions. The Planning Commission
agreed with' some modification to the conditions foir clarity.
EXHIBITS . '
Planning 'Commission Resolution No. 1437
Staff Report- dated March 8, 1978
Location Map ' .
Exhibit B, dated January 26, 1978Memorandum to Paul Bussey from Jim Hageman, dated March 24, 1978
City Mana9er from C^V Attorney, 4-7-78.
It is recommended that the City Council direct the City Attorney to prepare^
documents approving CT 77-14 as per Planning Commission Resolution No. 1437, •
as modified, as suggested by staff in the attached memorandum, dated
March 24, 1978. . ' •
Council action -"'""
4_4_78 The public hearing was continued to the meeting of April 18,
1978 at the request of staff.
FORM PLANNING 73 COPY
AGENDA BILL NO. 5396 -2- April 18, 1978
Council action
4-18-78 The Council accepted staff recommendation, including the City
Attorney's Memorandum of April 7, 1978. Staff was also instructed
to prepare a report on fire retardant roofs for multiple family
dwelling units where brush is a factor.
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1437
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
ONE LOT, 16 UNIT, CONDOMINIUM PROJECT TO BE
DEVELOPED IN THREE PHASES ON PROPERTY GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE NORTH WEST SIDE OF GIBRALTAR
BETWEEN ROMERIA AND SAN MARCOS CANYON.
CASE NO. CT 77-14
APPLICANT; SAMUEL W. PEARLMAN/MICHAEL O'HARA
WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property to
wit:
Lots 378 through 381 inclusive of La Costa South Unit
No. 5, in the City of Carlsbad, in the County of San
Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof
No. 66000, filed in the Office of County Recorder of
San Diego County, March 10, 1970
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and referred to the
Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request
as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 8th day. of
March, 1978,. hold a;: duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by
law to consider said request; 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 considered all factors relating to
the Carlsbad Tract (CT 77-14), and found the following facts and
reasons to exist:
1. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan because:
a) The Land Use Element designates the site for residential
land use at 20-30 dwelling units per acre. The project
provides about 12 dwelling units per acre.
b) Condominium development will provide for home ownership
in this high density area near recreational facilities(golf course).
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
The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is
consistent with the General Plan because1 ;
a) The project will provide orderly residential development.
b) The project will not cause excessive expansion of public
facilities and/or expense to the taxpayer.
The site is physically suitable for the type of development
because:
a) The site has been rough graded, creating building pads,
and;
b) All significant public improvements are existing, including
street improvements.
The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of
development because:
a) Dwelling units to be provided per acre are consistent with
the General Plan density, and;
b) All pre-building site preparation has been accomplished
previously.
The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are
not likely to cause serious public health problems because:
a) Conditions of approval will insure adequate public health
facilities, and;
b) A letter has been received from Leucadia County Water
District indicating that sewer facilities are available
with need.
The design of the subdivision of the type of improvements will
not conflict with easements required by the public at large
for access through or use of property within the proposed
subdivision because:
a) Storm drain easements will be created to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
The subdivision will not prohibit reasonable access to public
waterways, rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, coastlines
or shorelines because:
a) The subdivision does not front on any of the above.
The subject application has complied with the requirements of
the Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972
because:
.2
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
a)
9) Th
Ci
a)
b)
c)
d)
N
of the
A) Th
B) Th
th
is
fo
1) Ap]
an
Ma
am
2) Th«
be
3) A
sii
St.
4) Se]
hoi
5) Al
an<
to
6) A .
PI
Di.
tal
fa<
in
7) Du
ah
Prior compliance was achieved by a negative declaration
being issued on previous subdivision (CT 76-13) ,that
was tabeled.
The proposed tentative map is consistent with applicable
City Public Facility Policies and Ordinances because:
Sewer service was issued by Leucadia County Water District
prior to their present moratorium.
Park fees are required per City code prior to final map
adoption.
School agreements have been reached and are acceptable.
All other public facilities are existing or can be met.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE it resolved by the Planning Commission
of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
That the above recitations are true and correct.
That in view of the findings heretofore made and considering
the applicable law, the decision of the Planning Commission
is to APPROVE Carlsbad Tract (CT 77-14), subject to the
following conditions:
Approval is granted for the land described in the application
and any attachments thereto and as shown on the Tentative
Map submitted, labeled Exhibit B, dated January 26, 1978, as
amended to indicate three phases instead of 3 lots'.
The project may be constructed in phases. Phase one shall
be constructed first, with either phase 2 or phase 3 next.
A standard handicapped ramp shall be provided in the existing
sidewalk across from the southeasterly corner of Gibraltar
Street and Romeria Street. -
Separation walls between units shall have a minimum of two
hour fire rating.
All units shall be served with independent utility systems
and be separately metered. This shall be accomplished prior
to approval of final map.
A recreation and landscape plan is to be approved by the
Planning Director in consultation with the Parks and Recreation
Director that includes recreational uses such as picnic
tables, usable open areas and some form of active recreational
facilities. This recreation and landscaping shall be fully
installed prior to approval of the occupancy of the units.
During construction, existing street trees will be protected
arid preserved.
.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
8) Existing street trees shall not be removed. It is necessary
to remove street trees, replacement shall be made with equal
size and type.
9) Water service shall be provided by Carlsbad Municipal Water
District (CMWD). The applicant shall comply with the rules
and regulations of the CMWD regarding water service to
condominiums.
0) In the event that extensions to the existing public water
system are deemed appropriate by the water district, the
developer will be required to provide the complete water
system.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
City of Carlsbad Planning Commission held on March 8, 1978,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
ABSENT:
Commissioner L'Heureux, Fikes, Yerkes, Rombotis,
Woodward, Larson.
Commissioner Jose.
JERRY ROMBOTIS, Chairman
ATTEST:
JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Secretary
.4
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 8, 1978
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Department
CASE NO: CT 77-14
APPLICANT: Samuel W. Pearlman/ Michael O'Hara
REQUEST: Approval of a one lot, 16 unit, condominium
project to be developed in three phases.-
BACKGROUND
Location and Description of Property
The 1.3 acre parcel is generally rectangular in shape and backs up to the
La Costa golf course.
The entire site has been graded and building pads created. The parcel is
relatively flat.
All street improvements have been installed on the site's street frontage
and the surrounding area.
The improvements and grading were presumably accomplished previous to the
annexation of La Costa area to the City (La Costa South Unit No. 5).
Existing Zoning
Subject Property: RDM (RH, 20-30 dwellings/acre)
North: Planned Community
South: RDM
East: Planned Community
West: Planned Community
Existing Land Use . • . .
Subject Property: Vacant' -
North: Golf Course
South: Vacant
East: Vacant
West: Golf Course
History and Related Cases
The parcel was subdivided under the County of San Diego's jurisdiction, under
La Costa South Unit No. 5
CT 76-13 — This was the original application by Samuel Pearlman on
subject site. After a period of continuances, the application was denied
without prejudice because no school agreement was reached. The Planning Commission
had heard this item four times beginning on 11-8-76. Each continuance was
due to the applicant's failure to reach agreement with the school district.
Staff had recommended approval with a stipulation that a school letter was required.
CT 77-14 — The Planning Commission reviewed the subject application
(CT 77-14, Pearlman) for the first time on September 28, 1977. Again, as with
CT 76-13, school agreements were not reached and the matter was tabled. Since
then, school agreements have been made. Also, a new applicant, Mr. O'Hara, has
taken over the project.
Environmental Impact Information
The project satisfied the Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972 by
prior compliance.
1. The site has been graded and building pads created.
2. Provision for adequate drainage has been created.
3. No vegetation exists on site.
General Plan Information
The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the site Residential High
Density (20-30 dwelling units per acre). The density of the proposed project is
12 dwelling units per acre.
Public Facilities
%
All necessary street improvements, with the exception of a wheelchair ramp,
have been installed.
The Leucadia County Water District issued sewer permits for the subject
project in May, 1977. These permits were to expire automatically in six months
if the subdivision map was not approved. However, in December, 1977, the LCWD
provided a letter to the City explaining that the sewer permits "will remain
valid during the process necessary to obtain a building permit."
The applicant has reached satisfactory agreements with both the San Dieguito
Union High School District, and the Encinitas Union School District.
Major Planning. Considerations
Is the proposed subdivision consistent with the General Plan?
Have the policies of the City been met?
.2
Discussion
The City Council has reviewed a draft condominium and condominium conversion
ordinance and has directed staff to do further study and put into final 'form. '
This draft ordinance indicates that the standards for condominiums would be
based on the Planned Unit Development Ordinance.
The applicant has indicated he will meet this criteria where possible by
providing two hour rated fire walls between units, separate utilities, and
open space and recreation areas.
The project generally meets parking requirements as compared to the
Planned Unit Development Ordinance. The Planned Unit Development Ordinance
requires 1^ parking spaces for each dwelling unit on-site for high-density
development. The project has 16 dwelling units with 32 covered parking
spaces for a 2:1 ratio. However, the Planned Unit Development Ordinance
requires one visitor parking space for each dwelling unit with credit for
street parking if the street is totally within the project. The plans do
not contain on-site visitor parking, but there are approximately 18 spaces that can
be used for visitors directly in front of this project. Additional on-site
spaces could be provided. However, staff has not recommended doing this because
valuable open space and recreation areas would be removed and the gain in five
spaces would not be appreciable.
The RV storage requirements would be 640 square feet which could be placed on
the site at the expense of losing open space. It is possible to place a
condition on the approval that RV spaces be secured off-site in a commercial
storage yard and be the responsibility of the Homeowner's Association to maintain.
However, the site is in La Costa, which already has a prohibition on RV storage
and which plans to construct RV storage areas as part of their revised
Master Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of CT 77-12, based on the following findings and
subject to the following conditions:
Findings
1. The proposed map is consistent with the General Plan because:
a. The Land Use Element designates the site for residential land use
at 20-30 dwelling units per acre. The project provides about
12 dwelling units per acre.
b. Condominium development will provide for home ownership in this
high density area near recreational facilities (golf course).
2. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent
with the General Plan because:
a. The project will provide orderly residential development.
b. The project will not cause excessive expansion of public facilities
and/or expense to the taxpayer.
.3
3. The site is physically suitable for the type of development because:
a. The site has been rough graded, creating building pads, and;
b. All significant public improvements are existing, including
street improvements.
4. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development
because:
a. Dwelling units to be provided per acre are consistent with the
General Plan density, and;
b. All pre-building site preparation has been accomplished previously.
5. The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements are not likely
to cause serious public health problems because:
a. Conditions of approval will insure adequate public health
facilities, and;
b. A letter has been received from LCWD indicating that sewer facilities
are available with need.
6. The design of the subdivision of the type of improvements will not
conflict with easements required by the public at large for access through
or use of property within the proposed subdivision because:
a. Storm drain easements will be created to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer.
7. The subdivision will not prohibit reasonable access to public waterways,
rivers, streams, lakes, reservoirs, coastlines or shorelines because:
a. The subdivision does not front on any of the above.
8. The subject application has complied with the requirements of the
Carlsbad Environmental Protection Ordinance of 1972 because:
a. Prior compliance was achieved by a negative declaration being
issued on previous subdivision (CT 76-13) that was tabled.
9. The proposed tentative map is consistent with applicable City Public
Facility Policies and Ordinances because:
a. Sewer service was issued by Leucadia Water District prior to
their present moratorium.
b. A condition of approval is that park fees are required.
,!The applicant was not permitted to pay school fees to guarantee
S schools. In addition, the project may be built as apartments
(.without need for school guarantee.
d. All other public facilities are existing or can be met.
.4
Conditions **—- - •**;
1. The approval is granted for the land described in the application
and any attachments thereto and as shown on the Tentative Map submitted,
labeled Exhibit A, dated August 22, 1977. ' "
2. A standard handicapped ramp shall be provided in the existing sidewalk
across from the southeasterly corner of Gibraltar Street and Romeria Street.
3. Separation walls between units shall have a. minimum of two hour fire
rating.
4. All units shall be served with independent utility systems and be
separately metered. This shall be accomplished prior to approval of
final map.
A recreation and landscape plan is to be approved by the Parks and
Recreation Director that includes recreational uses such as picnic
tables, usable open areas and some form of active recreational facilities.
This recreation and landscaping shall be fully installed prior to
approval of the occupancy of the units.
6. During construction, existing street trees will be protected and
preserved to the satisfaction of the Parks and Recreation Director.
7. Existing street trees shall not be removed. If it is necessary to remove
street trees, replacement shall be made with equal size and type.
8. Water service shall be provided by Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD).
The applicant shall comply with the rules and regulations of the CMWD
regarding water service to condominiums.
9. In the event that extensions to the existing public water system are
deemed appropriate by the water district, the developer will be required
to provide the complete water system.
Attachments:
Location Map
Exhibit B, dated 1/26/78
.5
Case HQ/TT77-/4 Date Rec'd;DCC Date;/^O7 PC
Description of Request: APP£oy/IL - L.CTT-
AJRAddress or Location of Request: ftj
Applicant: ^
Engr. or Arch.
Aun o
At
Brief Legal : l•-: MAP &^- ;; ~LA/ ~J
?%
Assessor Book: 'JJ/% •~^*tfl e:
General Plan Land iJse Description: _
Existing Zone: I^D^M Propose
f,3:
Pa reel; ^Lg
Tone:
Acres: f,:t: No. ot Lots:
School~~Di strict:
~
DU's DU/A'cre
Water San1tat1on~lfistrict:
tftthln Coast Plan Area:
PORN PLANNING 52 COPY
MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 24, 1978
TO: Paul Bussey, City Manager
FROM: James C. Hagaman, Planning Director
SUBJECT: CT 77-14; Samuel W. Pearlman, Michael O'Hara, Applicants
This item was initiated last summer, but tabled at the request of the
applicant. Since then, staff has been developing condominium standards.
One of the conditions originally placed on this item no longer appears
applicable. It is Condition No. 4 of Planning Commission Resolution No. 1437,
which requires a two hour fire wall at certain points in large buildings,
or on property lines. It is no longer felt that a two hour wall is necessary
between each condominium unit. The building department feels that the present
code requirement of double studed walls between units is sufficient.
Building Official, Dick Osburn, has written a memo to this effect (attached).
Therefore, we would now suggest that Condition No. 4 be deleted.
A further note is that the property is within both the Encinitas and San
Dieguito School Districts. Agreements had been reached with both of these
school districts in late 1977. As you know, since January 1, 1978, a new
state law has gone into effect enabling school districts to require fees
if there is a need for additional school buildings. At this point, this
has little effect on the City of Carlsbad or the local school districts, since
our Public Facilities element already provides for the payment of fees.
There was, however, a question of whether or not the school districts would
recognize the agreements they entered into prior to January 1, 1978. Attached
are letters from these two school districts indicating that they will abide
by all agreements reached prior to this date.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve CT 77-14, as per Planning
Commission Resolution 1437, with the deletion of Condition No. 4.
EXHIBITS
Memorandum from Dick Osburn, Building Official, dated March 23. 1978
Letter from Encinitas School District, dated March 3, 1978
Letter from San Dieguito School District, dated March 1, 1978
JCH:BP:le
MEMORANDUM
DATE: April 7, 1978
TO: City Manager
FROM: City Attorney
SUBJECT: SB-201 — Treatment of Existing School Agreements
Attached are copies of my letters to the Encinitas, San
Diequito and San Marcos school districts outlining the
action taken by our City Council in response to their
overcrowding resolutions adopted pursuant to SB-201. As
you know, the City Council's concurrence with those
resolutions has the effect of placing a moratorium on
all development in the area until the school fee ordinance
can be adopted. Pending the adoption of such an ordinance
we have to determine how to deal with those projects
which have outstanding agreements with the school districts
to pay fees.
It is my recommendation that we deal with such agreements
as outlined in the attached letters. As you know, the
Pearlman condominium was originally on the agenda at the
April 4, 1978 meeting and was continued until the 18th.
Please ask the Clerk to attached this memorandum, and the
three letters, to that agenda bill. It is my intention
to recommend to the Council at the meeting that if the
project is otherwise acceptable, it may be approved not-
withstanding the SB-201 moratorium if the Council finds
that the existing school agreement constitutes an over-
riding economic or fiscal factor. If the Council concurs,
in their motion directing me to prepare the resolution
approving the subdivision, they should also indicate
that the resolution reflect their finding of overriding
facts pursuant to Government Code Section 65972. We
should also indicate to the Council whether or not we
have had any written communication from the districts
indicating that they are not in concurrence with the
procedures outlined in my letters.
VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR.
City Attorney
VFB/mla
Attachment
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD. CALIFORNIA 92008
(714) 729-1181
VINCENT F. BIONDO JR.
C.TY ATTORNEY April 7, 1978
Mr. Donald E. Lindstrorn
Superintendent & Board Secretary
ENCINITAS UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
189 Union Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Dear Mr. Lindstrom:
On January 24, 1978 the governing board of your district
adopted a resolution re conditions of overcrowding in
school attendance areas. We understand that resolution
was adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 65970
et seq., commonly known as SB-201. We understand further
that your resolution applies to all of the territory
of your district which is located within the city .-.
limits of the City of Carlsbad.
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, at
their April 4, 1978 meeting, considered your resolution.
The Council unanimously directed the City Attorney to
prepare a resolution whereby the City Council would concur
in the findings contained in your board's resolution. It
is anticipated that the City Council will adopt that
resolution at their April 18, 1978 meeting.
The City Council has also indicated they intend to proceed
to adopt the ordinance contemplated by SB-201 to provide
for the dedication of land and/or the payment of fees to
the school districts as a condition of approval for
residential developments. My office will be in touch with
you in the near future with regards to the number of
obligations which are imposed on the school district
by SB-201 in connection with such an ordinance.
As you know, the City of Carlsbad has been requiring the
payment of fees and the dedication of land for schools
in connection with residential development for several
,-V
Mr. Donald E. Lindstrom -2- April 7, 1978
years pursuant to our public facilities element. That
was accomplished by way of an agreement between the developer
and the school district. We understand there are a number
of those agreements entered into by your district which are
still outstanding. That is, the developer has agreed to pay
fees for a development which has not as yet come before the
City Council for approval. That presents a problem since
your action under SB-201 prevents the approval of residential
developments pending the adoption of an ordinance unless the
City Council finds an overriding fiscal, economic, social or
environmental factor, which justifies: the approval of the
development. We understand that your district's board has
determined to honor all the outstanding developer agreements.
We propose to accommodate your desire in that regard by a
finding that such an agreement satisfies the requirements
of SB-201 and your overcrowding resolution. It is anticipated
that in all cases where a residential developer has a pre-
existing agreement with your school district, that our City
Council will find that such an agreement constitutes an over-
riding fiscal and economic factor which will benefit the City
by assisting the schools to provide school facilities thereby
justifying the approval of that residential development,
assuming it is otherwise acceptable to the City Council.
At the April 18, 1978 City Council meeting the Council will
consider a proposed 16 unit one-lot condominium subdivision
(CT 77-14) PearIman/O1Kara. We understand from your letter
dated March 3, 1978 that your district has reached a school
fee agreement for this project which you intend to honor.
Based on that letter we anticipate that the City Council will
find that there are overriding factors present which justify
the approval of the project notwithstanding your resolution
of overcrowding. Unless we are informed in writing to the
contrary prior to that date, we will assume that this
procedure is acceptable to the Encinitas Union School
District. We will also assume that the position you have
taken in determining to honor pre-existing agreements
consitutes your request that we exempt the project covered
by the agreement from your overcrowding resolution. Finally,
unless advised otherwise, we will assume that the procedure
outlined in this letter for the Pearlman project is also
acceptable to your board for all other similarly situated
projects
Mr. Donald E. Lindstrom -3- April 7, 1978'
Please take the steps necessary to place this letter before
your board prior to the April 18, 1978 City Council meeting,
Sincerely,
VINCENT F. BIONDO/, JR.
City Attorney
VFB/mla
cc: Warren Roberts.Administrative Asst.
City Manager r
City Council Members
Planning Director
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
(714) 729-1181
VINCENT F. BIONDO JR.
C.TY ATTORNEY
Mr. William A. Barrier
Superintendent
SAN DIEGUITO UNION HIGH
SCHOOL DISTRICT
2151 Newcastle
Cardiff, California 92007
Dear Mr. Berrier:
On February 9, 1978 the governing board of your district
adopted a resolution re conditions of overcrowding in
school attendance areas. We understand that resolution
was adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 65970
et seq., commonly known as SB-201. We understand further
that your resolution applies to all of the territory .-.
of your district which is located within the city limits
of the City of Carlsbad.
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, at
their April 4, 1978 meeting, considered your resolution.
The Council unanimously directed the City Attorney to pre-
pare a resolution whereby the City Council would concur in
the findings contained in your board's resolution. It
is anticipated that the City Council will adopt that
resolution at their April 18, 1978 meeting.
The City Council has also indicated they intend to proceed
to adopt the ordinance contemplated by SB-201 to provide
for the dedication of land and/or the payment of fees to
the school districts as a condition of approval for
residential developments. My office will be in touch with
you in the near future with regards to the number of
obligations which are imposed on the school district by
SB-201 in connection with such an ordinance.
As you know, the City of Carlsbad has been requiring the
payment of fees and the dedication of land for schools
in connection with residential development for several
Mr. William A. Barrier -2- April 7, 1978
years pursuant to our public facilities element. That
was accomplished by way of an agreement between the
developer and the school district. We understand there
are a number of those agreements entered into by your
district which are still outstanding. That is, the
developer has agreed to pay fees for a development which
has not as yet come before the City Council for approval.
That presents a problem since your action under SB-201
prevents the approval of residential developments pending
the adoption of an ordinance unless the City Council finds
an overriding fiscal, economic, social or environmental
factor, which justifies the approval of the development. We
understand that your district's board has determined to
honor all the outstanding developer agreements. We propose
to accommodate your desire in that regard by a finding that
such an agreement satisfies the requirements of SB-201 and
your overcrowding resolution.
It is anticipated .that in all cases where a residential
developer has a pre-existing agreement with your school
district, that our City Council will find that such an
agreement constitutes an overriding fiscal and economic
factor which will benefit the City by assisting the schools
to provide school facilities thereby justifying the approval
of that residential development, assuming it is otherwise
acceptable to the City Council.
At the April 18, 1978 City Council meeting, the Council will
consider a proposed 16 unit one-lot condominium subdivision
(CT 77-14) Pearlman/0'Kara. We understand from your letter
dated March 1, 1978 that your district has reached a school
fee agreement for this project which you intend to honor.
Based on that letter we anticipate that the City Council
will find that there are overriding factors present which
justify the approval of the project notwithstanding your
resolution of overcrowding. Unless we are informed in
writing to the contrary prior to that date, we will assume
that this procedure is acceptable to the San Dieguito Union
High School District. We will also assume that the position
you have taken in determining to honor pre-existing agreements
constitutes your request that we exempt the project covered
by the agreement from your overcrowding resolution. Finally,
unless advised otherwise, we will assume that the procedure
outlined in this letter for the Pearlman project is also
acceptable to your board for all other similarly situated
projects.
Mr. William A. Barrier -3- April 7, 1978
Please take the steps necessary to place this letter before
your board prior to the April 18, 1978 City Council meeting.
Sincerely,
VINCENT P. BIONDO,
City Attorney
VFB/mla
cc: City Manager
City Council Members
Planning Director
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 ELM AVENUE
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
(714) 729-1181
VINCENT F. BIONDO JR.
CITY ATTORNEY April 7, 1978
Mr. Ralph E. Kellogg
Superintendent of Schools
SAN MARCOS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
270 San Marcos Blvd.
San Marcos, California
Dear Mr. Kellogg:
On January 3, 1978 the governing board of your district
adopted a resolution re conditions of overcrowding in
school attendance areas. We understand that resolution
was adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 65970
et seq., commonly known as SB-201. We understand further
that your resolution applies to all of the territory
of your district which is located within the city limits
of the City of Carlsbad.
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, at
their April 4, 1978 meeting, considered your resolution.
The Council unanimously directed the City Attorney to
prepare a resolution whereby the City Council would concur
in the findings contained in your board's resolution. It
is anticipated that the City Council will adopt that
resolution at their April 18, 1978 meeting.
The City Council has also indicated they intend to proceed
to adopt the ordinance contemplated by SB-201 to provide
for the dedication of land and/or the payment of fees to
the school districts as a condition of approval for
residential developments. My office will be in touch with
you in the near future with regards to the number of
obligations which are imposed on the school district by
SB-201 in connection with such an ordinance.
As you know, the City of Carlsbad has been requiring the
payment of fees and the dedication of land for schools
in connection with residential development for several
Mr. Ralph E. Kellogg -2- April 7, 1978
years pursuant to our public facilities element. That was
accomplished by way of an agreement between the developer
and the school district. We understand there may be some
of those agreements entered into by your district which are
still outstanding. That is, the developer has agreed to pay
fees for a development which has not as yet come before the
City Council for approval. That presents a problem since
your action under SB-201 prevents the approval of residential
developments pending the adoption of an ordinance unless the
City Council finds an overriding fiscal, economic, social or
environmental factor, which justifies the approval of the
development. We understand that your district's board has
determined to honor all the outstanding developer agreements.
We propose to accommodate your desire in that regard by a
finding that such an agreement satisfies the requirements
of SB-201 and your overcrowding resolution.
It is anticipated that in all cases where a residential
developer has a pre-existing agreement with your school
district, that our City Council will find that such an
agreement constitutes an overriding fiscal and economic
factor which will benefit the City by assisting the schools
to provide school facilities thereby justifying the approval
of that residential development, assuming it is otherwise
acceptable to the City Council. Unless we are informed in
writing to the contrary, we will assume that this procedure
is acceptable to the San Marcos Unified School District. We
will also assume that the position you have taken in deter-
mining to honor pre-existing agreements constitutes your
request that we exempt projects covered by such agreements
from you overcrowding resolution.
Please take the steps necessary to place this letter before
your board prior to the April 18, 1978 City Council meeting.
Sincerely,
VINCENT F. BIONDi
City Attorney
VFB/mla
cc: City Managert
City Council Members
Planning Director