Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-11-15; City Council; 5249; Senior Citizen HousingCITY OF '"RLSBAD - "> •-,.. Jf ' Initicl; AGENDA BILL NO. JJ.*/'? Dept. Hd. DATE: November 15, 1977 City Atty \J' $DEPARTMENT: Planning Department city Mgr. T\ SUBJECT: ZCA-85 SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING STATEMENT OF THE MATTER At the direction of the City Council, staff prepared ZCA-85 which will allow private senior citizens housing to be built in Carlsbad with re- duced standards and increased density. This is to allow the lowering of rents to accommodate low income senior citizens. Staff explored how other cities permit senior citizen housing and some of the problems involved with it. From this research staff prepared 3 alternativecordinances for the Planning Commission's review. The or- dinances ranged from a very permissive regulation requiring a CUP with the Planning Commission, setting development standards through a very restrictive ordinance that established the development standards and made the City party to determining rent and tenants. The Planning Commission chose the middle ground which requires a CUP with some stan- dards but limited City participation. The Planning Commission did make some changes to the staff recommendation, which are contained in the Exhibit attached to the Planning Commission Resolution. EXHIBITS Planning Commission Resolution No. 1409 Exhibit "E" dated 10-28-77 Staff Report dated 9/14/77 Memo from Housing Authority Director dated 11/7/77 RECOMMENDATION t It is recommended that the City Council direct the City Attorney to prepare documents adopting ZCA-85 as per Planning Commission Resolution No. 1409, with Exhibit E dated 10/31/77. Council Action: 11-15-77 Council continued the matter to the workshop meeting of November 22, 1977, for further discussion. (Public Hearing was closed.) 11-22-77 The matter was returned to staff for further report. FORM PLANNING 73 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. 1409 A RESOLUTION 'OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, SETTING FORTH ITS FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS RELATIVE TO AMENDING TITLE 21 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING CHAPTERS 21.04 AND 21.42 TO PROVIDE FOR PRIVATE SENIOR HOUSING. CASE NO.: ZCA-85 APPLICANT: ' CITY OF CARLSBAD WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad did adopt Resolution of Intention No. 159 declaring its intention to conduct a public hearing to consider a Zone Code Amendment amending Title 21 of the Municipal Code by amending Chapters 21.04 and 21.42 - to provide for private senior housing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received all testimony from those persons interested in and opposed to, if any, the proposed Zone Code Amendment; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did find the following facts and rea-sons to be present which in their opinion are necessary to carry out the general purpose of Title 21 of the Municipal Code: . " (1) The existing Zone Code . . does not contain a method to lower housing costs for Senior Housing. (2) This amendment is in. compliance with the General Plan because a goal of the Housing Element is "that all residents of Carlsbad have access to adequate housing within a price range they can afford". (3) A Negative Declaration was filed indicating that the permitting of private senior housing will have no adverse affect on the environment as per the Environmental Protection Act of 1972. 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 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad that it does recommend approval to the City Council of an amendment to Title 21 of the Municipal Code by the addition of 21.04 and 21.42 - Private Senior Housing as per Exhibit "E", dated October 18, 1977, attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Planning Commission held on October 5, 1977, by the following vote, to wit:' ' . • AYES: Commissioners Rombotis, Larson, L'Heureux, Fikes, Jose, Woodward. NOES: ' None. ABSENT: Commissioner Watson. • ABSTAIN: None. ERIC LARSON, Chairman ATTEST: JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Secretary 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 ORDINANCE NO Exhibit "E" October 28,< 1977 (Corrected 10-31-77 pe Planning Commission direction) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 21.04 AND 21.42 TO PROVIDE FOR PRIVATE SENIOR HOUSING. CASE NO: ZCA-85 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION I: That Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the addition of Section 21.04.293 to read as follows: 21.04.293 Private Senior Housing. "Private Senior Housing" means rental housing developed by a non public body or individual available only to senior .citizens, and approved pursuant to this code. SECTION II: That Title 21, Chapter 21.42 is amended by the addition of subsection (10) to Section 21.42.010 to read as follows: (10) Private Senior Housing may be permitted by Conditional Use Permit in the R-P Zone where residential is permitted by the General Plan. . (A) In addition to the facts required by Section 21.42.020, a Conditional Use Permit for private senior housing shall be granted only if the following facts are found to exist in regard thereto: »•(1) That the project's location affords senior citizen residents easy access to community, commercial and service facilities. (2) That preference for City housing programs has been guaranteed. '(B) If a Conditional' Use Permit is approved for private senior housing, the following shall be contained as conditions of approval: (1) The minimum age of at least one of the occupants of each unit shall be 62 years. 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 (2) The minimum income of the occupants may be determined by the Planning Commission as part of the Conditional Use Permit approval. (3) (4) (5) (6) All dwellings shall be offered to the City Housing Authority for use in local, state, or federally funded housing programs administered by the Authority at the time of initial occupancy, and as vacancies occur thereafter. In the event that the Housing Authority does not utilize the dwelling units offered within six months of initial offering, or one month of subsequent vacancies, the applicant may offer the units for rent to the general public. Each such general public tenant shall be reviewed by the Director of the Housing Authority to assure compliance with the limitations on tenants as may be required by the Conditional Use Permit. All buildings exceeding two stories shall include elevators in locations as approved by the Planning Commission; The number and be approved by that: location of parking facilities shall the Planning Commission, provided (a) (b) (c) No fewer than one parking space shall be provided on-site for each four dwelling units; No such on-site parking spaces shall be located in any required front or side yards; Parking areas shall be developed in conformance with the development standards of Chapter 21.44, and any additional requirements the Commission may pose in approving the Conditional Use Permit; and (d) Units at grade level shall be located, .designed and constructed in such a manner that they ma.y be converted to conforming parking areas, or equivalent areas left open and landscaped. (7) Parking as required by the Conditional Use Permit shall be available to the tenants of the project at no fee. « (8) Yard setbacks shall be approved by the Planning Commission provided that no front yard shall be less than ten feet, no interior side shall be less than five feet, no yard adjoining a street shall be less than ten feet, and no rear yard shall be less than ten feet in depth. 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 (C) -J (9) Density (lot area per dwelling unit) shall be approved .by the Planning Commission, and need not conform to the density of the zone in which the project is located. In no event however, shall density exceed one-hundred-fifty percent of the maximum density allowed in the zone in which the project is located. (10) The property and improvements thereof subject to the Conditional Use Permit shall be kept in undivided ownership during the life of the permit. (11) The Planning Commission may impose any additional conditions it deems necessary to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the project or the general public. (12) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shalVrecord a plan with the County Recorder that indicates how the proposed senior citizen housing.project will be converted to apartments meeting present City standards if such conversion is desired in the future. (13) The approved Conditional Use Permit resolution shall be recorded with the San Diego County Recorder. (14) Deviation from requirements of the Code or the approved Conditional Use Permit is grounds for revocation of the Conditional Use Permit. If evidence of such deviation is submitted to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission shall hold public hearing on the Conditional Use Permit to determine if the deviation can be corrected or if the Conditional Use Permit shall be revoked. If the Planning Commission determines revocation is necessary, their decision shall include a plan for conversion to meet conversion standards set forth herein a time such conversion is to be accomplished. (15) Owner initiated conversion of a project to non- senior citizen housing shall require amendment to the Conditional Use Permit to determine conversion plan and time such conversion is to be accomplished. Application for Conditional Use Permit shall be accompanied with site plan, landscape plan, elevations, methods of maintenance, and methods on how conversion to non-senior citijzen housing can be accomplished. J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -11 12 13 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on by the following vote, to wit: * AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ROBERT C. FRAZEE, Mayor ATTEST: MARGARET E. ADAMS, City Clerk (SEAL) 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MEMORANDUM September 14, 1977 TO: Planning Commission FROM: James C. Hagaman, Planning Director SUBJECT: Private Senior Citizen Housing I. INTRODUCTION The City Council at a meeting held earlier this year requested that the Planning staff develop a code amendment to allow the establishment of private senior citizen housing developments via the conditional use permit process. The impetus for this project was through the interest and concern of Mr. William Rick who is proposing a private senior citizen housing project in the Village Area of the City of Carlsbad. It was suggested by Mr. Rick to the City Council that it was not economically feasible to develop a private senior citizen housing project within the existing standards of the City Codes, and that in order to accommodate such projects some special mechanism would have to be developed to modify the code to meet the general needs associated with such housing. II. DISCUSSION The Planning staff subsequent to City Council direction prepared a report entitled Private Senior Citizen Housing which analyzes in detail various aspects of senior citizen housing incorporating an analysis of the proposals submitted by Mr. Rick and some of the concerns relative to loosening of the normal apartment standards concerning density, parking, open space and control of the rent structure in such a way as to tend to guarantee to the City that its relaxation of the zoning standards would not ultimately lead to just a high density apartment house - not catering to senior citizens. As part of the investigation of private senior citizen housing, the City staff found that the Carlsbad General Plan contains some general guidance on housing which is applicable to senior citizen housing as follows: A. Housing Element 1) "That all residents of Carlsbad have access to adequate housing within a price range they can affort." 2) Achieve a variety and choice of housing in all economic ranges throughout the City. 3) Locate multi-family uses near commercial centers. This would provide housing in close proximity to these facilities to the highest number of people possible. These residential developments should have adequate open space when located adjacent to commercial or industrial development. 4) Encourage the provision of low and moderate income dwelling units to meet the objectives of the City's Housing Element. In addition, if a project is for the low or moderate income segment of the population, the Housing Needs and Program section of the Housing Element recommends in part that the City provide low and moderate cost housing under private or joint public- private action by: 1) Offering flexibility in land development regulations. 2) Orienting a low-cost housing project area to existing deteriorating neighborhoods. 3) Offering assistance to developers of low or moderate housing by providing any information necessary. ' There are various standards that the City could adopt to provide the mechanisms to allow senior citizen housing, yet provide a degree of control and review by the City. Staff has prepared three alternatives within a range of most restrictive to least restrictive that are workable and give proper control. They are as follows: Alternative No. 1 (See Exhibit B-9/9/77 attached) Alternative No. 1 gives the City the greatest control and nearly total guidance to an applicant as to what the City desires in senior citizen housing. This alternative reduces some development standards that will allow flexibility in setbacks, special parking requirements and increases in building heights and density. However, there are requirements to insure that this project is available for senior citizens and monitored through our Housing Authority. This alternative includes provisions for maximum rent, income limitations for the residents and number of persons per dwelling unit. Alternative No. 1 gives maximum control to those problems explained in the report entitled Private Senior Citizen Housing (attached). However, administration will take additional resources of the Planning and Housing Authority staffs. In addition the City and the applicant are locked into rather tightly defined development standards without much flexibility. -2- Alternative No. 2 (Exhibit C - 9/9/77 attached) Alternative No. 2 is similar to alternative No. 1 in standards for physical development. However requirements in maximum rents, income limitations and number of residences are not included. This will give the City a degree of control of the physical standards, but eliminates a great deal of the administrative requirements of Alternative 1 allocation. The use will be permitted only in the R-P zone. This gives the City additional controls of where such uses can be located. The R-P zone is an ideal zone since it is a relative high density zone and allows compatible office type uses. Also the R-P zone is generally applied near high activity areas that provide transportation, recreation, retail goods and services. Alternative No. 3 (Exhibit D - 9/9/77 attached) Alternative 3 permits senior citizen housing in various zones as contained in Alternative 1, and has the same requirements as Alternative 2. The difference, however, is that the require- ments in Alternative 3 are guides the Planning Commission may impose. This alternative gives the greatest flexibility of location, development standards and operations. However, determining appropriate conditions to apply to a particular site could lead to unequal treatment. In addition an applicant will have little idea of what to expect as conditions pending City action. Many times applicants prefer to know what will be required at the earliest planning stages rather than be subject to conditions being placed on the project at time of approval. III. CONCLUSION Staff has presented three identifiable alternate courses of action if you choose to modify the current code standards to accommodate senior citizen housing. All three alternatives require a CUP, they differ on standards required and what zones they are permitted in. The first alternative requires physical and operational standards - it requires participation by the City in monitoring the project. The second alternative limits the use to the R-P zone and concentrates on physical standards. The third alternative establishes a list of conditions that are to be used or guides to approval, but they are not mandatory unless specified by the Planning Commission. IV. RECOMMENDATION The Planning Department recommends that Alternative No. 2 be adopted. This alternative will allow the City to move ahead with a senior citizen proposal. Since there are limitations -3- as to what zone they can be placed in, we would not expect a great many requests for this use. This will allow the City opportunity to review proposals without committing the City to a high number of projects. If it is found that they are successful and meet the intent of the General Plan, the ordinance can be amended to allow senior citizen projects in additional zones. Attachments Exhibit A, Report - Private Senior Citizen Housing Exhibit B, Alternative 1 Exhibit C, Alternative 2 Exhibit D, Alternative 3 Memorandum dated August 16, 1977 to Planning Commission from City Attorney. JCH:BP:jp -4- ,*&**** i%^-- PRIVATE SENIOR HOUSING PLANNING DEPARTMENT MARCH 11, 1977 EXHIBIT A ZCA-85 CONTENTS PAGE NTRODUCTION 1SSUE 1: MEED FOR THE USE 2SSUE 2: LOCATION CHARACTERISTICS LISSUE 3: TENANT LIMITATIONS 6 SSUE 4: RELATION TO CITY HOUSING PROGRAMSSSUE 5: CITY FEE WAIVERS/CONTRIBUTIONSSSUE 6: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND APPROVAL PROCESS LETTERS FROM WILLIAM RICK DATED MAY 3, JUNE 3, JUNE 17, AUGUSTSEPTEMBER 7, 1976,AND PRIVATE SENIOR HOUSING INTRODUCTION On July 6, 1976 City Council heard a request from Mr. William Rick that the City review standards of development for Senior Citizen Housing in multiple-family zones. Council instructed the City Manager to prepare a study on privately-developed senior citizen housing in general, particularly in relation to the possibility of increasing density in a zone and reducing the amount of parking spaces usually required. Council subsequently instructed staff on February 1, 1977 to set the matter for study and public hearing before the Planning Commission. Mr. Rick's Proposal; Mr. Rick's request to the Council is prompted by his desire to develop a lot on Jefferson and Oak Streets for Senior Citizen Housing. Mr. Rick has outlined his proposal in a series of letters dated May 3, June 3, June 17, August 4, and September 7, 1976. These letters raise the following policy issues, which the City will have to address in acting on the proposal: 1) What is the need for Private Senior Housing* in Carlsbad in the short-and long-term? 2) What location characteristics should be taken into account in approving Private Senior Housing in Carlsbad? 3) What limitations on tenants should be guaranteed to the City by the applicant? 4) To what extent should Private Senior Housing be related to the City's housing programs? 5) What development fees/contributions should be modified to accommodate Private Senior Housing? 6) What development standards should be modified to accommodate Private Senior Housing, and what process should be used to modify them? * This report will use the term "Private Senior Housing" to refer to projects such as Mr. Rick's, which contemplate apartments available only to senior citizens, developed to standards other than those currently adopted by the City of Carlsbad. .1 POLICY ISSUE 1; What is the need for Private Senior Housing in Carlsbad in the Short-and Long-term? DISCUSSION In his letters Mr. Rick cites various experts and documents as demonstrating a demand for Private Senior Housing. This high demand is said to exist currently and is projected to extend into the future. In assessing the demand for Private Senior Housing, Planning Staff believes that the breadth of senior citizen housing demand should be kept in mind. The demand for housing in Carlsbad from senior citizens is not merely related to 'taking care of one's own'. Senior citizens have become quite mobile since World War II, resulting in the development of retirement communities throughout the country's 'sun belt". San Diego County has felt the impact of these mobile Senior Citizens in its housing market. Mobility suggests a fairly high level of retirement income or net worth. Subsidized Senior Citizen Housing attempts to solve the housing problems of Senior Citizens who have low incomes/mobility. Private Senior Housing attempts to meet the needs of senior citizens who have more income than subsidized programs allow, but yet do not have the income to afford market housing. (Mr. Rick's letter of August 4th states that his project is not proposed for "Low-income" Senior Citizens). Figure 1 breaks down Carlsbad's senior citizens into these three categories. The category 'less than $7000' is a rough approximation of those households eligible for the City's housing subsidies (maximum 1-person incomes $7300, Sec. 23, $8000, Sec. 8). The category $10,000 or more' is a rough approximation of those households eligible for market housing ($8880, assuming a monthly rent of $185 at 25% of gross income). The category '$7,000-10,000' is a rough approximation of the market which Private Senior Housing should address. Figures are shown for households of 60 and over (as Mr. Rick suggests, see Issue 3) and for 65 and over (as staff suggests, see Figure 3). FIGURE 1 Number of Households for Various Income Groups AGE GROUP TOTAL NO RESPONSE TOTAL RESPONDING LESS THAN $7000 $7000- $10,000 $10,000 OR MORE 60+(1.6 Persons 1867 Household) 768 1099 100% 445 40% 174 16% 480 44% 65+(1.5 Persons 1354 Household) 570 784 100% 375 48% 131 17% 278 35% Source: 1975 Special Census v. Allocating the No Response Households proportionately to the three income categories, the market for Private Senior Housing would be no more than 300 households if the 60 age limit were used, or 230 if the 65 age limit were used. Since the actual in- come limits are narrower, $7,300 or $8,800, somewhat fewer house- holds than this actually constitute the market for Private Senior Housing. Staff believes that Figure 1 indicates a fairly narrow market for Private Senior Housing. Before becoming deeply involved in it, the City should undertake a study of all senior citizen housing demand in the City. Such a study could be conducted as a Specific Plan for senior housing (state defined) ; as a part of the upcoming amendment to the Housing Element; or as a part of the survey area, project area , or preliminary plan phases of the Redevelopment Program. .3 v. .. •**,. .^/ POLICY ISSUE 2; What location characteristics should be taken into account in approving Private Senior Housing? DISCUSSION: In his correspondence, Mr. Rick quotes various authorities to the effect that senior citizens require housing close to community services: medical services, libraries, parks, banks, restaurants, public transportation, etc. Mr. Rick points out that his site is close to: The Carlsbad Senior Citizen Center Site Churches Shopping Doctors and Dentists City Hall and Library Proposed Nutrition Center Public Transportation (onehalf block) Banks, Savings & Loan Restaurants Staff believes that the context in which the authorities speak of these services needs to be understood. Authorities have generally assumed an urban center setting (such as downtown San Diego) in pointing out the desirability of housing senior citizens near the community services usually centralized in downtown areas. Downtown Carlsbad is not completely comparable to downtown San Diego in at least three respects. First, while downtown Carlsbad does have a few doctors and dentists, it does not have complete medical facilities. Complete medical facilities may never develop in the downtown because of the competitive advantages of the Tri-City Hospital area. Second, public transportation in major cities such as San Diego provides a fairly high level of service. Public trans- portation in the North County is in its infancy. And in view of the low densities required here, it is questionable whether a level of transit service comparable to major cities will ever be possible. Third, the breadth of commercial services available in major cities is far greater than now available in downtown Carlsbad. This is not now a major problem , because day-to-day commercial needs (food, drugs, notions, etc.) are available downtown and only less frequent commercial needs (clothing, household furnishings, etc.) require travel to the Plaza or elsewhere. The non-urban nature of the downtown is an attribute however for those senior citizens who dislike the drawbacks of urban centers. These drawbacks include noise, crime, congestion and pollution. Planning staff's concern is that redevelopment of the downtown may not increase the availability of services needed by senior citizens, and may increase the problems found in urban areas. The extent to which this may occur depends on the specifics (or 'theme') of the redevelopment program, and the boundaries of individual redevelopment project areas. .4 For example, adoption of a tourist-oriented program might well create noise, congestion and an outsider's climate not attract- ing to permanent residents. And tourist-oriented redevelopment in a given project area could cause changes in land use in neigh- boring areas incompatible with senior citizen housing, private or other, As a more concrete example, privately-initiated redevelopment has already affected the Mayfair Market center. This center has until now provided commercial services primarily oriented to the surrounding residential neighborhood, including many senior citizens. Mayfair Market was recently closed as part of the new owner's plans to convert the center into a furniture store and shops oriented to a broader commercial market. Staff believes that the downtown area is currently the most desirable area of the City for Private Senior Housing. The City should not however get heavily involved until it has thoroughly evaluated the effects of redevelopment. .5 POLICY ISSUE 3; What limitations on tenants should be guaranteed to the City bythe applicant, and how can those limitations be guaranteed over a number of years? DISCUSSION As defined earlier, Private Senior Housing is housing available only to senior citizens, developed to standards other than those applying to other residential projects. Limitations on tenants serve two purposes: They ensure that Private Senior Housing will not be inhabitated by other households, and they ensure the public benefit of housing moderate-income senior citizens, which is the justification for permitting non-stan- dard development. Mr. Rick has proposed the following limitations on tenants: . Preference to applicants over the age of 60 years; . A drop in the eligible age to 55 years after two months if apartments remain vacant; . Initial rentals to be set for a period of 3 years with re- newal negotiated on a cost of living index for successive three year periods (or actual cost pass through). To summarize, Mr. Rick suggests limitations on tenant age and unit rent. Staff feels that both these limitations are appropriate to ensure that Private Senior Housing is inhabited by those who most need it. AGE: Staff believes that the proposed 60-55 year age limit- ations are too liberal in aging senior citizens. HUD defines elderly as 62 years or older. Society's current retirement age is 65 years, and staff believes that is the logical age at which to initially screen applicants. The retirement age is dropping, particularly in industries with heavy union involvement. Staff does not believe however that this trend justifies setting a younger age at this time. Staff believes that those who retire at 55 do so because they are finan- cially able to. As well, the drop of retirement age combined with longer life spans will cause an increase in the number of second careers. These factors should negate much of the need for non-market housing for 55-65 year olds. Staff is also concerned that if no income limitations are adopted (discussed below), and 60-55 age limitations are adopted, 55-65 "senior citizens' could well rent units which are needed by older senior citizens who are truly retired and living on fixed incomes. RENT; Planning staff believes that the provision for rent limitation in Private Senior Housing is the most important question to be answered. There are two reasons for this. First, the granting of density in excess of the City's Zoning Ordinance and General Plan is the granting of a very substantial property right, which can be .6 easily translated into additional private economic gain. The clearest justification for granting such a right is the lower rents to be charged to the senior citizen residents. Second, the rents charged to the senior citizens must be appreciably less than market rents in order to help the senior citizens with their housing costs. RENT ANALYSIS: In order to better judge the flexibilities of rent in Private Senior Housing, planning staff has analyzed its construction costs and revenues using Mr. Ricks proposed project as an example. Two alternative market developments have also been analyzed for comparison purposes. Mr. Rick's project has been chosen for evaluation because it is a serious, site-planned proposal for Private Senior Housing (Figure 2). The first alternative (Figure 3, "Accord- ing to Development Standards") provides 18 units in the general configuration of Mr. Rick's proposal, but follows R-P Zone development standards while ignoring General Plan density (6-13 units). The second alternative (Figure 4, "According to Code") provides 13 units in the general configuration of Mr. Rick's proposal, but follows R-P Zone development standards and General Plan density. The results are shown in Figure 5, "Financial Analysis of Private Senior Housing". The following factors need to be kept in mind in reviewing Figure 5: - The dollar amounts are estimates only, and are unimportant in themselves. The importance of Figure 5 is the relationship between the projects. Since the same price factors were used, the relative costs and profitability of the alternatives should be valid even if individual price factors are not. - The alternative site plans follow Mr. Rick's proposal in unit size and provision of a recreation room. In practice those alternatives might vary unit size, and would almost certainly not include a recreation room. They follow Mr. Rick's proposal to isolate the effect on rent. - Expenses are a function of square footage and not income. Therefore expenses may be somewhat understated or Private Senior Housing. On the other hand, senior citizens tenants are generally less destructive than most, creating less expense. - Figure 5 does not take income tax effects into account. These effects are important to the investor, however, sometimes outweighing immediate profitability in his decision to purchase the project. Mr. Rick indicates in his letters that high density is required in Private Senior Housing to make it financially possible to lower rents. This would suggest that a Private Senior Housing project would not be proposed if it did not promise to be at least as profitable as a market project. Staff believes that the Council has the responsibility to ensure that the profitability of Private Senior Housing does not exceed the profitability of market projects. To allow excess profit through excess density would be to grant a property right not granted to others in the same zone, a questionable practice ethically as well as legally. Excess profit would also indicate that the rents charged the senior residents were higher than they could be and still yield a market profit. .7 ^"W FIGURE 2 MR. RICK'S PROPOSAL >J-j* «. 'i -^ Vf> r, vS m v>VI FIGURE 3 --- 18 ACCORDING TO DEVELOTfo STANDARDS A/ FIGURE 4 -- 1*3 ACCORDING TO CODE. <TV7« X-. FIGURE 5 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF PRIVATE SENIOR HOUSING a ITEM (1) Private Senior Housing (40 Units) DIRECT & INDIRECT CAPITAL COSTS b Land Architect Fees (100/Unit) Unit Const. ($15/Sq. Ft., Unit & 20% profit). Water Line (540 ft. @ $2.75, front ft). Sewer ($250/Unit) Rec. Room ($10.00/sq.ft). Parking Area ($.75, sq.ft). Landscaping ($1.00, sq.ft). Furnishings (3% of Unit Const) TOTAL (VALUE) Income & Expenses (Annual) Income c Expenses (40% of Income) Net Income Before Debt Service Debt Service e Net Income (Spendable) Initial Equity ^ $56,400 4,000 314,640 1,490 10,000 6,000 1,350 16,700 9,440 $420,020 $ 72,000 28,800 $ 43,200 $ 33,900 $ 9,300 / $ 84,000 NOTES: (2) Dev. Standards (18 Units) $56,400 1,800 141,590 1,490 4,500 6,000 7,880 12,800 4,250 $236,710 $ 37,960 14-^20- $ -237*40 $ 19,070 (3) Dev. Standards & General Plan (13 Units) $56,000 1,300 102,260 1,490 3,250 6,000 6,560 15,400 3,070 $195,730 $ 277*20 10,700a' iCO $ 15,840 $ 4,0700° $ 880 (2066 ) $ 47,340 $ 39,150 a) See qualifications to this figure in report. b) Land value taken from current Assessor's Rolls; other costs estimated by local architectural firm, City Engineering and Parks Departments. c) Income for Alternative 1 calculated at $150/mo. per unit with no vacancy factor. Alternative 2&3 calculated at $155/mo. per unit with 5% vacancy factor. d) 40% estimated by local property management firm. e) Loans estimated by local Savings and Loan as follows: Combined con- struction-permanent financing, 80% loan for 30 years, at 9.5% ; 2 points + $200 loan fee. Title, $1200 Alternative 1, $790 Alternative 2, $640 Alternative 3. Title, points and loan fee not included in analysis. f) Equity is the 20% of value not mortgaged. .11 The 'profitability1 of a project can be determined by several methods, any one of which can be defended as the 'right' method. Figure 6 is a comparison of the three projects using three different methods of determining profitability. The first is the one most often used in the real estate industry. Figure 7 is a comparison of the rents required in Private Senior Housing to yield a market profit, using the profit ratios of the two alternative projects. FIGURE 6 Profitability of the Three Projects Using Various Methods. METHOD (1) (2) (3) Private Senior Dev. Standards Dev. Standards Housing (18 Units) (13 Units) (40 Units) Net Spendable Income to Initial Equity 11.1% 8.6% 2.2% Net Spendable Income to Gross Income. 12.9% 10.7% 3.2% Net Spendable Income to Total Assets. 2.2% 1.7% 0.4% FIGURE 7 Minimum Rentals in Private Senior Housing Using Profitability Of Market Alternatives METHOD MINIMUM RENT, 18 MINIMUM RENT, 13 UNIT PROFIT UNIT PROFIT Net Spendable Income to Initial Equity $140 $120 Net Spendable Income to Gross Income .$145 $125 Net Spendable Income to Total Assets $145 $125 These figures indicate that if the Development Standards alternative is used as a benchmark, Mr. Rick's proposed rent only slightly exceeds a market profit. If the General Plan alternative is used, as much as $30 should be pared from the rent. .12 The Development Standards alternative might at first glance appear more equitable. Staff's inquiry with a local broker indicates however that investors are purchasing apartment projects yielding 3-4% return (Spendable to Initial Equity) as a hedge against inflation. Staff would therefore recommend that, if a more complete study supports these findings, the lower profit alternative be used as a benchmark. The Council must realize that amending the zone code to allow Private Senior Housing will involve the City in close analysis of the profitability of private developments. The City will also periodically find itself mediating between an owner seeking to pass through cost increases to rent increases, and renters hard-pressed to pay them. These are both areas in which the Council is not now involved. INCOME; In addition to age and rent, staff believes it would be appropriate to include income as a screening device. This would ensure that those senior citizens most in need of housing receive it. If, as his August 4th letter states, Mr. Rick is not proposing to meet the needs of low-income senior citizens, then Private Senior Housing could be rented to moderate-and high-income senior citizens (as defined in Issue 1). As discussed in Issue 1, high-income senior citizens can afford market housing. There is no reason for the City to waive development standards for these senior citizens. Without any limitations on income however, these senior citizens could rent Private Senior Housing, keeping it from those senior citizens who need it most. The developer would have reason to rent to these senior citizens before moderate-income senior citizens, because their greater ability to pay increased rents would make them less likely to oppose rent increases before the Commission or Council. If Council used the Housing Authority to screen tenants (Issue 4) it would be possible to ensure conformance with any income limitation. If, as discussed below in Issue 4, Private Senior Housing was reserved for section 8 or 23 housing, an income limitation would become automatic. .13 POLICY ISSUE 4; To wftat extent should Private Senior Housing be related to -the City's Housing Programs? DISCUSSION In his letters Mr. Rick indicates a willingness to make his project available to the City's Housing Assistance programs. Specifically, he suggests: -That the City Housing Office have 60 days from the original offering for reference of preferred tenant applicants, 60 years or older; -That the City would have preference for Section 23 housing. Utilizing the Housing Authority as a screening device involves a separate agency in what is otherwise an activity regulated by the City Government. As a practical matter, however, the City Council also constitutes the Housing Authority. Therefore if the Council feels it would be desirable for Housing Authority staff to screen applicants it may, as the Housing Authority, approve such an al- location of staff time. Planning staff believes that, regardless of the specific tenant limitations adopted, some City review of tenants should occur to ensure that those limitations are met. The Housing Authority is the logical staff to perform this task because of its familiarity with senior citizen housing problems and tenant relations, and its field location. The Planning Department, as enforcing agent of the project's permit, could also perform this function. Planning staff does not however have the Housing Authority's expertise in tenant relations. Further study of the time involved in screening applicants should be done prior to any decision being made. The question of Section 23 housing is a more complicated issue. The section 23 program is due to terminate June 30, 1978, and the Authority is unable to lease any new apartments under that program. If in future years the section 23 program was reactivated, the financial prospects of a Private Senior Housing project approved by City Government would be influenced by the rent paid by a sub- sidiary agency. And if Private Senior Housing were approved by the Planning Commission through CUP,.the cancelling-out effect of the City Council control over both would be lost. Under the Section 8 program, individual senior citizen house- holds find their own units in the private market and the landlord receives payments for the cost of rent which exceeds one-quarter of tenant income ($8000-1 person, $9,200-2 persons). If approval was conditioned on City preference for Section 8 housing, then Private Senior Housing projects would rent to Section 8 tenants as long as there were eligible tenants. There would be distinct advantages to the City in such a condition. The availability of additional housing for senior citizens would put less senior citizen demand on the remainder of the City's Section 8 units. This would open up additional units for non-senior citizen use. .14 Since applicants could not be forced to rent in Private Senior Housing Projects however, the point might well come when market renters would be needed. At that point the Housing Authority would serve as a screening device, enforcing whatever conditions (age, rent, income) and City's approval contained. A negative aspect of Section 8 or 23 involvement would occur with requests for rent increases. As the regulating body, the City would be acting on rent increases which, as the Housing Authority, it would be responsible for paying for. .15 POLICY ISSUE 5; What development fees/contributions should be modified to accommodate Private Senior Housing? DISCUSSION; In his letter of September 7, 1976 Mr. Rick raises the question of civic contributions, such as park fees. The City's ordinance on dedication of land for recreation facilities would not require any payment of fees or land dedication since no land subdivision is involved. If Mr. Rick's project was approved at the Commission's or Council's discretion, the school district would have to certify the availability of school facilities. The Carlsbad Unified School District's current policy would require the payment of fees, since their policy does not except adult-only developments. This fee is not however within the City's control. Other City fees are involved. Figure 4 indicates a water line fee ($1,490) and a sewer connection fee ($10,000). A CUP or similar application would cost $50, and require an Environmental Impact Assessment ($50). Building permits would cost approximately $1100. A total of $12,690 could therefore be waived by the City. All of these fees are directly related to review and construction of the project. Planning staff therefore believes the City should assess them as for any other private project. Their cost would become a componant of the total project cost, and would be reflected in the project's rent as regulated by the City. In particular, any reduction in the sewer fee would be contrary to the objective of raising money for the Encina Plant expansion. As Issue 6 will note, certain parking problems inherent in Private Senior Housing could be solved by constructing off-site parking using HCD funds. Similarly, any public improvements re- quired of a Private Senior Housing project site might be provided through the City's Redevelopment program. The site of Mr. Rick's project does not require any public improvements (the water line fee is an assessment to pay for water lines built several years ago). However, other project sites could require public improvements. The potential of providing them through redevelopment is further reason to consider potential locations for Private Senior Housing in adopting Redevelopment area plans. .16 POLICY ISSUE 6; What development standards should be modified to accommodate Private Senior Housing, and what process should be used to modify them? DISCUSSION: Mr. Rick's project varies from the following requirements of the R-P Zone: DENSITY (Lot area per dwelling): As described above, 40 units instead of the maximum 13. SETBACKS A 10' front yard, (Oak) instead of the required 20"; A 6" alley sideyard instead of the required 10'; and a 10' rear yard setback instead of the required 20'. PARKING; 10 spaces instead of the required 60 spaces. These are the three requirements which any Private Senior Housing project will most likely conflict with. DENSITY; Acceptable density is not a technical absolute, it is a policy matter decided by the City Council. The Council des- ignates densities through the Land Use Element of the General Plan, and then implements them through the residential zones of the zoning ordinance. If, as a policy matter, the Council finds it in the public in- terest to allow higher densities for Private Senior Housing, the important decision is the process through which density increases will be approved (discussed below). SETBACKS; Setbacks ensure the availability of light and air between neighboring buildings, and are also a fire prevention measure. Within limits, the depth of setbacks is a Council policy matter established in the zoning ordinance. Mr. Rick's proposed setbacks are consistent with the setbacks of the RD-M zone. The RD-M zone allows 10 foot front yards, 5 foot sideyards, and a 10 foot rear yard. Therefore there is precedent for the setbacks which Mr. Rick requests. PARKING: Unlike density and setbacks, the issue of onsite parking is not easily resolvable. In his letters Mr. Rick points out that Senior Citizens own fewer cars than other age groups and hence their housing requires fewer spaces. Planning staff agrees with this point, (except for 55-65 year olds) but believes that the potential for conversion of Private Senior Housing to market housing must be kept in mind. Parking in parts of the downtown area is marginal. If Private Senior Housing is constructed with few parking spaces and subsequently converted to market rentals, the existing parking situation would be made worse by additional on-street parking. If the City approved Private Senior Housing through a permit process, then it would have some control over conversion of the use. As a practical matter however, such control would force the City to choose between granting variances and having buildings deteriorate from a lack of maintenance forced by low rents and/or high vacancies. .17 One solution to this problem would be to require all Private Senior Housing to be constructed so that lower floors could be readily converted to parking. The shape of Mr. Rick's units (19X23 feet) would allow the creation of two parking spaces in each downstairs unit. A second solution suggested at the staff level would be for The City to construct parking on neighboring land using HCD funds. Planning staff believes this solution is viable only if the City has a well-defined policy on its involvement in Private Senior Housing. Given the attributes of the downtown area for these pro- jects, such a policy could easily evolve from the redevelopment program. APPROVAL PROCESS; There are at least three ways in which the City could provide for Private Senior Housing. These are: 1) Allow for it in Redevelopment project area(s). 2) Amend the zone code to allow it by right in certain zones, with certain standards. 3) Amend the zone code to allow it by CUP. Staff believes that Private Senior Housing is only logical in the downtown area (Issue 1). Therefore the City's Redevelopment program should take it into account. The study areas and project areas adopted by the City may not include the blocks closest to the Senior Citizens Center however, and Mr. Rick's site in particular. Therefore relying solely on Redevelopment to provide for Private Senior Housing is not sufficient. Staff believes that a zone code amendment to allow Private Senior Housing by right cannot presently be justified (Issue 1) by the public need for the use. No such amendment should be adopted unless an updated Housing Element recognizes a specific, long-term need for such housing. For the same reason, staff believes that a zone code amendment to allow Private Senior Housing by CUP is of questionable justi- fication. Without justification in an updated Housing Element, staff believes that such a zone code amendment should only be enacted if exclusive preference is included in the amendment for Section 8 or 23 housing. Such preference would ensure a large enough market of low- and moderate-income senior citizens to justify the waiving of development standards. ACM/ar 3/11/77 .18 **>» -Hf Xfc.™ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING RE: ZONE CODE AMENDMENT ZCA-85 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, September 14, 1977 at 7:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, to consider a Zone Code Amendment (ZCA-85) of Title 21 of the Municipal Code of the City of Carlsbad, to amend Chapters 21.04 and 21.42 to provide for private senior housing. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. .If you have any questions, please call 729-1181 and ask for the Planning Department. APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad PUBLISH: August 31, 1977 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION 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 ^alternative 1 ORDINANCE NO. EXHIBIT "B" September 15, 1977 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 21.04 AND 21.42 TO PROVIDE FOR PRIVATE SENIOR HOUSING. CASE NO.; ZCA-85 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION I: That Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the addition of Section 21.04.293 to read as follows: 21.04.293 Private Senior Housing. "Private Senior Housing" means rental housing developed by a non-public body or individual available only to senior citizens, and approved pursuant to this Code. SECTION II: That Title 21, Chapter 21.42 is amended by the addition of subsection (10) to Section 21.42.010 to read as follows: (10) Private senior housing may be permitted by Conditional Use Permit in the R-3, R-P, RD-M, and C-2 zones. (A) In addition to the facts required by Section 21.42.020, a Conditional Use Permit for private senior housing shall be granted only if the following facts are found to exist in regard thereto: (i) That there is a demonstrated existing and long- term need for such private senior housing in the City of Carlsbad. (ii) That the project's location affords senior citizen residents easy access to community, commercial and service facilities. (iii) That limitations on tenant age and income, and project rent have been guaranteed. (iv) That preference for City housing programs has been guaranteed. (B) If a Conditional Use Permit is approved for private 1 conditions of approval: 2 3,, the Conditional Use Permit approval. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 senior housing, the following requirements shall be contained as (i) The minimum age of the occupants may be determined by the Planning Commission or City Council in appeal as part of (ii) The Planning Commission shall approve maximum rents for dwellings within the project, taking into account variations in unit size, number of bedrooms, location withing the project, and other variables which the commission may deem to influence a fair and equitable rent distribution throughout the project. In no event however shall the total maximum monthly rent from all dwellings within a project exceed an amount equal to seventy-five percent of initial equity. Initial Equity shall be defined for the purposes of this paragraph as twenty-percent of the estimated direct and indirect capital costs of the project. The applicant shall submit an estimate of direct and indirect capital costs with his application for a Conditional Use Permit, and the reasonable- ness of this estimate shall be verified by the Planning Director prior to public hearing. (iii) The Planning Commission may consider requests for in- creases in unit rent, provided that: (a) Provisions for the consideration of rent increases are made in the original Conditional Use Permit; (b) A formal application for each rent increase is made in conformance with such provisions; (c) A public hearing is held and notice of said hearing is given to all residents of the subject project. (iv) All dwellings shall be offered to the City Housing Authority for use in local, state, or federally funded housing programs administered by the Authority, at the time of initial occupancy, and as vacancies occur thereafter. (v) In the event that the Housing Authority does not utilize the dwelling units offered within six months of initial offering, or one month of subsequent vacancies, the applicant may offer the units for rent to the general public. Each such general public tenant shall be reviewed by the Director of the Housing Authority to assure compliance with the limitations on tenants. (vi) The maximum income of each household occupying a dwelling unit shall be: (a) For general public tenant households, regardless of size, the maximum income of a two-person household permitted. XXX 28 XXX .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 under the least restrictive housing program administered by the City Housing Authority; (b) for tenant households renting, leasing or sub- leasing dwellings under a program administered by the Housing Authority, the income limitations of that program. (vii) The maximum number of persons per dwelling shall be limited to the following: efficiency or studio dwellings 1 person; 1-bedroom dwellings 2 persons; 2-bedroom or more dwellings 3 persons. (viii) All buildings exceeding 2 stories shall include elevators in locations as approved by the Planning Commission; (ix) The number and location of parking facilities shall be approved by the Planning Commission, provided that: (a) No fewer than one parking space shall be provided on-site for each four dwelling units; (b) No such on-site parking spaces shall be located in any required front or side yards; (c) Parking areas shall be developed in conformance with the development standards of Chapter 21.44, and any additional requirements the Commission may pose in approving the Conditional Use Permit; and (d) Units at grade level shall be located, designed and constructed in such a manner that they may be converted to conforming parking areas, or equivalent areas left open and land- scaped. (x) Yard setbacks shall be approved by the Planning Com- mission provided that no front yard shall be less than ten feet, no interior side yard shall be less than five feet, no yard ad- joining a street shall be less than ten feet, and no rear yard shall be less than ten feet in depth. (xi) Density (lot area per dwelling unit) shall be approved by the Planning Commission, and need not conform to the density of the zone in which the project is located. In no event however shall density exceed One-Hundred-Fifty percent of the maximum density allowed in the zone in which the project is located. (xii) The property and improvements thereof subject to the Conditional Use Permit shall be kept in undivided ownership during the life of the permit. (xiii) The Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal, may impose any additional conditions it deems necessary to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the .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 project or the general public. (xiv) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record a plan with the County Recorder that indicates how the proposed Senior Citizen housing project will be converted to apartments meeting present City standards if such conversion is desired in the future. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ROBERT C. FRAZEE, Mayor ATTEST: MARGARET E. ADAMS, City Clerk (SEAL) .4 4 23 Alternative 2 * DRAFT «* EXHIBIT "C" SEPTEMBER 9, 77 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 21.04 AND 21.42 TO PROVIDE FOR PRIVATE SENIOR HOUSING. CASE NO: ZCA-85 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, doeso .. ordain as follows:6 „ SECTION I: That Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the addition of Section 21.04.293o Q to read as follows: 21.04.293 Private Senior Housing. "Private Senior Housing" _ means rental housing developed by a non-public body or individual _ available only to senior citizens, and approved pursuant to this Code. SECTION II: That Title 21, Chapter 21.42 is amended by the 14 addition of subsection (10) to Section 21.42.010 to read as 15 follows: 1 fi (10) Private senior housing may be permitted by Conditional ..„ Use Permit in the R-P Zone. _,, (A) In addition to the facts required by Section 21.42.020, a Conditional Use Permit for private senior housing -.g shall be granted only if the following facts are found to exist in regard thereto: 20 (i) That the project's location affords senior 2~t citizen residents easy access to community, commercial and service facilities. 22 (ii) That preference for City housing programs has been guaranteed. (B) If a Conditional Use Permit is approved for private senior housing, the following shall be contained as conditions of approval: (i) The minimum age of the occupants may be determined by the Planning Commission or City Council in appeal as part of the Conditional Use Permit approval. 28 XXX 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 (ii) All dwellings shall be offered to the City Housing Authority for use in local, state, or federally funded housing programs administered by the Authority, at the time of initial occupancy, and as vacancies occur thereafter. (iii) In the event that the Housing Authority does not util- ize the dwelling units offered within six months of initial offer- ing, or one month of subsequent vacancies, the applicant may offer the units for rent to the general public. Each such general public tenant shall be reviewed by the Director of the Housing Authority to assure compliance with the limitations on tenants. (iv) All buildings exceeding two stories shall include elevators in locations as approved by the Planning Commission; (v) The number and location of parking facilities shall be approved by the Planning Commission, provided that: (a) No fewer than one parking space shall be provided on-site for each four dwelling units; (b) No such on-site parking spaces shall be located in any required front or side yards; (c) Parking areas shall be developed in conformance with the development standards of Chapter 21.44, and any additional requirements the Commission may pose in approving the Conditional Use Permit; and (d) Units at grade level shall be located, designed and constructed in such a manner that they may be converted to conforming parking areas, or equivalent areas left open and land- scaped. (vi) Yard setbacks shall be approved by the Planning Commission provided that no front yard shall be less than ten feet, no interior side shall be less than five feet, no yard adjoining a street shall be less than ten teet, and no rear yard shall be less than ten feet in depth. (vii) Density (lot area per dwelling unit) shall be approved by the Planning Commission, and need not conform to the density of the zone in which the project is located. In no event however, shall density exceed one-hundred-fifty percent of the maximum density allowed in the zone in which the project is located. (viii) The property and improvements thereof subject to the Conditional Use Permit shall be kept in undivided ownership during the life of the permit. (ix) The Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal, may impose any additional conditions it deems necessary to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the project or the general public. .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 (x) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record a plan with the County Recorder that indicates how the proposed senior citizen housing project will be converted to apartments meeting present City standards if such conversion is desired in the future. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ROBERT C. FRAZEE, MAYOR ATTEST: MARGARET E. ADAMS, City Clerk (SEAL) .3 "Alternative 3 •X DRAFT J EXHIBIT "D" September 15, 1977 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 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CHAPTERS 21.04 AND 21.42 TO PROVIDE FOR PRIVATE SENIOR HOUSING. CASE NO.; ZCA-85 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows: SECTION I: That Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the addition of Section 21.04.293 to read as follows: 21.04.293 Private Senior Housing. "Private Senior Housing" means rental housing developed by a non-public body or individual available only to senior citizens, and approved pursuant to this Code. SECTION II: That Title 21, Chapter 21.42 is amended by the addition of subsection (10) to Section 21.42.010 to read as follows: (10) Private senior housing may be permitted by Conditional Use Permit in the R-3, R-P, RD-M, and C-2 zones. (A) In addition to the facts required by Section 21.42.020, a Conditional Use Permit for private senior housing shall be granted only if the following facts are found to exist in regard thereto: (i) That the project's location affords senior citizen residents easy access to community, commercial, and service facilities. (B) (ii) That preference for City housing programs has been guaranteed. If a Conditional Use Permit is approved for private senior housing, the following requirements as a guide may be made part of conditions of approval if deemed desirable by the Planning Commission or City Council upon appeal. ., (i) The minimum age of the occupants may be determined by the Planning Commission or City Council on appeal as part of the 2 Conditional Use Permit approval. 3 (ii) All dwellings shall be offered for use in Section 8 or other local, state, or federally funded housing programs admin- » istered by the Authority, at the time of initial occupancy, and as vacancies occur thereafter. R (iii) In the event that the Housing Authority does not utilize the dwelling units offered within six months of initial offering, or one month of subsequent vacancies, the applicant may offer the units for rent to the general public. Each such general public tenant shall be reviewed by the Director of the Housing Authority to assure compliance with the limitations on tenants. (iv) All buildings exceeding two stories shall include elevators in locations as approved by the Planning Commission; (v) The number and location of parking facilities shall be ,.. approved by the Planning Commission, provided that: (a) No fewer than one parking space shall be provided on-site for each four dwelling units; 13 (b) No such on-site parking spaces shall be located in any required front or side yards; (c) Parking areas shall be developed in conformance with the development standards of Chapter 21.44, and any additional requirements the Commission may pose in approving the Conditional Use Permit; and 17 (d) Units at grade level shall be located, designed and -o constructed in such a manner that they may be converted to conforming parking areas, or equivalent areas left open and landscaped. 2o (vi) Yard setbacks shall be approved by the Planning Commission provided that no front yard shall be less than ten feet, no interior side yard shall be less than five feet, no yard adjoining a street shall be less than ten feet, and no rear 22 yard shall be less than ten feet in depth. (vii) Density (lot area per dwelling unit) shall be approved by the Planning Commission, and need not conform to the density of the zone in which the project is located. In no event however shall density exceed one-hundred-fifty percent of the maximum 25 density allowed in the zone in which the project is located. nc (viii) The property and improvements thereof subject to the Conditional Use Permit shall be kept in undivided ownership during the life of the permit. 28 ////// J> • 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 (ix) The Planning Commission, or City Council on appeal, may impose any additional conditions it deems necessary to protect the health, safety, and general welfare of the residents of the project or the general public. (x) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall record a plan with the County Recorder that indicates how the proposed Senior Citizen Housing Project will be converted to apartments meeting present City standards if such conversion is desired in the future. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ROBERT C. FRAZEE, Mayor ATTEST: MARGARET E. ADAMS, City Clerk (SEAL) /•"••• **> city of Carlsbad HOUSING ASSISTANCE OFFICE Housing Authority 277? Jefferson Street commissioners Carlsbad, California 92008 Robert C. Frazee, Chairman (714) 729-1 1 76 Mary Casler Claude A. Lewis Anthony Skotnicki Ronald Packard Social Services Coordinator, Amy Villalobos MEMORANDUM Secretary, Gloria A. Martinez Executive Director, Robert J. Coles HOUSING AUTHORITY of the CITY of CARLSBAD 1969 DATE: November 7, 1977 TO : City Manager FROM: Director Housing Authority RE : Senior Citizen Housing Ordinance Bud Plender asked me to review the ordinance proposed for Council approval. Below are some comments. "(B)(l) The minimum age of at least one of the occupants of each unit sball be 62 years." I think some provision should be made for monitoring this. Either, a) the Housing Authority Director could check each potential tenant or; b) there could be a periodic audit of each unit to assure compliance. The possible problem with "b)" is what happens if an audit turns up someone under 62 - does the owner evict the person? "(B)(4) In the event that the Housing Authority does not utilize the dwelling units offered within six months of initial offering, or one month of subsequent vacancies, the applicant may offer the units for rent to the general public. Each such general public tenant shall be review by the Director of the Housing Authority to assure compliance with the limitations on tenants as may be required by the Conditional Use Permit." The possibility of having to keep units vacant for six months doesn't seem to me that it would encourage development of low cost senior citizen housing. I feel two months would be fair both to the Authority and the developer. I do not understand the need for the second sentence. Under the Section 8 program we certify people to seek housing using HUD regulations. Then the owner has the option of accepting or rejecting any prospective tenant. It should be the owner's obligation to assure compliance as required by the CUP and ours to assure compliance with HUD regulations. I would also like there to be a correlation with our "least restrictive" income limits as proposed in Alternative 1, item (B)(vi)(b). Bob Coles cc: Planning Director