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