Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1979-07-03; City Council; 5886-1; Conversion of Apartments to Condominumsff CITY OF CARLSBAD AGENDA BILL NO. 5886-Supplement 1 Initial: Dept.Hd. DATE: July 3, 1979 c> Atty> DEPARTMENT; City Attorney C. Mgr.i • Subject: CONVERSION OF APARTMENTS TO CONDOMINIUMS CASE NO: CT 79-3/CP-3 APPLICANT: VON ELTEN. Statement of the Matter The City Council, at your meeting of June 19, 1979, directed the City Attorney to prepare documents denying Tentative Subdivision Map CT 79-3 and Condominium Permit CP-3 for the conversion of an 80-unit apartment complex to condominiums. A resolution in that regard is attached. Exhibit Resolution No Recommendation if the City Council concurs, your action is to adopt Resolution No. Council Action: 7-3-79: Council adopted ResolutionNo. 5832 W ffi3 Mp 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 § 13 | 14 I 15 o- 16 | 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO.5832 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, DENYING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (CT 79-3) AND CONDOMINIUM PERMIT (CP-3) FOR THE CONVERSION OF AN 80-UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX TO CONDOMINIUMS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED ON APPROXIMATELY 4.9 ACRES OF LAND, EAST OF EL CAMINO REAL BETWEEN THE S.D.G.& E. TRANSMISSION EASEMENT AND ALGA ROAD. APPLICANT: VON ELTEN. ' WHEREAS, on May 23, 1979, the Carlsbad Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 1523 recommending to the City Council the Tentative Subdivision Map (CT 79-3) and Condominium Permit (CP-3) be denied; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on June 19, 1979, held a public hearing to consider the recommendations of the Planning Commission and to receive all recommendations and hear all persons interested in or opposed to said Tentative Subdivision Map and Condominium Permit; and WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, acting as Lead Agency, has processed said property through environmental guidelines pursuant to Title 19 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and the State EIR guidelines.. This project has been found to be exempt from environmental review according to Section 19.04.090(a)(8) which exempts the division of existing multiple family rental units into condominiums. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A. That the above recitations are true and correct. B. That the City Council concurs with the findings and decisions of the Planning Commission as expressed in ' o m _</3 °° • (C (N|fC < o):. BIONDO. J• CITY OF C-M AVENUEALIFORNIAz>so 2"i 8 0III Z (N rfo oc - 5 i£ "> f- tc ^ "o 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 Resolution No. 1523, on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by reference herein and, in addition, the City Council makes the following findings and conclusions: 1. Ct 79-3/CP-3 does not meet the design criteria as required by Section 21.47.110 of the Condominium Ordinance. (a) The plan is not comprehensively designed; the required amenities including parking, land- scaping, recreation areas, storage, and refuse locations were added with great difficulty to meet only the minimum requirements. The attempt to upgrade to condominium standards, a project initially designed as apartments, has resulted in amenities being crammed into any available area instead of planned with consideration of their proper interrelationship. (b) The buildings are not well integrated to parking and recreation areas -because parking and paved areas intrude between, buildings and must be crossed by pedestrian residents to reach the recreation site. (c) This development, as proposed ownership units, is not compatible with existing and potential traffic circulation because: ( i) The buildings are close to heavily traveled El Camino Real and will have high noise levels due to traffic. ( ii) Traffic on El Camino Real will increase as the La Costa residential and nearby industrial and commercial areas are developed. Traffic is expected to ultimately be in excess of 40,000 auto trips per day. (d) The internal street system is a dominant feature in the development since it surrounds the development and projects into the interior. (e) Common recreation areas are not centrally located and are not readily accessible to several of the units. Some residents will be required to travel several hundred feet across driveways and parking areas and in front of other units to reach the common recreation area. (f) Building placement does not create private areas nor reduce noise from El Camino Real. The -2- *S-•ss's |£o5 u.° •-Igg if AVENUEIFORNI1200SBAD,i 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 buildings in the development are oriented to one another and to the parking and driveway areas. Several of the buildings are close to El Camino Real so noise will be a problem. 2. This project does not meet the parking requirements of Section 21.47.130(2). (a) One hundred eighty-three spaces are required; only 168 have been provided. (b) The spaces are not readily accessible to the units they are supposed to serve. (c) The northern parcel parking area is not acceptable for required parking since it is too distant from the units to properly serve that function and is separated from the rest of the development by a full-width City street. The area would be acceptable for RV and trailer storage only, since vehicles need not be readily accessible. 3. The project does not meet the development standards for residential condominiums in Section 21.47.130(1) of the Condominium Ordinance because the required building setbacks of the units are not maintained. (a) Ten foot setbacks from the right-of-way of private streets are required for all structures. Several buildings along the eastern and southern portions of the site are set back less than the required distance. (b) Twenty-five foot setbacks are required for parking structures with an entrance at right angles to a private street. Two buildings along the southern side of the property have garage openings at right angles to the private street and are only set back eight feet. A building fronting on the eastern private street also has garage openings to that street and is set back only fifteen feet. (c) Buildings with garages entered directly from private drives shall be set back five to seven feet or greater than twenty feet. The buildings with garage openings fronting on private drives are being constructed with only a three foot setback. C. That based on the reasons contained in the findings set out above, the Council is satisfied that the project in question does not meet the requirements of Chapter 21.47 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code and therefore must be denied. —3 — 0 <Ou. ^ 5 §° i i 2 P 5 u- — So z % 8 QIII <£ CM *f O £ - 2 1§ 3> \~ tc. O 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 D. That since the application for the Condominium Conversion Permit has been denied, and such permit is a prerequisite to the approval of a Subdivision Map for a condominium conversion, the Tentative Subdivision Map must be denied as well for failure to comply with the applicable zoning ordinance. E. That this decision is final upon adoption of this resolution. The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the proceedings accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one.- A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008. Qsa of "" o-" z . i§ u.' • !_ >- Ui ZO £Z O < u '* 008 si'g K < t m O SoIN <SiV>_J. cc5 •1 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 ^ ^\ '>-' . ' O '1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 3rd day of July r 1979 by the following vote, to wit: . AYES: Councilmen Packard, Skotnicki, Lewis, Anear and Councilwoman Casler NOES: None ABSENT: None • /^^ , /^^ /?J^^^^C^ j£^2^CfRONALD C. PACKARD, Mayor V ATTEST : tfjkftL'^i&s.lLjAA ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk^T r^ (SEAL) ' ' -5-