HomeMy WebLinkAbout1980-05-06; City Council; 6237; 6 Unit CondominiumCITY OF CARLSBAD
INITIAL
AGENDA BILL NO. (j? 33 7 Dept. Hd.
DATE: MAY 6, 1980 cty< Atty._V
DEPARTMENT: PLANNING cty> Mgr,
SIX-UNIT CONDOMINIUM.
CASE NO: CT 79-20/CP-23(A) APPLICANT: HARRY FRIES
STATEMENT OF THE MATTER
The subject property is located on the north side of La Costa Avenue
adjacent to the golf course. On March 4, 1980, the City Council
approved a 6 unit condominium development on this same property.
The original project and. the_proposed project both are a six unit
condominium. The changes are generally to the orientation of 3
of the units. Open space has been changed to private patio rather
than a common recreation and some changes to the grading. The
new plan reduces the need for retaining walls.
Through the planning staff .review and Planning Commission hearing,
all concerns have been resolved on this project.
EXHIBITS
1. • Planning Commission Resolution No. 1616
2. Staff Report dated March 26, 1980
3. Exhibits A & B dated February 11, 1980
'RECOMMENDATION
Both the planning staff and Planning Commission recommend that this
application be APPROVED and that the City Attorney be directed to
prepare documents APPROVING CT '79~20/CF-23(A) per Planning Commission
Resolution No. 1616.
Council Action:
5-6-80 Council directed the City Attorney to prepare documents approving
CT 79-20/CP-23(A) per Planning Commission Resolution 1616.
1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 1616
2 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A
3 REVISED TENTATIVE AIRSPACE SUBDIVISION MAP
AND CONDOMINIUM. PERMIT FOR SIX UNITS LOCATED
4 ON THE NORTH SIDE OF LA COSTA AVENUE, BETWEEN
VIEJO CASTILLA AND EL CAMINO REAL.
5
APPLICANT: H. FRIES
6 CASE NO: CT 79-20/CP-23 (A) .
7 WHEREAS, a verified application for certain property, to
8 wit:
9 Lot 1 of La Costa Greens, in the County of San Diego,
according to Map thereof No. 6708, filed in the
10 Office of the County Recorder for San Diego County,
August 18, 1979
11
has been filed with the City of Carlsbad, and referred to the
12
Planning Commission; and
13
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request
14
as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
15
WHEREAS, based on an initial study of the project, including
16
a field investigation of the site, the Planning Director has
17
found that the project will not result in any significant
18
environmental impacts and, therefore, has issued a Negative
19
Declaration, Log No. 653,' on March 4, 1980.
20
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 26th day of
21
March, 1980, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed
22
by law to consider said request; and
23
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering
24
all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to
25
be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to
26
the Tentative Tract Map and Condominium Permit; and
27
28 ////
0
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
2 Commission as follows:
3 A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
4 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing,
5
jg
20
22
23
25
2g
27
no
the Commission recommends APPROVAL of CT 79-20/CP-23 (A)
based on the following findings and subject to the following
conditions:
Findings
1) The project is consistent with the city's General Plan Land
Use Element since the project conforms to the land use desig-
nation for this area and qualifies for a reduced density
based on the topography of the site and its location adjacent
to a single-family residential area.
2) The site is physically suitable for the type, density and
design of the development since the property is adequate in
size and topography to accommodate the project and still meet
all of the city's condominium and subdivision regulations
without any significant environmental impacts.
3) The project is consistent with all city public facility pol-
icies and ordinances since:
15 a) The applicant is on the Leucadia County Water District's
sewer allocation list, and six sewer hookups have been
reserved for the project.
17 b) The applicant has agreed and is required by the inclu-
•iQ sion of an appropriate condition to pay a public facil-
ities fee. Performance of that contract and payment of
the fee will enable this body to find that public facil-
ities will be available concurrent with need as required
by the General Plan.
c) School fees to mitigate conditions of overcrowding are
required at the time of building permits pursuant to
Chapter 21.55 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
d) All necessary public improvements have either been
provided or will be required as conditions of approval
24 e) The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an
appropriate condition to this condominium permit
and tentative subdivision map, insured that the final
map will not be approved unless the City Council finds
that sewer service is available to serve the project.
In addition, the Planning Commission has added a con-
dition that a note be placed on the final map that
building permits may not be issued for the condominium
-2-
PC RESO #1616
•"
21
22
26
27
28
project unless the City Engineer determines that sewer
service is available. Since the final map cannot be
approved unless sewer service is available, and building
cannot occur within the project unless sewer service
remains available, the Planning Commission is satisfied
that the requirements of the public facilities element
of the General Plan have been met insofar as they apply
to sewer service for this condominium permit and tenta-
tive map approval.
4) The design of the project and all required improvements
will not cause any significant environmental impacts,
and a Declaration of Negative Environmental Impact has
been issued by the Planning Director on March 4, 19808 Log No. 653.
" 5) The proposed condominium project meets the criteria of
Chapter 21.47 (Condominiums) since:
a. The condominiums meet the design criteria of
Chapter 21.47.110 since the overall plan is
comprehensive, embracing land, building, land-
scaping and their relationships , the driveways
are not dominant features, and sufficient circu-
lation and on-site amenities are provided.
b. Storage space, laundry facilities, open recreation
areas, parking facilities, refuse areas, separate
utilities and requirements of Section 21.47.130
have been met or will be conditions of approval.16
6) The design of the subdivision and type of improvements
•*•' will not cause any serious public health problems.
7) The design of the subdivision and type of improvements
will not conflict with easements for public use of
public access through the subject property.
Conditions
1) Approval is granted for CT 79-20/CP-13 (A) as shown on
Exhibits A and B to CT 79-20/CP-23 (A) dated February 11, 1980
on file in the Planning Department and incorporated by refer-
ence. Development shall occur substantially as shown on these
exhibits unless otherwise noted in these conditi'ons.24
2) The location of the southernmost storage area and the north-
ernmost visitor parking space shall be switched and redesigned
subject to the approval of the Planning Director. Said change,
shall be noted on the final condominium site plan.
////
////
-3-
PC RESO #1616
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
3) Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall
prepare a reproducible copy of the final condominium site plan
incorporating all requirements of the condominium permit
approval and shall be subject to the approval of the Planning
Director.
4) The applicant shall provide school fees to mitigate conditions
of overcrowding as part of building permit application. These
fees shall be based on the fee schedule in effect at the time
of building permit application.
5) This subdivision and condominium plan is approved upon the
express condition that the final map shall not be approved
unless the City Council finds as of the time of such approval
that sewer service is available to serve the subdivision.
6) This subdivision condominium plan is approved upon the express
condition that building permits will not be issued for devel-
opment of the subject property unless the City Engineer
determines that such sewer facilities are available at the
time of application for such permits and will continue to be
available until time of occupancy. If the City Engineer
determines that sewer facilities are not available, building
permits will not be issued.
7) This approval is expressly conditioned on the payment by the
applicant of a public facilities fee as required by City
Council Policy No.-17, dated August 29, 1979, on file with
the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, and
according to the agreement executed by the application for
payment of said fee. A copy of that agreement, dated
February 22, 1980 , is on file with the City Clerk and incor-
porated herein by reference. If said fee is not paid as
promised, this application will not be consistent with the
General Plan and the project cannot proceed and this approval
shall be void.
8) The developer shall receive the approval of the City Engineer
for a site grading plan and obtain a grading permit prior to
issuance of building permits.
9) Automatic garage door openers shall be installed by the
applicant on all garage doors prior to final occupancy of
any unit.
10) The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape and irrigation
plan subject to the .approval of the Planning Director prior to
final map approval. Said plan shall indicate the utilization
of drought tolerant plant species.
11) Grading shall occur in accordance with an approved grading
and erosion control plan, city standards, and an approved
soils and geologic investigation report which shall include
slope stability calculations and construction specifications).
All exposed slopes shall be hydromulched or otherwise stabil-
P.C. Reso. No. 1616
-4-
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
ized prior to the issuance of building permits subject
to the approval of the City Engineer.
12) Drainage improvements shall be constructed in accordance
with an approved plan, and the work shall be coordinated
with the overall plan for grading to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer.
13) The applicant shall pay park-in-lieu fees to the city
prior to the approval of the final map.
14) The applicant shall submit plans indicating the location
of a trash enclosure on the site subject to the approval
of the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building
permit.
15) The applicant shall establish covenants, conditions and
restrictions for the project. Said CC&R's shall be
submitted to and approved by the Planning Director prior to
the issuance of a building permit. Said CC&R's shall
prohibit the placement of any structure or Jacuzzi within
the 10' sewer easement unless an encroachment permit is
obtained from Leucadia County Water District.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held
on the 26th day of March, 1980, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
EDWIN S. SCHICK, JR., Chairman
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
JAMES C. HAGAMAN, Secretary
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
PC RESO #1616 — 5—
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 26, 1980
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Brian Milich, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: CT 79-20/CP-23(A) - FRIES - 6 unit condominium
development on La Costa Avenue, La Costa.
I. BACKGROUND
Description
The applicant is proposing a six unit condominium dev-
elopment on a 27,797 square foot parcel located on the
north side of La Costa Avenue, adjacent to the golf
course. The property has been previously graded and
two pads (approximately 15 feet and 25 feet respectively)
have been created. Approximately 1,000 cubic yards of
additional grading is proposed.
Each unit will be three levels (maximum height of 28
feet) with two bedrooms and an attached two-car garage.
The dwellings will be arranged in two, three-unit
buildings, each with access directly off of a private
driveway.
Existing Zoning and Land Use
Subject Property: RD-M Vacant
North: P-C Golf Course
South: RD-M Condominiums
East: R-l-10 Vacant
West: RD-M Condominiums
General Plan Information
A) Land Use Element: The city's current land use plan
designates the subject property for high density
(20-30 du/acre) residential development. The
proposed project would result in a net density of
9.6 du/acre.
B) Public Facilities
Sewer Service; The Leucadia County Water District
has reserved six sewer connections for the subject
property.
Schools: The project is located within the San
Dieguito and Encinitas School Districts. Since the
districts are presently experiencing conditions of
overcrowding, school fees would be assessed at the
time of building permit application.
Other Public Facilities; All other public facilities
necessary to serve this project will not be available
concurrent with need. The Planning Commission may,
by inclusion of an appropriate condition, require
that the project contribute to the costs of such
facilities according to City Council Policy No. 17.
Since the development will pay for its appropriate
share of the public facilities it will require,
the Planning Commission could be assured that the
requirements of the Public Facilities Element of the
General Plan will be satisfied. In addition,
park-in-lieu fees will be assessed at the time of
building permit issuance.
C) Other Elements of the General Plan
The project is consistent with all other elements
of the city's current general plan.
Environmental Impact Assessment
Based on an initial study of the project, including
a field investigation of the site, the Planning
Director has found that the project will not result
in any significant environmental impacts and
therefore has issued a negative declaration,
Log No. 653, on March 4, 1980.
Related Cases
CT 79-20/CP-23: On March 4, 1980, the City Council
approved a six unit condominium development on the
subject property. That project differed from the
current proposal in building orientation (both
buildings were parallel to each other, rather than
perpendicular as currently proposed), parking design
and recreation area provision. No extraordinary
conditions were placed on that project.
II. ANALYSIS
Major Planning Considerations
1. Have adequate on-site amenities been provided to
serve all units?
—2—
2. Is the design of the proposed storage parking area
desirable in terms of accessibility and aesthetics?
Discussion
As proposed, the project would result in a net density
of 9.6 du/acre. This is considerably below the density
range of 20-30 du/acre which has been established for
this site by the general plan. However, two factors
should be considered when evaluating density for this
property. First, the property is not entirely level and
thus the topography limits the number of units which could
be developed on this site without major land form
modification. In addition, the adjacent property to the
east is zoned for single-family residential development.
By developing the subject property at a relatively low
density, a desirable transition from low density single
family to higher density multiple-family is created.
In general, the proposed development would provide ample
on-site amenities to serve each of the dwellings. These
amenities include the required resident and visitor
parking, open recreation areas in the form of private
patios and balconies, and storage in excess of the
required 480 cubic feet. The location of the storage
buildings and the visitor parking, however, raise two
important design concerns.
The first concern deals with the placement of a sizeable
storage structure within the front (southern) portion
of the property. This, coupled with the additional
paving necessary to serve this storage building reduces
the overall amount of landscaping in this area and
thus, the aesthetic quality of the development. This
is an important concern since the area in question is
visible from La Costa Avenue.
The other design concern relates to the single visitor
space located on the lower driveway near the center of
the development. Specifically, this space is not well
integrated into the design of the development nor does
it facilitate relatively easy exiting.
In order to eliminate both design concerns, staff
recommends that the location of the southernmost storage
building and the single visitor parking space be switched.
This will provide room for additional landscaping at the
front of the project, and also improve the utility of
all on-site visitor spaces.
With these relatively minor changes to the plan, the
project can be found to be consistent with the design
criteria and development standards of the city's
condominium ordinance. All pertinent conditions of
approval of CT 79-20/CP-23 have been included for this
project.
-3-
III. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution No. 1616, recommending APPROVAL of
CT 79-20/CP-23(A) based, on the findings and subject
to the conditions contained therein.
Exhibits
Location Map
Resolution No. 1616
Exhibits "A" and "B", dated February 11, 1980
Disclosure Form
BH:ar
3/21/80
-4-