HomeMy WebLinkAbout1985-06-04; City Council; 8201; Interim Ordinance - Beach AreaI .-i 01H-H
&4-I O<D O 4-1
^ OJ -MD^ u1 CC c ra•H to -P
c oCn (o O
•d " fl)'O CO H|ti <U -HH -H rC
CIT )F CARLSBAD — AGEND/ IILL
•P S
"^ -H
o4JBO "tJ-i <D
-y35
M-i
^ CO CO
I CNo PS i•H in
H "S H
t§B
o S w-p S -P-p c 'd
en oQ "X3 ro-P M Ifp Onrt ro<p e4J HO -P(U 03M
$
rdP-Ptn
to S (d£BM
mooI
O
1
j
O
oo
AR# ^?^>/
urn 6/4/85
DFPT. PEN
TITLE:
INTERIM ORDINANCE - BEACH AREA
DPPT. HD.C&
CITY ATTvN//^
CITY MGR.^t<-
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff is recommending that the City Council ADOPT Interim Ordinance
No. ?7£>/ f with modifications as proposed by the Land Use
Planning Office. (4/5ths vote required)
ITEM EXPLANATION
On May 8, 1985, the City Council asked staff for a report on the
problems in the beach area. Attached for Council review is a
proposed interim ordinance with an explanatory memorandum prepared
by the City Attorney's Office in response to a request from the
City Manager. The ordinance would prohibit the acceptance of any
discretionary applications in the beach area. The beach area is
defined by the ordinance as the area between Buena Vista Lagoon and
Agua Hedionda Lagoon, west of the AT&SF Railroad right-of-way,
excepting the Village Redevelopment Area.
The Land Use Planning Office has some concerns with one part of the
ordinance as proposed and is recommending some modifications.
These modifications are described in the attached memorandum to the
City Manager from the Principal Planner.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed ordinance is an urgency ordinance and is exempt from
environmental review under Section 15269(C) (CEQA Guidelines,
Statutory Exemptions).
FISCAL IMPACTS
Additional costs will be incurred if the Council authorizes the use
of consultants for the traffic and planning studies. If the
Council approves the use of consultants staff will return with a
scope of work and estimated costs.
EXHIBITS
1. Proposed Interim Ordinance
2. Memorandum from City Attorney
3. Memorandum from Principal Planner w/attachments
a
i
- O LU
2 ° UJ
5 O 5u- • f
UJ S £>
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
§ 13
i 14
§ 15
3
S 16
o
s 17
18
19
20
21
22
25
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO.9761
AN INTERIM ORDINANCE AS AN URGENCY MEASURE OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA
ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL PLANNING STUDY AREA FOR THE
BEACH AREA BETWEEN BUENA VISTA LAGOON ON THE NORTH,
AGUA\HEDIONDA LAGOON ON THE SOUTH, THE RAILROAD
RIGHT\OF-WAY ON THE EAST, AND THE PACIFIC OCEAN ON
THE WESST, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE VILLAGE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA; AND PROHIBITING THE ACCEPTANCE
OR APPROVAL OF ANY APPLICATION PURSUANT TO TITLE 21
OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE OF ANY PERMIT FOR A
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, OR ZONE CHANGE OR GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENT\EXCEPT ZONE CHANGES OR GENERAL PLAN
AMENDMENTS\INITIATED BY THE CITY.
WHEREAS, the\citizen's committee studying revisions to
the Land Use Element oft the Carlsbad Geiiexal-JPlan has identified
a need for special study\of development pattern^ in the beach
area; and
WHEREAS, the beach\area is an area/which may be
developing with a mix and incensity\ of residential densities
resulting in potentially incompatible neighboring land uses; and
WHEREAS, becaii^e^bhe public facilities system serving
the area was developed many I years\ ago the streets and other
public facilities may be~~tnadequat«ily sized to accommodate the
current public facilities needs forXthe area because of a lack of
off-street parking, the existence of ionly two east-west traffic
corridors both \of which are heavily burdened by traffic coming to
the beach area from other parts of the community and the impact
on available, on-street parking from beach \users; and
WHEREAS^,) the City Council and the ^fetaff need
sufficient time to study the problems of the\beach area and
to suggest and implement appropriate solutions^ and
WHEREAS, further development pursuant to the multiple
density zoning and general plan designations currently
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
_- o w < -[.4
- H < t i Roo r; _ D -LO
a
I
>• UJ"J o aiz & <% ™ m
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
established for the area could make the problems worsen, and
result in development which may be in conflict with General
Plan, specific plan or zoning proposals which may result from
the study** and
WH5IREAS this ordinance is adopted pursuant to Section
65858(a) of t^e Government Code;
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad
does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1 :\ That the area of the City of Carlsbad
bounded by the Buena vista Lagoon on the North, the Agua Hedionda
Lagoon on the south; the\ railroad right-of-way on the east and
the Pacific Ocean on the w^st, excepting the Village
Redevelopment area, is declaimed a spreciaT~T»^anning study area and
\may be referred to as the beacn\ area.
SECTION 2: The City Manager Its directed to prepare a
recommendation on the meansi to acccVplish>a study of the beach
area to determine the extent of probl\ras identified above,
evaluate the appropyfabeness o£ existing General Plan and zoning
land use regulation? and! recommend the planning and engineering
methods to remedy 01?—mitigate the problems \dentified during the
study. The. CityI Manager shall report his recommendation to the
City Council\pn Jline 18, 1985.
SECTION 3: During the period this ordinance is
effective no applications for any development permr* or approval
located in whole or part in the beach area, required\pursuant to
Title 20 or Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, snail be
accepted, processed or approved.
2.
a<CO 00
o>
isg§e £ § £^i§
* I ° 9ill ^, O rfo £ - S*£ 3>^ §^ (_3
K
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
SECTION 4: On June 18, 1985 the City Council shall hold
a publi'C hearing to consider extending this ordinance for 10
months an<3 15 days. The City Clerk is directed to notice the
hearings as\required by Government Code Section 65090.
DECDARATION OF URGENCY: This ordinance is hereby
declared to be\an emergency ordinance adopted as an urgency
measure to proteott the public health, safety and welfare and
shall take effect \mmediately upon its adoption. The facts
constituting the emeVgency are set forth above and represent a
threat to the public h\alth/ safety or welfare of the citizens of
Carlsbad.
EFFECTIVE: This ^ordinance shall be effective
immediately upon passage andv shall be of no further force and
effect after July 31, 1985 unless extended by Council prior to
that date. The City Clerk of tf\e City of Carlsbad shall certify
to the adoption of this ordinance\and cause it to be published
once in the Carlsbad Journal within\15 days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Carlsbad., California held on the
day of , 1985 by th\ following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED AS TO
FORM AND LEGALITY
VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR.
City Attorney
- O LLJ <
° U. => 2i?s|?^i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
8 § 16« m
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
oc<o
MARY H. CASHER, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKftANZ, City Clerk
4.
May 14, 1985
TO: City Manager
FROM: City Attorney
PROPOSED MORATORIUM FOR BEACH STUDY AREA
At your request we have prepared an interim ordinance as an
urgency measure which would impose a planning moratorium on the
beach study area.
This ordinance requires a four-fifths vote for adoption. It is
not a public hearing item. If adopted, the ordinance remains
valid for up to 45 days. As prepared, the ordinance directs the
City Clerk to notice a public hearing before the Council at their
meeting of June 18, 1985 to consider whether or not to extend the
moratorium ordinance for an additional period of ten months and
15 days. The notice for this hearing is given pursuant to
Government Code Section 65090 which calls for a newspaper
advertisement and written notice to anyone who has previously
filed a request therefore. It is not necessary to notice the
individual property owners. The ordinance also directs you to
prepare a recommendation on the means to accomplish that study
for presentation to the Council at their meeting of June 18,
1985.
The ordinance prohibits the acceptance, processing or approval of
applications for developmental permits under the zoning code or
the subdivision code. It does not apply to building permits. If
adopted properties within the study area would be able to take
out building permits for developments at the minimum end of the
density range that do not require any other discretionary
approvals. If the Council wishes to extend the moratorium to
building permits a sentence to that effect should be added to
Section 3 of the ordinance.
The redeveopment area is expressly excluded from the moratorium
for a number of reasons including primarily the fact that the
land uses in the project area are controlled by the redevelopment
plan and are already subject to individual design review by the
Design Review Board, Planning Commission and City Council. These
bodies have sufficient discretionary approval to take care of any
potential problems in the interim period.
At the hearing on June 18, 1985 the City Council would consider
your recommendations on how to accomplish the study and
presumably take action as they consider appropriate in that
regard. You would probably also wish to report to them on all of
the projects "in the pipeline." The City's counsel could then
consider, as a part of the extension of the moratorium, an
appropriate effective date.
-2-
You may also wish to remind the Council, as a part of your
report, that the General Plan and zoning for the beach area have
been approved by the State Coastal Commission as well as the City
Council as a part of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Plan. The City
is actively pursuing action before the Commission to assume
permit authority over the plan. Any changes in the General Plan
or zoning which may result from the study would also necessitate
amendments to the LCP.
rmh
attachment
VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR.
City Attorney
7
MAY 30, 1985
TO: FRANK ALESHIRE, CITY MANAGER
FROM: Charles Grimm, Principal Planner(
VIA: MARTY ORENYAK, DIRECTOR OF BUILDING & PLANNING
RE: BEACH AREA GROWTH
BACKGROUND
Based on Council discussion at their meeting of May 8,
1985, the City Manager directed the Land Use Planning Office to
prepare a summary report regarding the problems occuring in
conjunction with the development of the beach area (generally the
area west of the railroad right-of-way between Buena Vista and
Agua Hedionda Lagoons). Growth in this area has become an issue
recently because of the rapid development of apartment and
condominium units over the last 18 months. The increase in units
has brought about an increase in other problems which have caught
the attention of the Council, the Planning Commission, the Land
Use Committee and of course citizens living in the beach area.
The Land Use Committee has recently recommended that a reduction
in density (from a maximum of 30 units to 23 units) be
implemented and special treatment standards be applied.
PROBLEMS
The basic problems now affecting this area include an
inadequate number of through-streets, increased traffic,
inadequate parking and rapid transition of neighborhood (single
family vs. apartments). These problems are caused by a number of
reasons which start with density. The beach area has the largest
section of high density (20-30 du's/acre) in the City. Buildout
at this density could bring an additional 3700 people into this
area. Another major factor is that the area is confined by the
railroad right-of-way. Tamarack and Elm are the only nearby
freeway access streets which penetrate west of the railroad and
Tamarack has been recently downgraded. Parking is inadequate
because of low standards for apartments and because beach users
park in this area. Lot sizes are also small and sometime unusual
in shape because they were subdivided many years ago. Some are
really too small to be developed under the RH category.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
The City Council will be considering a proposed
ordinance temporarily suspending discretionary approvals. The
Land Use Planning Office has several concerns regarding the
proposed ordinance. The ordinance would prohibit acceptance of
all discretionary applications in the beach area. However, it
allows development to occur at the minimum density in the range
without review by either the Planning Commission or the City
Council. In other words, it would leave the existing zoning
ordinance in effect which would allow building permits to be
issued for any project in this area at the guaranteed minimum
density range without any discretion by the city. The recent
number of appeals of projects at 20 or 21 du's/acre would
indicate that allowing development at the low end of this range
still doesn't solve the beach area's problems.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1) As an addition to the ordinance as drafted, the
planning staff is recommending that it not only prohibit the
acceptance of discretionary applications but also limits any
development to a maximum of 2 dwelling units per lot. This will
accomplish several things. It will prohibit development at the
guaranteed minimum without discretionary review, and it will
permit very small projects to be processed at a low density. If
the Council agrees they should substitute the attached pages for
pages 3 & 4 of the attorney's draft.
The planning staff is recommending that the boundaries
and other provisions of the ordinance remain the same. We also
feel that these provisions should remain in effect until a
traffic study and planning analysis can be completed to develop
long term solutions to the beach area problems (minimum staff
estimate - 6 months). There are approximately 6 projects pending
in this area. With one exception they are all less than 5 units.
We would recommend that the proposed revisions apply to any
project which has not received a discretionary action by May 8,
the day Council asked staff to prepare a report on beach area
problems.
2) In addition to the planning study contemplated by
the ordinance staff would recommend that a study also include the
entire area west of 1-5 between the Buena Vista Lagoon and Cannon
Road (see attached map). The study would address access to the
downtown area and to the beach area based on the existing general
plan, zoning and the LCP. The traffic study would be the basis
for a specific planning analysis to be done for the beach area
and for the redevelopment area.
3) We agree with the scope of the planning study
contemplated by the ordinance. The high density creating the
problems described is located west of the railroad right-of-way
area. We do not feel that the specific planning study described
in the ordinance needs to be expanded.
4) If the City Council extends the proposed ordinance
on June 18 then we must complete whatever studies are called for
by the ordinance. If Council finds that we need both the traffic
and planning studies staff would recommend the use of
consultants. The Land Use Planning Office could manage the
consultant's work on these studies but does not have the time or
manpower to complete them without outside help.
Attachments:
1. Ordinance Additions
2. Memorandum from Research & Analysis Group
3. Traffic Study Map
4. Planning Study Map
CG/ar
a
CDca
- O UJ <
to
DC
<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
SECTION 4: During the period this ordinance is in
effect no building permits shall be approved or issued for more
than two dwelling units on any one lot located in whole or in
part in the bea\h area.
SECTION \5: On June 18, 1985 the City Council shall hold
a public hearing to\ consider extending this ordinance for 10
months and 15 days. \The City Clerk is directed to notice the
hearings as required by* Government Code Section 65090.
DECLARATION OF \JRGENCY: This ordinance is hereby
declared to be an emergency ordinance adopted as an urgency
measure to protect the public health, safety and welfare and
shall take effect immediately\upon its adoption. The facts
constituting the emergency are ^et forth above and represent a
threat to the public health, safety or welfare of the citizens of
Carlsbad.
EFFECTIVE: This ordinance \shall be effective
immediately upon passage and shall be\of no further force and
effect after July 31, 1985 unless extended by Council prior to
that date. The City Clerk of the City ofyCarlsbad shall certify
to the adoption of this ordinance and caus£» it to be published
once in the Carlsbad Journal within 15 days \after its adoption.
INTRODUCED, PASSED AND ADOPTED at a Vegular meeting of
the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California held on the
day of , 1985 by the folloying vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
3.
o
1 °°
~5 <!! ®
~ O LLJ <(
If 11
10 " 5 <
uj 2 o <o o: « ooz O m
^ 5>- <->bo
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
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR., City Attorney
MARY H. CASHER, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ\ City Clerk
4.
MAY 20, 1985
TO: FRANK ALESHIRE
FROM: Jim Hagaman
REQUEST FOR ROUGH ESTIMATE OF CURRENT & BUILDOUT
POPULATION IN NORTH WEST QUADRANT OF CITY WEST OF THE
RAILROAD TRACK BETWEEN B.UENA VISTA AND AGUA HEDIONDA LAGOONS
The estimates are based on the following assumptions:
1. Household size - 2.12 persons
2. Vacancy rate - 5%
3. No estimates of population are given for
estimated 62.5 acres of visitor commercial
nor 21.6 acres of school facilities (Army-
Navy) .
Population
Units
Existing
Estimate
2,976
1,626
Buildout
Estimate
6,663
3,278
Difference
3,687
1,652
Data soucres:1. 1980 Federal Census
2. PFMS Update data
3. 400 scale Coastal Plan
S^j
^~£&*<&*(
//^ /'//JAMES C/HAJGAMAN
' / JCH:pgk
STUDY AREA MAP
AGUA HEDIONDA
I 1^ LAGOON
PLANNING
STUDY AREA
STUDY AREA MAP
AGUA HEDIONDA
LAGOON
TRAFFIC
STUDY AREA
June 3, 1985
TO: City Manager
PROM: City Attorney
INTERIM ORDINANCE - BEACH AREA
This memorandum is to outline the two options which have been
presented to the City Council for imposing an interim suspension
of project approvals in the beach area pending a land use and
traffic study. In addition, the memorandum discusses a third
option which has emerged from staff discussions as a possible
compromise.
All options do not require a public hearing, remain in effect
for a maximum of 45 days, and will be reconsidered at a public
hearing by the City Council in two weeks at which time they can .
be extended as is, extended as modified or not extended. A
four/fifths vote is required.
Option 1 - Ordinance No. 9761 - Suspends the acceptance,
processing, or approval of any application under the zone code
or the subdivision ordinance (would include, for example,
variances, CUPs, site plans, density determinations, parcel
maps, subdivision maps, zone changes, condominium permits, PUDs,
subdivisions). Council may or may not determine to modify the
ordinance on June 18 to grandfather projects "in the pipeline."
This option does not effect building permits. Two types of
project could go forward: 1) projects with final discretionary
approvals could build to their approved densities (even if this
is above the mean); 2) new apartment projects not requiring
a discretionary approval could pull building permits at the
guaranteed minimum as provided by the zoning ordinance (eg., ten
units in the 10-20 area and 20 units in the 20-30 area).
Option 2 - Compromise - Option 2 also suspends approvals under
the zone code and the subdivision ordinance. It would stop new
apartment projects except those at two units or less per lot.
However, it would allow projects with final discretionary
approval from the City Council to pull building permits at the
densities as approved by Council.
Option 3 - Planning Department Recommendation - Option 3 suspends
approvalsunder the zone code and the subdivision ordinance. It
differs from Option 2 in that building permits could only be
issued for up to two units on any lot. This would affect all new
apartment projects as well as other projects, even those with
final discretionary approvals.
-2-
None of these options deal with possible Council "grandfathering"
since the ordinance will remain in effect for a very short
period and the City Council will determine whether or not that's
appropriate when they can have the public hearing to consider
extending the ordinance.
Attached to this memorandum is a short chart which attempts to
summarize the three options presented by staff.
VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR.
City Attorney
rmh
attachment
STOPS ALL ZONING STOPS BUILDING STOPS BUILDING
AND SUBDIVISION PERMITS FOR PERMITS FOR
APPROVALS APPROVED NEW APARTMENTS
PROJECTS
OPTION 1 YES NO NO
9761
OPTION 2 YES NO YES
COMPROMISE
OPTION 3 YES YES YES
PLANNING
DEPARTMENT