HomeMy WebLinkAbout1986-04-08; City Council; 8526-2; REPORT ON SDP 84-08A - BREHMZ 0
I- o 4
a %
c
.. z 0 5 a
d 0 z 3 0 0
ClmOF CARLSBAD - AGENUBILL
AB# 8526-&2 TITLE: DEI
CIT MTG.
DEPT. PLN CIT
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
4/8/86 REPORT ON SDP 84-S(A) - BREHM
Accept report. No further action is recommended,
ITEM EXPLANATION
At the request of Councilmember Pettine, the City Council c
25, 1986 directed staEf to prepare an additional report on
SDP 84-8(A).
The report is contained in the attached memorandum to .t Manager dated April 2, 1986. Based upon a review of the bac leading up to the Council's approval, staff is recommending
further action be taken.
Basically, the applicant Has given the approval to del apartrnent project on the subject site as part of an c approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD-71). development plan was required to approve the actual design
apartment project. Although the original site develope technically expired on September 12, 1985, the PUD is 8 effect. The new site development plan is a revision previously-approved plan. The neN plan complies with a ordinances and requirements and, in staff's analysis,
improvement over the previously-approved plan.
EXHIBIT
1. Memorandum to the City Manager dated April 2, 1986.
m 0
APRIL 2, 1986
TO : CITY MANAGER
FROM: Planning Department
SDP 84-8(A) - BREHM
The purpose of this memo is to clarify the history of the abo mentioned project. The original site development plan for th
apartment project was approved by the Planning Commission September 12, 1984. It was approved as a portion of CT 8 23/PUD-71, a 324 unit project (refer to attached Exhibit "A"
Staff Report dated September 12, 1984). This project propos 220 single family lots and a 104 unit apartment projec Although the PUD approved the entire project, the si development plan approved the specific design of the apartrnen portion of this project.
In June 1985, the applicant, Brehm Communities, informed ste that they wanted to revise the approved site plan for t apartment portion of the project. At that time, both staff i
the applicant proceeded under the assumption that the approval
the site development plan ran concurrently with the approval
the tentative tract map and planned unit development since t'r were all approved as one project. The tentative tract map i
planned unit development had a two year approval, which is val until October 16, 1986. After several revisions, Brc Communities finally submitted an application to formally am€
the site development plan on November 27, 1985.
The new site development plan was approved by the Planni Commission on January 22, 1986 and by the City Council February 18, 1986. As part of it's report and presentation both the Planning Commission and the City Council, st: indicated that the new site development plan was a revision and an improvement over the previously approved plan which 1 applicant still had approval to build. As mentioned previous:
it was staff's understanding at that time that the previous s:
development plan had not expired and the new plan was jusl revision,
Staff and the applicant became aware that technically the (
site development plan had expired when staff closely examined i
history of this project after the applicant requested exemption from the moratorium. Although the planned UI development gave approval for a 104 unit apartment project on
subject site, the site development plan which approved the act1
design of the project had expired on September 12, 1984. Sect
21.06.160 of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance states:
0 0
"A site development plan shall expire and be of no furth force and effect if building permits are not issued and ke
active within the time specified in the resolution approval or if no time is specified within one year from t
date of approval."
Since the Planning Commission resolution (copy attache
approving this project did not specify an approval period, it hi
determined that the previous site development plan technical expired on September 16, 1985. Staff is sure that if t applicant had been aware that the site development plan was on good for one year, and due to expire on September 12, 1985, t applicant would have submitted his proposed amendment in a mo
timely manner or would have requested an extension of t original site development plan.
Regarding the applicant's request for an exemption from t
interim growth management program (City Council Ordinance Til 9791), it is clear to staff that regardless of whether t
previously-approved site plan had expired or not the new si development plan does not qualify for an exemption. The new Pl - SDP 84-8(A) - was on the list of projects which were permitt
to be processed through Planning Commission and City Council 1: which could not get building permits until a phasing program prepared for the area in which the project is located (refer Exhibit 'IC" - excerpt from City Council Ordinance No. 9791).
From reviewing all the background information on the projec staff believes that the original PIJD approval allows t
applicant to develop an apartnent project on the subject sit
The site development plan merely approves the design of t
project. The new site plan complies with all City ordinances E requirements and is actually an improvement over the previous
approved plan. For these reasons, staff is recommending that t
City Council take no further action on this matter.
Attachments
1. Exhibit "A" - Staff Report dated September 12, 1984
2. Exhibit I'B" - Planning Commission Resolution No. 2350
approving original Site Development Plan.
3. Exhibit "C" - Excerpt from City Council Ordinance No. 9791
4. Exhibit "D" - Agenda Bill and attachments for new Site Development Plan.
MJH/ar
-2-
EX
0 :.
@ STAFF REPORT i
DATE : September 12, 1984
TO : Planning Commission
FROM: Land Use Planning Office
SUBJECT: CT 84-23/PUD-71/SDP 84-8 - THE MEADOWS - Request for i
223 lot/324 unit tentative tract map and planned development and site development plan located
approximately 500 feet south of the intersection of
Melrose Avenue and Alga Road in the RD-M zone.
I. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission APPROVE the Negative Declaration issued by the Land Use Planning Manager ar ADOPT Resolution No. 2350 APPROVING SDP 84-8 and ADOPT Resoluti
-347 recommending APPROVAL of CT 84-23/PUD-71 to the City
Council based on the f’lndings and subject to the conditions
contained therein.
11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicant is requesting approval of a 223 lot/324 unit
tentative tract map, planned development and a site developmen plan located as described above. The proposed project will be located on a 43.6 acre site and have a density of 7.4 dwelling units per acre. This is in conformance with the General Plan designation for this site of RM, Residential Medium 4-10 du/ac
The site consists of gently sloping hillsides covered with nat
vegetation. The gradient is steepest to the west and gradual1 decreases to a relatively flat area along Melrose Avenue. A condominium project has been approved on the property immediat to the north of the subject property. The properties to the h east and south are vacant at the present time.
This project is divided into two product types. The majority the site will be developed with single family detached zero IC
line homes on lots ranging in size from 3600 to 9000 square fe
A 104 unit apartment project will be located on the southeast€
portion of the project. This development will consist of one
two bedroom units in five buildings clustered around a common
recreation area. None of the buildings will exceed 35 feet ir
height.
In June, 1980, the Planning Commission approved a 300 unit
project consisting of condominiums, fourplexes, triplexes, duplexes and single family detached units on this site. This
project would supercede the former approval .
e 0
L
111. ANALY S IS
1) Does the proposed project conform to the development
standards of the Planned Development Ordinance?
2) Does the proposed project conform to the design criteria (
the Planned Development Ordinance?
3) Is the site adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
4) Is the development compatible with surrounding developmenl
Discussion
Development Standards
As proposed this project meets or exceeds the development
standards of the Planned Development Ordinance. All of the single family homes will have a two-car garage with a minimum
dimension of 400 square feet. This will provide adequate spa to fulfill the storage requirements as well as provide adequa
parking for two cars. Guest parking will be provided on the
public and private streets which serve this project.
All of the units will have a level rear or side yard with a
minimum dimension of 15 feet. In addition, there will be two
common recreation areas. The active recreation area will hav swimming pool, spa, cabana, barbeque facilities and a tot lot The passive common recreation area will have barbeque facilit
and a tot lot.
As the Commission is aware, apartment projects are not subjec the requirements of the Planned Development Ordinance. The proposed apartment project, however, does comply with all of requirements of the RD-M zone and incorporates many of the
development standards and design criteria of the Planned Development Ordinance. The apartment project's common recrea area will have a pool, spa, barbeque facilities, picnic tablc deck area and a recreation building. Each of the units will
a balcony or patio with a storage closet. In addition, this project will have a common laundry facility.
Design Criteria
As proposed, this project conforms with the design criteria ( Planned Development Ordinance. Although 90 percent of the s:
will be graded, the existing topographical character of the :
will be preserved. The common recreation areas will be read: accessible to all of the units in the single family portion t
project. The slopes adjacent to Melrose Avenue and Corintia Street will buffer the single family homes from traffic noisc generated on these streets.
proposed use?
-2-
e e
AS mntionpd previouslyl the apartment; projesL tiii I8 6luitmi around a heavily landscaped common recreation area. Meandering walkways will connect the units to the common recreatio area and
the parking areas. The buildings will be designed to provide
central courtyards so that the majority of the units will have windows on two sides. The buildings will be designed with offsets and insets to create shadow areas to give the buildings
depth and interest.
Staff believes the portion of the site that the proposed
apartment project will be constructed on is adequate in size and
shape to accommodate the proposed use. As detailed in the previous paragraphs, all of the required parking along with the amenities will be provided on site.
The proposed project will be compatible with future surrounding
development. A sixty foot wide public street and a heavy
single family homes. Existing steep slopes will separate this
project from future low density development to the west.
In conclusion, staff believes that the single family portion of
the proposed project conforms with the development standards anc design criteria of the Planned Development Ordinance. The site of the proposed apartment project is adequate in size and shape
to accommodate this project and the proposed project will be compatible with future development in the area, therefore, stafi
recommends approval of CT 84-23/PUD-7l/SDP-84-8.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Land Use Planning Manager has determined that this project
will not have a significant impact on the environment and, therefore, has issued a Negative Declaration on July 30, 1984.
landscape screen will separate this project from the proposed
Attachments
1. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 2347 and 2350. 2. Location Map
3. Background Data Sheet 4. Disclosure Form
5. Environmental Documents 6. Reduced Exhibits 7. Exhibits "A" - "P" dated, August 30, 1984
MH : ad
8/29/84
-3-
e e
:t
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
@ 0 L
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2350
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SITE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN NO. 84-8, FOR A 104 UNIT
APARTMENT PROJECT ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE FUTURE CORINTIA STREET APPROXIMATELY 500 FEET WEST OF MELROSE AVENUE.
APPLICANT: THE MEADOWS CASE NO: SDP 84-8
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed 1
City of Carlsbad and referred to the Planning Commission;
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a
as provided by Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code: ar
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municj
the Planning Commission did, on the 12th day of September,
consider said request on property described as:
Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No. 10179 filed June 27,
1980;
WHEREAS, at said hearing, upon hearing and consic
testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring 1
heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to
Development Plan No. 84-8. I
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Plai
Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
(A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
(B) That based on the evidence presented at the public he the Commission APPROVES SDP 84-8, based on the follov findings and subject to the following conditions:
F ind ing s :
1) The project is consistent with the City's General P1;
the site has been designated for residential developr the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0 0
2) The site is physically suitable for the type and dens
the development since the site is adequate in size ant
to accommodate residential development at the density
posed.
3) The project is consistent with all City public facili. icies and ordinances since:
a) The Planning Commission has, by inclusion of an
appropriate condition to this project, insured thi
final map will not be approved unless the City Co\ finds that sewer service is available %o serve tht
project. In addition, the Planning Commission ha: condition that a note shall be placed on the fina:
unless the City Engineer determines that sewer sei
available, and building cannot occur within the p' unless sewer service remains available, and the P Commission is satisfied that the requirements of public facilities element of the general plan havc met insofar as they apply to sewer service for thj
project.
that building permits may not be issued for the pi
b) The San Marcos School District has written a
letter, dated May 25, 1984, stating that school
facilities will be available to this project.
c) All necessary public improvements have been provic
d) The applicant has agreed and is required by the ir
of an appropriate condition to pay a public facil:
will enable this body to find that public faciliti
be available concurrent with need as required by t general plan.
5) The proposed project is compatible with the surroundir
will be required as conditions of approval.
fee. Performance of that contract and payment of
I
land uses since surrounding properties are designated residential development on the general plan.
impacts and a Negative Declaration has been issued by
Use Planning Manager on July 30, 1984 and approved by Planning Commission on September 12, 1984.
6) This project will not cause any significant environmer
Conditions:
1) Approval is granted for SDP 84-8, as shown on Exhibits
ncn and WE" - WHII , dated August 30, 1984, incorporated reference and on file in the Land Use Planning Office.
Development shall occur substantially as shown unless otherwise noted in these conditions.
PC RES0 NO. 2350 -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
0 0
2) Approval of this project is granted subject to approv<
3) This project shall comply with all applicable conditic
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2347 (CT 84-23/PUD.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, h(
the 12th day of September, 1984, by the following vote, to
AYES : Chairman Rombotis, Commissioners Farrow,
NOES : None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Marcus.'
ABSTAIN : None.
CT 84-23/PUD-71.
Schlehuber, McFadden and Smith. .
ATTEST: ?. ,\&?!($!& ,%L€Q- MICHAEL J. HQaZMILLE&&
LAND USE PLANNING MANAGER
I
PC RES0 NO. 2350 -3- I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1o
11
12
2 m 13
-a ows m 14 gI.22
ZOWQ
mc'E* u 'do gL ,zB6 16 UazS zo y
f
ria Yg
g+.>o +45 15
'5 2 17 *o c 0 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
-
EXHlt e e
SECTION 2: Notwithstanding, any provisions of tk
Carlsbad Municipal Code to the contrary, the submission
processing or approval of any application for any entitlen
development, whether-discretionary or ministerial, pursuar
Title 11, Chapter 11.06; Title 18, Chapter 18.04; Title 2(
Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is prohibited excc
follows:
1. Applications may be accepted, processed and 2
for: (A) minor subdivisions (4 units or less), (B-) redeve
permits, (C) projects by governmental agencies, (D) indust
commercial projects, (E) variances in the R-1 zone.
2, Building and other ministerial development
permits issued under Title 11 or Title 18 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code may be issued for:- (A) projects in the Vi1
Redevelopment zone, (B) minor subdivisions, (C) commercial
industrial projects; (D) projects for which a final map ha
approved by the City Council on or before January 14, 1986
projects located in the northwest quadrant of the City and
identified as infill projects on the map and incorporated
by this reference, labeled Exhibit "A", dated January 14,
and on file in the Planning Department and (F) projects fo
construction has stayted on all or part of the project and
are shown, "as developing" on the map labeled Exhibit "A".
3. 'Final maps for commercial or industrial projec
projects identified 'in Subsection 2(E) and (F) of this seci
,
a complete application in
bstantial conformance with City requirements for a
.
r, 1
2
e @
City prior to January 14, 1986, may be processed and apprc
provided, however, that no final map or building permit sl
5
6
1
8
9
1o
11
12
m a 13
$55 14
‘i Z z g 15 m5za F’d‘? 16
n
G ”
q!! E
o$K
>$ d 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
>3 c 0
25
26
27
28
is effective. The projects which qualify for
processing under this section are listed on Exhibit “B” wl
attached hereto. and made a part hereof.
SECTION 3: AS a condition of approval of any bu
permit pursuant to Section 2 of this ordinance, the applic
shall agree to pay any increase in the public facilities
additional tax on new construction established by the Citl
Council prior to July 20, 1986. In addition, the applicar
agree to comply with any conditions for public facility
improvements which the City Council finds are necessary tc
implement an approved development management system and pk
plan for the area in which the project is. located. If a
development management system and phasing plan is adopted
City Council purusant to Section 4 of this ordinance then
plan’s requirements must be satisfied as a condition of tk
I issuance of a building permit.
~ SECTION 4: Prior to the expiration of this ordir,
property owner or owners may submit and the City Council n
adopt by resolution, a development management system and F
plan for specific areas of the City. After adoption of su
system and plan, the City Council may allow final maps, bu
and other ministerial development permits to be issued for
projects in the areas covered by that system and plan; prc
however, that the City Council may by resolution impose ae
condition of the issuance of building permits for such
-4 . 2
-6-
* CAlllDI 0
a PLABBISG cOIII(ISSI0~ LLGgaDIL I --
!CEETMIVELY SW AS OF JAEUARY 14, 1986
- JABUAEY 22, 1986
GpA/LU 86-1 (Iknendnent to Master Plans)
CT 84-41/PUD-77 (Alga Hills)
ZCA-187 (City of Carlsbad-Parking Standards) CUP-280 (Carlsbad School District) CUP-275 (Pacific Bell)
AV 85-8 (Beilbey)
SDP 84-8(A) (Brehm) CUP-245 (Western Bankers)
GPA 85-13/2C-342 (City of CarlSbad-A$a Hills)
(Request for Extension)
- FEBRUARY 5, 1986
Planning Corrmission
SP-l86(A) (=onany Inns)
CT 85-23/CP-320 (Hosp Grove)
ZCA-189 (Hotel & Motel Stardards)
Design Review Board
Re 85-7 (Pucci)
RP 85-18 (Carlsbad Inn Tennis Club)
- FEBRUARY 26, 1986
Planning comnission
CT 85-29/PuD-94/SDP 82-3(A)/
SDP 85-7 (Levante Properties)
CT 85-36 (Oceanview Estates)
Design Review Board
RP 85-1 9 ( California Builders )
APRIL 9, 1986
SDP 85-11 (Alicante View Apartinents)
CT 85-16/P-85 (Lancaster Townhomes)
CUP-278 (Poinsettia Village)
* MEGTIPJS CLOsm
.I