HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-04-06; City Council; 12145; Age Requirement For Senior Citizen HousingCITY-JF CARLSBAD - AGENC- BILL 1-f
AB ,# l2;/Y E, TITLE: CHANGE IN AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR
MTG. 416193 - HOUSING
PLN ZCA 92-10 - Cl-l-Y OF CARISBAD DEPT. CITY MGR. h
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
If Council concurs both the Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City
Council ADOPT Resolution No. Gi 3 -. 8 &- , APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by
the Planning Director; and INTRODUCE Ordinance No. /L’s-2.3 4 . APPROVING ZCA 92-10.
; ITFM EXPLANATION
z I z On January 20,1993 the Planning Commission approved (6-O) a Zone Code Amendment (ZCA
92-10) to the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Title 20) to amend Section 21.18.045 changing the .
2 age requirements for senior citizen housing in the Residential Professional (R-P) zone.
. 62
Currently the R-P zone allows senior citizen housing with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
subject to certain conditions which regulate the use. The proposed changes allow the
definition of senior citizen housing to be extended from 62 years of age to apply to occupancy
by one person 55 years of age or older under certain conditions.
These conditions require that projects provide facilities and services which are specifically
designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons. The ordinance further gives
examples of these facilities and services such as “recreation programs”, “counseling”, “health
care programs”, “congregate dining facilities”, etc. (Chapter 21.18, Section
21.18.045(h)(3)(D)). Otherwise the applicant must demonstrate that the project is necessary
to provide “important housing opportunities for older persons” (Chapter 21.18, Section
21.18.045(h)(3)(B)).
A minimum of 80% of the units must be occupied or reserved for at least one person 55 years
of age or older per unit.
Under the advice of the City Attorney, the changes are intended to comply with State and
Federal laws prohibiting age discrimin ation in housing. The amendment will have no effect
on the intent of the zone.
The proposed amendment modifies the applicability of the ordinance only, therefore the R-P
section of the Zoning Ordinance remains consistent with the General Plan.
No physical alteration of the environment is associated with this Zone Code Amendment, and it has been determined that no environmental impacts will result. The development of senior
citizen housing will still be subject to a Conditional Use Permit which is a discretionary permit
and subject to further CEQA review. When individual facilities are planned and developed, any
environmental impacts will be identified and mitigated through the Conditional Use Permit
process. The Zone Code Amendment was analyzed through an Environmental Assessment and
would not create any significant adverse environmental impacts, and a Negative Declaration
was issued on December 17, 1992.
-
PAGE2OFAGENDABILLNO. 12, Icp5
No new costs are anticipated.
1. City Council Resolution No. 9 3 -8%
2. City Council Ordinance No. NS- $3 Y
3. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3493 8~ 3492
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated January 20, 1993
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated January 20, 1993
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
EXHIBIT 1
RESOLUTIOI MO. 93-82
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 21.18 BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 21.18.045 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING. CASE NAME: CHANGE IN AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING CASE NO. . ZCA 92-10
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal
Code, the Planning Commission did, on January 20, 1993, hold a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said
request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and
considering all testimony and arguments, examining the initial
study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission
considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration: and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the findings and conditions of the Planning
Commission Resolution No. 3492, on file with the City Clerk, and
incorporated herein by reference constitute the findings of the
City Council in this matter and that the Negative Declaration is
hereby approved.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
1 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a,regular meeting of the
city Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the 2
(
3
4'
1
5
6
7
6th day of APRIL I 1993, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES: Council Members Stanton, Kulchin, Nygaard, Finnila
NOES: None
ABSENT: Council Member Lewis
8
9
10
11 ATTEST:
LEWIS, Mayor anton, Mayor Pro Tern
13 ALETHA L. RAtiTENKRANZ, City Clerk]
14 (SEW
/I 15 II
16
17
18
19
2.
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-29
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
EXHIBIT 2
ORDINANCE NO: NS-234
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTER 21.18 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 21.18.045 TO CHANGE THE AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING. CASE NAME: CHANGE IN AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING CASE NO: ZCA 92-10
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California
lees ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: That Title 21, Chapter 21.18, Section
21.18.045, subsection 21.18.045(d)(l) of the Carlsbad Municipal
zode is hereby amended to read as follows:
"(1) The project must be I-housing for senior citizens' 1s defined in this section;".
SECTION 2: That Title 21, Chapter 21.18, section
21.18.045 is amended to add subsection 21.18.045(h) to read as
follows:
" (fr) As used in this section, lWhousing for senior zitizensVV means housing: (1) Provided under any state or federal program that the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development determines is specifically designed and operated to assist elderly persons as defined in the state or federal program; or (2) Intended for, and solely occupied by, persons 52 years of age or older: or (3) Intended and operated for occupancy by at
Least one person 55 years of age or older per unit if the Eollowing factors are shown: (A) The existence of significant facilities fnd services specifically designed to meet the physical or social leeds of older persons, or if the provision of such facilities and services is not practicable, it must be shown that such housing is necessary to provide important housing opportunities for older persons; and (B) That at least80 percent of the units are occupied by or reserved for occupancy by at least one person 55 rears of age or older per unit; and (C) The publication of, and adherence to, policies and procedures which demonstrate an intent by the owner 3r manager to provide housing for persons 55 years of age or >lder.
-l-
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) Significant facilities and services specifically designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons include, but are not limited to, social and recreational programs, continuing education, information and counseling, recreational, homemaker, outside maintenance and referral services, and accessible physical environment, emergency and preventative health care programs, congregate dining facilities, transportation to facilitate access to social services, and services designed to encourage and assist residents to use the services and facilities available to them. The housing facility need not have all of these features to meet these requirements of this subsection.*@
SECTION 3: That Title 21, Chapter 21.18, section
21.18.045 is amended to add subsection 21.18.045(i) to read as
follows:
"(i) This section is intended to comply with state and federal laws prohibiting age discrimination in housing."
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
-2-
1 EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective
2 thirty days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify
3 to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at
4 least once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days after its
5 adoption.
6 INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the
7 Carlsbad City Council on the 6th day of APRIL I
8 1993, and thereafter.
9 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
10 Council of the City of Carlsbad on the day of
11 I 1993, by the following vote, to wit:
12 AYES:
13 NOES:
14 ABSENT:
15 ABSTAIN:
16 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
17
18
19
20
21
22
RONALD R. BALL City Attorney
ATTEST:
23
24 ALETI-IA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
25
26
27
28
-3-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
a
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3492
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE
CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND TITLE 21 CHAPTER 21.18
BY THE AMENDMENT OF SECTION 21.18.045 OF THE
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO CHANGE THE AGE
REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING.
CASE NAME: CHANGE IN AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
CASE NO: ZCA 92-10
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 20th day of January, 1993,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering aII testimony
and arguments, examinin g the initial study, a&zing the information submitted by staff,
and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered ail
factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative De&ration according
to Exhibit “ND”, dated December 17, 1992, and “PtI”, dated December 15, 1992,
attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
FiIlW:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may
have a significant impact on the environment.
. . .
. . .
. . .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
5
1c
13
16
l?
14
1:
1t
1:
1l
II
2(
2:
2r
2:
24
21
2(
2’
21
P
1
1
!
5
L
5
5
7
3
3
3
1
2
3
3
5
5
7
3
,-
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 20th day of January, 1993, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm,
Erwin, Welshons & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Savary.
ABSTAIN: None.
/
BAILEY NOBa Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
All-EST:
MICHAEL J. kKtLZk%LER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RESO NO. 3492 -2-
.
-Tc‘ P”p”c
=-IS-cr z
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Citywide
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Addition of provisions to the City’s R.P Zone to comply with the
Federal Fair Housing Act.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for tmplementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said
review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant
impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this
action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the
public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within
30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Robert Green in the
Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4442.
DATED: DECEMBER 17, 1992
CASE NO: ZCA 92-10 Planning Director
CASE NAME: SENIOR HOUSING
PUBLISH DATE: DECEMBER 17, 1992
RG:km
.- -. _-- __^_ h
”
NOTICE OP COMPLETION -
Mail to: State Clearinghouse, 1400 Tentn street, Rm. 121, Secrewnto. CA 95814 - 916,.4 613
See YOTE Belar:
I
sat
Project Title: ZCA 92-10 - SmiOr HoUSirW
Lead Agency: City of CarMad Contact Person: Robert Green
Street Address: 2075 Las Palnms Orive Phone: (619)438-1161, ext. 4U.2
City: Carlsbad Zip: 92000 county: San Dies0
__________.______.__----.------.------.------.------.-------------------------------.------.------.----------------.--.--------
PROJECT LOCATION:
county: San Dies0 City/Nearest Ccemmity: Carlsbed - Citvwide
Cross Streets: N/A Total Acres: N/A
Assessor's Parcel No. N/A Section: TV. Range: Base:
Uithin 2 Miles: State Huy It: N/A Uaterways: N/A
Airports: N/A Railuays: N/A Schools: N/A
_--__-___._--__-__.-------------------.---------------.--.-------------------.-----------.----.--.-----------.------..----------.
WQIlEYT TYPE
CEQA: - NOQ - Suppletnent/Subsequent YEPA: NOI OTHER: - Joint Docusant
Early Cons - x Neg Dee
EIR (Prior SCH No.) = EA - Fine1 Docunent
- Other - Draft EIS - Other
-Draft EIR - FDNSI _____________.__-__---.----.------.-------------.------------------.-.------------------------------..--..--.---..--------------
LOCAL AcTioW TYPE
- General Plan Update - Specific Plan - Rercne Amexation
- General Plan Amadnent Master Plan Pretane
- General Plan Elment - Planned Unit Develmt - Use Permit
1 Redevelap*nt
Coastal Permit
- Coamnity Plan - Site Plan = Land Divisicn (S&division, TOther 3oneCockb~wzdnmt
Parcel Map, Tract Hap, etc.) - -_____-__.__-__--__.____________________-----------.-..----------------------.----..------.-------------..-------...--------..--
DEvELmRm TYPE
Residential: Units Acres
z Office:
- Uater facilities: typa nGD
Sq. Ft. Acres Employees Transportation: Typa - Comaercial: sq. Ft. Acres .- EWOY- - - Mining: Mineral
- Industrial: Sq. Ft. Acres Employees -Power: Typt Uatts
- Educational - Waste Treatmant: Type
- Recreational - Hazardous Yaste: Type
x Other: Zone Coda Amen&ant
- Aesthetic/VisueL - Flood Plain/Floading - Schools/Universities - Uater quality
- Agricultural Land - Forest Land/Fire Hazard -Septic System Uater StqpLy/
- Air QuaLity d Geologic/Seismic - Sewer Capacity - Ground Uater
Archaec~cgical/Historical Minerals
z Coastal Zona - Noise
- Soil Erosion/Conprcticn/Crading - UetlaWRiparian
- Solid Uaste - Uildlife
- Drainage/Absorption = Populetion/Housing Balance - Toxic/Hazardous Growth In&cing
- Econmic/Jcbs - P&lic Services/Facilities -Traffic/Circulation XLanbse
- Fiscal - Recreation/Parks - Vegetation - Cwlative Effect
- Other -_.__._.___----_..___________I__________.------.---------------------------------..-..---------------------.--------------.---
Present lLrndltse/Z#mino/~lPlmlhe N/A
-_
__--__--__-______-______________________---------------------*------.---------------------------------------------.--.----------
Project Description Addition of provisims to the City's RP Zone to comply with the Fader81 Fair Housing Act
MITE: CLearinghouse will assign ideotification rnmbrs for all new projects. If a SCil nmber alrea&y exists for a project (e.g.
frcm a Notice of Preparation or previous draft docunant) please fill it in. Revised October 1989
RG:km
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACX ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. ZCA 92-10
DATE: DECEMBER 15, 1992
BACKGROUND
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
CASE NAME: Senior Housing ZCA
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: Citv of Carlsbad, City Attomev
1200 Carlsbad Villane Drive
(6191438-2891
DATE ELA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: December 15.1992
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Addition of txovisions to the CiWs RP Zone to comnlv with the
Federal Fair Housing Act.
\
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that ‘the City conduct an
Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment.
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist
8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and
provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental
Impact Report or Negative Declaration.
* A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the entionment. On the checklist, “NO” will be checked
to indicate this determination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the
project may cause a -can? effect on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative
Declaration however, if adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed insiznificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings “YES-sig” and ‘YES-insig”
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
DISCUSSION OF ElWIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
PHYSICAL ENvrRoNMF!NT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRJXTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
big) (insig)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Result .in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards?
Appreciably change the topography pr any
unique physical features?
Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site?
Result in changes in the deposition of beach
sands, or modification of the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?
Result in substantial adverse effects on
ambient air quality?
Result in substantial changes in air
movement, odor, moisture, or temperature?
Substantially change the course or flow of
water (marine, fresh or flood waters)?
Affect the quantity or quality of surface
water, ground water or public water supply?
Substantially increase usage or cause
depletion of any natural resources?
Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
Alter a significant arc&ological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
NO
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
-2-
BIOLOGICAL ~ONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECI-LY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
big)
Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
plants)?
Introduce new species of plants into an area,
or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
YES NO
(insig)
Reduce the amount of acreage of any
agricultural crop or affect prime, unique
or other farmland of state or local
importance?
Affect the diversity of species, habitat
or numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals, all water dwelling organisms
and insects?
Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to.the
migration or movement of animals?
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES
big)
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area?
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fire, emergency or other
public services?
YES
(insig)
x
x
x
x
NO
x
x
-3-
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECI’LY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Result in the need for-new or modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems?
big1 (insig)
Increase existing noise levels?
Produce new light or glare?
Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
Affect existing housing, or create a demand
for additional housing?
Generate substantial additional trafl?c?
Affect existing parking facilities, or
create a large demand for new parking?
Impact existing transportation systems or
alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods?
Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic?
Increase traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
Interfere with emergency response plans or
emergency evacuation plans?
Obstruct any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically offensive public view?
Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?
NO
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
X
x
x
x
x
x
x
-4-
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO big1 (big)
33. Does the project have the potential
to substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or aninal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory.
34. Does the project have the potential
to achieve short-term, to the dis-
advantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of. time while long-term impacts will
endure well into the future.)
35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in- dividually limited but cumulatively
considerable? (“Cumulatively con-
siderable” means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of prob&e future projects.)
36. Does the project harm environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
x
x
x
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
This project is a Zone Code Amendment to Title 21, Chapter 21.18 Residential Profession (RP) of the Cadsbad
Municipal Code. The (RP) Zone shows senior citizen housing with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) subject to certain conditions which regulate the use. The amendment provides a revised definition of senior housing in the RP Zone to comply with the Federal Fair Housing Act.
The changes are intended to comply with state and federal laws prohibiting age discrimination in housing. The amendment will have no effect on the intent of the zone. No physical alteration of the environment is associated with this project, therefore no significant physical, biological, or human environmental impacts will result. The development of senior citizen housing in the RP zone will require a CUP which is discretionary
and subject to further CEQA review. When individual facilities are planned and developed, environmental
impacts will be identified and mitigated through the environmental review associated with the CUP process.
-6-
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATNES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS:
a) Phased development of the project,
b) alternate site designs,
c) alternate scale of development,
d) alternate uses for the site, e) development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed project, and
g) no project alternative.
Issues of phasing, alternate site design and uses, scale of development, alternate sites, and development
at a future time are not applicable to this project because no physical development is proposed.
The no project alternative would result in lack of compliance of the municipal code with Federal Law.
-7-
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the
environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction with
previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required.
Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
+ Signa?- ’
.
Date Planning Directs
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE1
-8-
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. 3493
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT, AMENDING
TITLE 21, CHAPTER 21.18 BY THE AMENDMENT OF
SECTION 21.18.045, OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE,
TO CHANGE THE AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR
CITIZENS HOUSING. CASE NAME: CHANGE IN AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
CASE NO: ZCA 92-10
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 20th day of January, 1993,
hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered ah
factors relating to the Zone Code Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
as follows:
A)
B)
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
recommends APPROVAL, of ZCA 92-10, according to Exhibit ‘X’, dated January 20,
1993, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Fink:
1.
2.
. . . .
TheZoneCdeAmendment iscoIlsisteIltwiththeiIltentoftheGeneralPlanby . ~1legalpnwisionsforSeniorCitizenHousingandtherebyprovidinga
valuable social service to the elderly population of the City.
TbeZcmeCodeAnwdmmt does not alter the intent of the RP Zcme and is
consistentwiththeRPZonewhichallowsseniorcitizenhousingwithaeonditional
usepelmitm
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
16
19
2c
21
22
22
24
26
26
27
26
3. Tbe2bneCodeAmfmbmt will not cause any siticallt environmental impacts
and a Negative Declaration has been issued by the Planning Director on December
17,19!92, and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on January
6, 1993.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 20th day of January, 1993, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Noble, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Schramm, Welshons, Ekwin & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: Commissioner Savaxy.
ABSTAIN: None.
,I
BAILEY NOBk, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
Al-l-EST:
MICHAEL J. HOtiMItiR
Planning Director
-2-
EXHIBIT 4
STAFF PL&JNER: ROBERT GREEN
STAFF REPORT
DATE: JANUARY 20,1993 0 4
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: ZCA 92-10 CHANGE IN AGE REO- FOR SENIOR CllZ5EN
HOUSING - Residential Professional Zone Senior Housing provisions, Zone Code Amendment to allow Senior Citizen Housing to be occupied by
residents aged 55 years and older under certain conditions.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 3492 RECO MMENDING APPROVAL of a Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and ADOPT Resolution No.
3493, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of ZCA 92-10, based on the findings contained
therein.
lx. PRWE(X DESCIWTI ON AND BACKGROUND
This project is a Zone Code Amendment to Title, 21, Chapter 21.18, Residential
Professional Zone (RP) .of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The (RP) Zone allows senior
citizen housing with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) subject to certain conditions which
regulate the use. The amendment provides a change in age requirements for senior citizen
housing to comply with the Federal Fair Housing Act.
These changes allow the definition of senior citizen housing to be extended from 62 years
of age to apply to occupancy by one person 55 years of age or older under certain
conditions.
The conditions require that projects provide facilities and services which are specifically
designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons. The ordinance further
provides examples of these facilities and services such as “recreation programs”, “counseli@, “....healtb care programs”, ” congregate dining facilities”, etc. (Chapter 21.18,
Section 21.18.045,h,3,D). Otherwise the applicant must demonstrate that the project is
necessary to provide “important housing opportunities for older persons” (Chapter 21.18,
Section 21.18.045, h,3,B.
A minimum of 80% of the units must be occupied or reserved for at least one person 55
years of age or older per unit.
ZCA 92-10
CHANGE IN AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
JANUARY 20,1993
Under the advice of the City Attorney, the changes are intended to comply with State and
Federal laws prohibiting age discrimina tion in housing. The amendment will have no effect
on the intent of the zone.
General Plan
The proposed amendment modifies the applicability of the Ordinance only. There is no
change in purpose and intent of the zone, therefore the RP section of the Zoning Ordinance
remains consistent with the General Plan.
Environmental Review
No physical alteration of the environment is associated with this Zone Code Amendment,
therefore, no significant physical, biological or human environmental impacts will result.
The development of senior citizen housing will still be subject to a CUP which is a
discretionary permit and subject to further CEQA review. When individual facilities are
planned and developed, any environmental impacts will be identified and mitigated through
the CUP process. The Zone Code Amendment was analyzed through an Environmental
Assessment and would not create any significant adverse environmental impacts, and a
Negative Declaration was issued on December 17, 1992.
SUMMARY
The Zone Code Amendment is: (1) consistent with the General Plan; (2) meets the intent
of the RP Zone and (3) will not have any significant adverse environmental impacts based
on the requirements for environmental review under the California Environmental Quality
Act. Therefore, the Planning Department recommends approval.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3492
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3493
RG:km:lh
EXHIBIT 5
PLANNING COMMISSION January 20,1993 PAGE 5
ary 18, 1993, from Angela Dawson to Bill Dyson, which details SDG&E’s objections to both
ns. A copy of that memorandum is on file in the Planning Department with the minutes of this
staff on several occasions. He thought that those meetings had resulted in a decision
study, i.e. SDG&E would do beach profiling and had been provided with City maps
that indicated w
Condition #8 was
capability to place ch is an area of approximately one mile in radius. However, the Condition #8
being proposed does t this understanding. Therefore, SDG&E would like additional time to study
the two conditions, meet City Attorney, and come to some mutual agreement on the wording.
Commissioner Hall inquired wh G&E had received the proposed conditions. Mr. Chomyn replied that
SDG&E had met with the Beach ttee and expressed their concern on January 9, 1993. At
nderstanding that the wording of Condition #8 would
on at the December 1992 meeting. However, the final
There being no other persons desiring to add e Commission on this topic, Chairman Noble declared
the public testimony closed and opened the item f ussion among the Commission members.
Commissioner Erwin requested staff to include in the n ackets some information on sand migration so
he can better understand the impacts of the SDG&E ope n the normal sand patterns.
Commissioner Schlehuber inquired what staff would like to d ayne, Assistant Planning Director,
replied that staff could accept a continuance to the first meeting in
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Schlehuber, an seconded, to continue
SUP 92-04 to February 3,1993.
VOTE: 6-O
AYES: Chairman Noble, Commissioners Erwin, Hall, Schlehuber,
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
m, and Welshons
4) ZCA 92-l 0 - CHANGE IN AGE REQUIREMENTS FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING - Residential
Professional Zone Senior Housing provisions, Zone Code Amendment to allow Senior Citizen
Housing to be occupied by residents aged 55 years and older under certain conditions.
Robert Green, Principal Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that this item is an
amendment to the Residential Professional (RP) portion of the municipal code. The RP Zone currently
allows senior citizen housing with a CUP, subject to some specified conditions which regulate the use.
This amendment allows the definition of senior citizen housing to be extended from its current limit of
age 62, to age 55, under certain conditions. The changes are intended to comply with federal laws
prohibiting age discrimination in housing. This proposal is consistent with the General Plan, meets the
intent of the RP Zone, and will not have any significant effect on the environment. Staff recommends
approval.
Commissioner Erwin requested staff to clarify the change to Section 2 of Exhibit “X” which appears to
contain conflicting information. Karen Hirata, Deputy City Attorney, replied that the wording follows exactly
the wording of the federal statute. She stated that the City of Escondido was recently in litigation over their
ordinance because some housing projects had to declare bankruptcy. So, to eliminate controversy, she
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION January 20,1993 PAGE 6
followed the federal statute word for word. In effect, the amendment merely creates an opening for another
type of occupancy.
Chairman Noble opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Noble declared the
public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Welshons, and duly seconded, to adopt Resolution
No. 3492 recommending approval of a Negative Declaration: ssued by the Planning
Director, and adopt Resolution No. 3493, recommending approval of ZCA 92-l 0, based
on the findings contained therein.
VOTE: 6-O
AYES: Chairman Noble, Commissioners Erwin, Hall, Schlehuber, Schramm, and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ADJOURNMENT:
By proper motion, the Regular meeting of January 20, 1993 was adjourned at 650 p.m.
BETTY BUCKNER
Minutes Clerk
MINUTES ARE ALSO TAPED AND KEPT ON FILE UNTIL THE WRITTEN MINUTES ARE APPROVED.
MINUTES