HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-04-19; City Council; 12662; Senior Citizen Housing?TY OF CARLSBAD - AG-iDA BILL //4 a
*o
HT
IEPT. pm 1
?ECOMMENDED ACTION:
If the Council concurs, both the Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. qY-/o3 APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director; and INTRODUCE Ordinance No. fi.$-&'??- , APPROVING ZCA 93-05.
ITEM EXPLANATIOM
On February 16, 1994 the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and recommended approval (5-1, Hall) of a Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 93-05) to the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Title 21, Zoning) to: (1) amend the City's existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations to conform to State Density Bonus Law (as implemented by the City's Density Bonus Ordinance), and to establish new design and development standards which respond to senior citizen needs.
The primary recommended revisions to the City's existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations include the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
In
Delete the existing Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requirement for Senior Citizen Housing projects and replace this with a Site Development Plan (SDP) requirement.
Delete the existing maximum 75 du/acre density provision for Senior Citizen Housing and replace this with a density standard which allows the City to grant a minimum density increase of at least 25% over the Growth Control Point of the applicable General Plan designation.
Incorporate a 15% lower-income inclusionaryhousingprovision for Senior Citizen Housing projects.
Establish locational guidelines and design and development standards which respond to the special housing needs of senior citizens.
summary, the revisions proposed serve to bring the City's . . Senior Citizen Housing regulations into conformance with the City's Density Bonus Ordinance, Inclusionary Housing Ordinance and Growth Management Program while, establishing new development standards which address the daily needs of senior citizens.
No major ordinance issues were identified. However, the Planning Commission did recommend approval of one minor amendment to the ordinance as follows:
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. /a./,@
1. One of the Senior Citizen Housing project locational guidelines (Subsection 21.18.045(c)(l)(A)) has been revised to specify that, "The proposed project should be located in proximity to a wide range of commercial retail, professional, social and community services patronized by senior citizens or have it's own private shuttle bus which would provide daily access to these servicesV1. This revision was recommended for purposes of enabling senior projects which are not located in close proximity to community services to be found to be in conformance with the intent of this locational guideline, provided that a project shuttle service is available to the residents. This revision has been incorporated into the Ordinance.
Please see the attached staff report to the Planning Commission for additional details regarding this zone code amendment to the City's Senior Citizen Housing regulations.
ENVIRONMEN!l'AL REVIEW
On February 16, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director on October 7, 1993.
FISCAL IMPACT
The implementation of senior citizen housing projects processed pursuant to these amended Senior Citizen Housing regulations will result in a commitment of City staff resources. Specifically, there will be administrative (staff) costs to the City for providing a number of recurring services, including, but not limited to: (1) administering density bonus senior housing agreements, (2) establishing rental rates and sales prices for affordable senior dwelling units, (3) qualifying eligible households and (4) monitoring the ages of tenants. Staff is recommending that a portion of the various inclusionary housing fees which are deposited in the City's Housing Trust Fund be allocated for these administrative services.
EXHIBITS
1. City Council Resolution No. City p_y- 103 - & ._ 2. Council Ordinance No. #S- d3Y 3. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3563 and 3564 4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated February 16, 1994 5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated February 16, 1994
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
RESOLUTION NO. 94-103
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT AMENDING VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF TITLE 21, OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO (1) AMEND THE CITY'S EXISTING SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING REGULATIONS TO CONFORM TO THE PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915
AND, (2) ESTABLISH NEW DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WHICH RESPOND TO SENIOR CITIZEN NEEDS. CASE NAME: SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING . CASE NO. ZCA 93-05
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal
Code, the Planning Commission did, on February 16, 1994, 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. 3563, 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
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
-
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the
19th day of APRIL, 1994, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Stanton, Kulchin, Nygaard, Finnila
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk\
(SEAL)
-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
ORDINANCE NO. NS-274
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO REPLACE THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUIREMENT FOR SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING WITH A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN . REQUIREMENT AND TO REVISE OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR . SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING. CASE NAME: SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING CASE NO: ZCA 93-05
WHEREAS, the California Government Code Section 65915
permits a developer of a residential project of five (5) or more
units on a specific site to request that the project be granted a
density bonus and other incentive or concession, or equivalent
incentives and concessions for the purpose of providing affordable
housing for very low-income or low-income households or for
qualifying (senior) residents; and
WHEREAS, the existing City of Carlsbad zone code
contains standards for the development of senior citizen housing
projects through Conditional Use Permit; and
WHEREAS, the existing City of Carlsbad zone code
provisions for senior citizen housing are not in conformance with
California Government Code Section 65915; and
WHEREAS, the existing City of Carlsbad zone code
provisions for Senior Citizen Housing are not in conformance with
Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (City's Inclusionary
Housing Ordinance) and City Council Policy No. 43; and
WHEREAS, it is a program of the Housing Element of the
City's General Plan to amend the City's current Senior Citizen
housing regulations to conform to the provisions of Government
Code Section 65915 and to establish standards for location,
parking, safety, recreational facilities, medical care and other
1
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
aspects of senior oriented housing,
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does
ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: That Title 21, Chapter 21.18, section
21.18.045, of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is repealed and
reenacted to read as follows:
21.18.045. Senior Citizen Housins bv Site Development Plan. (a) This section is intended to provide a mechanism and standards for the development of rental or for-sale housing available to senior citizens.
(b) The city may approve a Site.Development Plan for privately developed senior citizen housing on property in the R-P zone where the general plan applicable to such property permits residential uses. The provisions of this section shall apply to such permits.
(cl Senior Citizen Housing projects shall meet the following requirements:
(1) Senior housing projects should, whenever reasonably possible, be located consistent with the following locational guidelines: (A) The proposed project should be located in close proximity to a wide range of commercial retail, professional, social and community services patronized by senior citizens; or have its own private shuttle bus which will provide daily access tho these services; and
(B) The proposed project should be located within two to three blocks of a bus or transit stop unless a common transportation service for residents is provided and maintained; and (C) The proposed project should be located in a topographically level area; and (D) Development of a senior citizen housing project at the proposed location should not be detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare. (2) As used in this section, "housing for senior citizens" means housing:
(A) 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
(B) Intended for, and solely occupied by, persons sixty-two years of age or older; or (C) Intended and operated for occupancy by at least one person fifty-five years of age or older per unit if the following factors are shown:
0) The existence of significant facilities and services specifically designed to meet the physical or social needs of older persons, or if the provision of such facilities and services is not practicable, it must be shown that
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
such housing is necessary to provide important housing opportunities for older persons, and (ii) That at least eighty percent of the units are occupied by or reserved for occupancy by at least one person fifty-five years of age or older per unit, and (iii) The publication of, and adherence
to, policies and procedures which demonstrate an intent by the owner or manager to provide,housing for persons fifty-five years of age or older. 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.
(D) Upon the death or dissolution of marriage, or upon hospitalization or other prolonged absence of the qualifying resident, any qualified permanent resident, as defined by Section 51.3 of the California Civil Code, shall be entitled to continue his or her occupancy, residency or use of the restricted dwelling unit as a permitted resident. (3) A senior citizen housing project shall observe the following development standards: (A) All senior citizen housing projects are required to comply with all applicable development standards of the underlying zone, except those which may be modified as an additional incentive granted pursuant to Chapter 21.86 of this Title; (4) Parking for a senior citizen housing project shall be provided pursuant to Section 21.44.020(a)(9) and is subject to the following conditions: (A) Whenever possible, parking spaces should be laid out at either a thirty (30), forty-five (45) or sixty (60) degree angle;
(B) Required parking spaces shall be available to the tenants of the project at no fee;
(5) The senior citizen housing project shall observe the following design criteria: (A) To the maximum extent feasible, architectural harmony, through the use of appropriate building height, materials, bulk and scale, within the development and within the existing neighborhood and community shall be obtained; (B) The building(s) shall be finished on all sides with similar roof and wall materials, colors, and architectural accent features; (C) Laundry facilities must be provided in a separate room at the ratio of one washer and one dryer for every 25 dwelling units or fractional number thereof. At least one washer and one dryer shall be provided in every senior citizen housing project. Washers and dryers may be coin operated;
3 ',
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) Common areas shall be provided in the senior citizen housing project. The common areas that are provided shall be designed to make these areas useful and functional for residents. Examples of common areas include but are not limited to the following: a recreation social room, a common cooking and dining facility, passive open space, and reading/TV rooms. The total amount of common area required in each senior housing project shall be no less than twenty (20). square feet per dwelling unit. Common space excludes all stairwells and any balconies of less than forty (40) square feet. The size of the recreation/community-social room may be appropriately reduced if it is located adjacent to usable outdoor space. Adjacent toilet facilities for men and women shall be provided. Unless the building is serviced by an elevator, the recreation/community-social room shall be located on the ground floor;
(El A manager-Is unit is recommended to be included in every senior citizen housing project. If provided, the manager's unit shall be a complete dwelling unit and so designated on all plans. All senior citizen housing projects which do not have an on-site manager shall provide a posted phone number of the project owner or off-site manager for emergencies or maintenance problems; (F) All buildings exceeding two stories shall include elevators;
(6) Dwelling units in senior citizen housing projects shall observe the following requirements: (A) Tubs shall be equipped with at least one grab bar;
(B) Tubs and/or showers shall be equipped with temperature regulating devices;
(Cl Tub or shower bottom surfaces shall be slip resistant;
(D) Peepholes in entry doors; and (E) All projects are required to comply with Title 24 of the State Building Code (Disabled Access Regulations). (F-) All senior citizen units must conform to the requirements of the applicable building and housing codes. (7) Upon written request by an applicant, and in return for his agreement to develop and operate the senior citizen housing project in accordance with this section and Chapter 21.86 (Residential Density Bonus), the final decision making authority shall allow an increase in the number of dwelling units permitted per acre (density) subject to the following conditions: (A) Aminimum increase of twenty-five percent (25%) over the Growth Control Point of the applicable General Plan designation or the otherwise maximum allowable residential dwelling unit density as specified by the applicable master plan or specific plan, at the time of application, consistent with Section 21.86 of this Title.
(B) All senior citizen housing projects requesting a residential density bonus shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 21.86 of this Title.
(Cl Any senior citizen housing project constructed pursuant to this section and/or requesting a residential density bonus pursuant to Chapter 21.86, shall be
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
required to comply with the inclusionary requirements for residential developments in Chapter 21.85 of this Title. Not less than fifteen percent (15%) of all approved units in any Senior Citizen Housing project shall be set aside for occupancy by and shall be affordable to lower-income households. (d) Application submittal and review is as follows: '
(1) Preliminary application: A developer of a senior citizen housing project shall submit a preliminary. application prior to the submittal of a formal request for approval. The preliminary application shall include the following information: (A) A brief description of the proposal including the total number of senior units, density bonus units and affordable senior units proposed; (B) The zoning, General Plan designations and assessors parcel number(s) of the project site; (C) A site plan, drawn to scale, which includes: building footprints, driveway and parking layout, building elevations, existing contours and proposed grading; and (D) A letter identifying what specific incentives (i.e.; density bonus, standards modifications, or financial incentives) are being requested of the City.
Within 30 days of receipt of the preliminary application by the Planning Department, the Department shall provide to an applicant, a letter identifying project issues of concern to staff, and the incentives or assistance that the Planning Director can support when making a recommendation to the final decision making authority. (2) Application: The Site Development Plan (SDP) application for a senior citizen housing project shall be processed along with all otherwise required project application(s) and no additional hearings or approvals shall be required, except as provided herein with regard to the modification of existing standards or other additional incentives. If the application involves a request for direct financial incentives, then any action by the Planning Commission on the application shall be advisory only, and the City Council shall have the authority to make the final decision on the application.
(3) Submittal: (A) The completed application for a senior citizen housing project requesting a density bonus, modification of development standards or other additional incentives shall include the following information: (i) A legal description of the total site proposed for development including a statement of present ownership and present and proposed zoning; (ii) A letter signed by the present owner stating how the project will comply with Government Code Section 65915 and stating what is being requested from the City, (i.e. density bonus, modification of development standards, or other additional incentives); (iii) Site plans and other supporting plans (i.e.; a landscape plan, building elevations and floor plans) per the City's application submittal requirements; (iv) A detailed vicinity map showing the
5
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
-
project location and such details as the nearest market, transit
stop, park or recreation center, medical facilities or other related uses and services likely to be patronized by senior citizens; (v) A set of floor plans for each different type of unit indicating a typically furnished apartment, with dimensions of doorways, hallways, closets, and cabinets; . (vi) A set of first floor plan or other floor showing any common areas and accommodations and; (vii) A monitoring and maintenance plan. (B) In the case of a request for a modification of development standards or other additional incentives, The applicant shall be required to submit a project pro-forma for the proposed project to demonstrate that the standards modification and/or other requested incentive is necessary to make the project economically feasible.
(Cl At the time of plan submittal for building permits, the applicant shall submit a set of detailed drawings for kitchens and bathrooms indicating counter and cabinet heights and depth; type of pulls, faucets, grab-bars; tub and/or shower dimensions, and handicapped turn space where appropriate. (4) Review: The Planning Director shall evaluate the request and make findings and recommendations based upon the following criteria: (A) The senior citizen housing project helps achieve the City's senior and affordable housing goals as set forth in the Housing Element of the General Plan;
(B) The density bonus and/or additional incentive(s) must be necessary to make the project economically feasible: (C) The senior citizen housing project shall not result in density or design that is incompatible with other land uses in the immediate vicinity:
(D) The senior citizen housing project complies with the general plan, zoning and development policies of the City of Carlsbad.
(5) Processing: All senior citizen housing projects shall be given priority in processing. (e) Monitoring and Enforcement of Site Development Plan Conditions: (1) To assure compliance with the age requirement of this chapter, all applicants/owners of Senior Citizen Housing projects shall be required to submit, on an annual basis, an updated list of all project tenants, and their age to the City's Housing and Redevelopment Department. (f) This sectior-1 is intended to comply with state and federal laws prohibiting age discrimination in housing.
SECTION II: That Title 21, Chapter 21.16 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the amendment 1.16.016 to
read as follows:
6
- -
.
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 0 ~wm $ yr-7 uug 13 an0
OWgj du,
$2~
14
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
"21.16.016. Senior Citizen Housing bv Site Development Plan. Senior citizen housing may be permitted by site development plan issued according to the provisions of Section 21.18.045 of this title. The development standards of this zone shall apply."
SECTION III: That Title 21, Chapter 21.20 of the.
Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the amendment of section
21.20.025 to read as follows:
"21.20.025. Senior Citizen Housing bv Site Development Plan. Senior citizen housing may be permitted by site development plan issued according to the provisions of Section 21.18.045 of this title. The development standards of this zone shall apply."
SECTION IV: That Title 21, Chapter 21.22 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by amendment of section
21.22.015 to read as follows:
"21.22.015. Plan. - Senior Citizen Housing by Site Development
Senior citizen housing may be permitted by site development plan issued according to the provisions of Section 21.18.045 of this title. The development standards of this zone shall apply."
SECTION V: That Title 21, Chapter 21.24 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code is amended by the amendment of section 21.24.025 to
read as follows:
"21.24.025. Senior Citizen Housing bv Site Development Plan. Senior citizen housing may be permitted by site development plan issued acc,>rding to the provisions of Section 21.18.045 of this title. 'I.?2 development standards of this zone shall apply.'*
SECTION VI: That Title 21, Chapter 21.44 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the amendment of Subsection
21.44.020(a)(9) to read as follows:
"(9) Senior Citizen Housing Projects - Minimum one space per every two units, plus one space for an on-site managers unit (when provided) and one guest parking space, subject to
approval of a site development plan."
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective
thirty days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify
to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at
least once in a paper of general circulation in the city within.
fifteen days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the
Carlsbad City Council on the 19th day of APRIL I
1994, and thereafter
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad on the day of I
1994, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City ?le'rk
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
- EXHIBIT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3563
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE
CODE AMENDMENT AMENDING VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF
TITLE 21, OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO (1)
AMEND THE CITY’S EXISTING SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
REGULATIONS TO CONFORM TO THE PROVISIONS OF
GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915 AND, (2) ESTABLISH
NEW DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WHICH
RESPOND TO SENIOR CITIZEN NEEDS.
CASE NAME: SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
CASE NO: ZCA 93-05
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 16th day of February, 1994,
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, ex amining 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.
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 Declaration
according to Exhibit “ND”, dated October 7,1993, and “PII”, dated September
27, 1993, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following
findings:
Findinns:
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
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1e
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 16th day of February, 1994,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Savary, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Betz, Noble
&Erwin.
NOES: Commissioner Hall.
ABSENT: Commissioner Welshons.
ABSTAIN: None.
Al-l-EST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RESO NO. 3563 -2-
PLANNING CO
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Zone Code Amendment to be implemented Citywide.
PROJECT’ DESCRIPTION: A Zone Code Amendment to (1) add a definition for senior
citizen housing, (2) amend the City+ existing senior citizen
housing regulations to conform to the provisions of
Government Code Section 65915 (State Density Bonus Law)
and, (3) establish new design and development standards
which respond to senior citizen needs.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia 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 Pahnas 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 Chris DeCerbo in the
Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4445.
DATED: OCTOBER 7, 1993
CASE NO: ZCA 93-0s Planning Director
CASE NAME: SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING ZCA
PUBLISH DATE: OCTOBER 7, 1993
CDD:km
1 4
2075 Las Palmas Drive l Carlsbad, California 92009-1576 l (619) 438-l 161 @
ENWR~NMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. ZCA 93-05 1
DATE: SEPTEMBER 27. 1993 BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Senior Citizen Housing Zone Code Amendment
2. APPLICANT: Citv of Carlsbad
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 LAS PALMAS DRlVE
CARLSBAD. CA 92009
(6191 438-1161 X 4445
4. DATE ELA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: N/A
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Zone Code Amendment to (1) add a definition for senior citizen
housing. 12) amend the Citv’s existing senior citizen housing regulations to conform to the
provisions of Government Code Section 65915 (State Den&v Bonus Law) and. (31 establish
new design and development standards which respond to senior citizen needs.
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 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
tmpact 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 environment. 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 significant 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 insignificant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings “YES-s&” and ‘YES-i&g”
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
DtSCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
PHYSICAL FNVTRONMENT
-WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
(sig) (insig)
1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property to geologic hazards?
2. Appreciably change the topography or any
unique physical features?
3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site?
4. 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?
5. Result in substantial adverse effects on
ambient air quality?
6. Result in substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture, or temperature?
7. Substantially change the course or flow of water (marine, fresh or flood waters)?
8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface
water, ground water or public water supply?
9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources?
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
11. Alter a significant archeological,
paleontological or historical site, structure or object?
NO
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
x
X
x
x
-2-
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
-
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
(Sk) (insig)
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?
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?
HtJMANENvIRoNMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRJXM,Y OR [NDIRECI-LY: YES YES NO
WI (in@)
17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area? X
18. Substantially afkt public utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services? X
NO
x
x
x
x
x
-3-
. HUMANENVIRONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES NO
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?
big) (insig)
Increase existing noise levels?
Produce new light or glare?
Involve a sign&ant 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 traffic?
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?
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
4-
dblANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
33.
34.
35.
36.
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
animal 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.
(s&9 (insig)
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.)
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 cment projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
NO
x
x
X
x
-S-
-,
IkCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The Citys existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations (Section 21.18.045 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code)
allow the development of Senior Citizen Housing at a density of up to 75 du/ac within the R-3, R-P, R-T, R-
W and R-D-M zones, subject to specific conditions and requiring the approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
Consistent with Housing Program 3.4.1, this project is a zone code amendment to (1) amend the City’s
existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations to conform to the provisions of Government Code Section 65915
(State Density Bonus Law), (2) to establish new design and development standards which respond to senior
citizen needs, and (3) add a definition for Senior Citizen Housing.
This project is not a specific development, but rather an amendment to an implementing chapter of the City’s
Zoning Ordinance, which will affect future senior citizen housing developments. In that it implements,
Program 3.4.1 of the City’s Housing Element and Section 65915 of State Law, it is deemed consistent with the General Plan.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
l-4.
5 - 8.
9 - 10.
11.
As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this Zone Code Amendment, no changes in
topography resulting in unstable earth conditions, erosion of soils, or alteration of deposition
pattern will occur. No geological impacts will result from this Zone Code Amendment.
In that, no physical, site-specific development is proposed as part of this zone code amendment, no
impacts to air quality or climatological indices are expected. Each subsequent project processed
pursuant to the amended senior citizen housing regulations will be subject to individual, site-
specific review that will evaluate potential impacts to water courses and the quality and quantity
of various water sources.
No site-specific development is proposed with this ZCA. Therefore this zone code amendment will
not deplete any natural resources or other form of energy.
This zone code amendment is strictly administrative. As such, no site-specific project processed
pursuant to the amended senior citizen housing regulations is proposed. Only a site-specific environmental review for a particular project could identify the existence of a significant
archeological, paleontological, or historical structure or object on site. This is an administrative,
non-project zone code amendment, therefore, it has no impact on historical resources.
BIOLOGICAL
12 - 16. Because this zone code amendment proposes no actual development, no impacts to the diversity
of flora or fauna condition of ecosystems, or agricultural areas or farmlands are anticipated. Each site-specific senior citizen housing project will be reviewed for possible biological-related impacts on a project-by-project basis.
-6-
-
.
HUMAN EWRONMENT
*
17.
18-22.
23-24.
2530.
31.
32.
This is a zone code amendment. No actual site-specific development is proposed as part of this project. This zone code amendment does not directly affect land use patterns as it only establishes the guidelines and procedures under which a senior citizen housing project may be applied for. The
amended senior citizen housing regulations will not directly alter the present or planned land use
of a specific area. Any future development application processed pursuant to these regulations, shall be required to undergo specific environmental review. Any potential land use capability impacts shall be identified and adequately mitigated.
The amended senior citizen housing regulations are not associated with any specific development. They will not substantially affect futilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services. The proposed program will not alter or result in the need for sewer, solid waste, hazardous waste
or other systems. The proposed amendment will not increase noise levels, light or glare or deal
with hazardous substances. Future projects processed pursuant to these regulations shall be
required to address and adequately mitigate associated service and public facility impacts.
The density of any residential area within the City will not be directly affected by this proposed
Zone Code Amendment, since it is strictly administrative. Although the total number of senior
citizen units on a given site may be allowed to exceed that permitted per the General Plan,
potential impacts from density increases proposed through future senior citizen housing projects
shall be required to be adequately mitigated.
The proposed amendment will not substantially affect parking, generate substantial traffic, or alter
existing transportation systems. This proposed Zone Code Amendment is not affiliated with any specific development project and will not impact emergency evacuation response plans or increase
traffic hazards to motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists.
In that no specific development is proposed with this Zone Code Amendment, no scenic vistas will be obstructed. Aesthetically offensive views will not be created by the implementation of the
proposed amended senior citizen housing regulations.
The proposed Zone Code Amendment will not affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational
opportunities. Projects processed pursuant to these regulations shall still be required to provide recreational amenities, as necessary.
-7-
hUYSISOFVLWLEALTERNATIVESTOTHEPROPOSEDPROJECTSUCHAS:
a) Phased development of the project,
b) alternate site designs,
d alternate scale of development,
d) alternate uses for the site,
d development at some future time rather than now, f) alternate sites for the proposed project, and g) no project alternative.
Project alternatives are required when there is evidence that the project will have a signifkant adverse
impact on the environment and an alternative would lessen or mitigate those adverse impacts. Public Resources Code Section 21002 forbids the approval of projects with signifkant adverse impacts when feasible alternatives or mitigation measures can substantially lessen such impacts. A “significant effect” is defined as one which has a substantial adverse impact. If the project has "NO" sign&ant impacts
than there are no substantial adverse impacts and no justification for requiring a discussion of alternatives, (There is no alternative to no substantial adverse impact). This project has no significant impacts therefore no alternatives are required.
-8-
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department)
x
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 &ill 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 signifkant 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 signiiicant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
Date Signat&e
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE)
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE’1
-9-
APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES
AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECX.
Date Signature
CDD:km
-lO-
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
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT, AMENDING
VARIOUS CHAPTERS OF TITLE 21, OF THE CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL CODE TO (1) AMEND THE CITY’S EXISTING
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING REGULATIONS TO CONFORM TO
THE PROVISIONS OF GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915,
AND (2) ESTABLISH NEW DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS WHICH RESPOND TO SENIOR CITIZEN NEEDS.
CASE NAME: CITY OF CARLSBAD
CASE NO: ZCA 93-05
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 16th day of February, 1994,
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 all
factors relating to the Zone Code Amendment.
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 Commission
recommends APPROVAL of ZCA 93-05, according to Exhibit “X”, dated
February 16, 1994, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the
following findings:
Findin~:
1. This Zone Code Amendment implements Housing Element Program 3.4.a.
Accordingly, this zone code amendment is consistent with the City’s General Plan.
2. Tbis Zone Code Amendment establishes new design and development standards which respond to Senior Citizen needs.
3. This Zone Code Amendment conforms to the provisions of Government Code Section
65915 (State Density Bonus Law).
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
-
4. This2heCode Amendment confoRlls to the pmisions of chapter 21.85 of the
Carl&ad Municipal Code (City of Caxisbad hhsionaxy Ordinance).
5. ThisZonecodeAmendmentisconsistentwithcitycouncilPolicyNo.43.
6. This Zone Code Amendment is consistent with );Iousing Element Law.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regukr meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 16th day of February, 1994,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Savary, Commissioners: Schlehuber, Betz, Noble
&Erwin.
NOES: Commissioner Hall.
ABSENT: Commissioner Welshons.
ABSTAIN: None.
AT-I-EST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 3564 -2-
CARUBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJErn
FEBRUARY 16, 1993
PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ZCA 93-05 - CITY OF CARLSBAD - An amendment to various chapters and
sections of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Title 21) to: (1) amend the City’s
existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations to conform to the provisions of
Government Code Section 65915 and to (2) establish new design and
development standards which respond to Senior Citizen needs.
I. RECOMMENDATION
EXHIBIT 4
STAFFPLANNER: CHRISDECERBO &Q
STAFF REPORT 0 2
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3563, recommending APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director and
ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3564, recommending APPROVAL of ZCA 93-
05, based on the findings contained therein and recommending that the City Council direct
staff to subsequently open up the six week public review period to amend the City’s six
Local Coastal Program segments accordingly.
II. PROJ.ECI- DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Housing Program 3.4.a. of the City’s Housing Element states that the City shall amend it’s
existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations to conform to the provisions of Government
Code Section 65915 (State Density Bonus Law), and to establish new standards for
location, parking, safety, recreational facilities, medical care and other aspects of senior
housing.
The City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations (Section 21.18.045 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code) allow the development of senior citizen housing at a density of up to 75
du/acre within the R-3, R-P, R-T, R-W, and R-D-M zones, subject to specific conditions and
requiring the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The City’s Senior Citizen
Housing regulations were adopted in 1979 for the purpose of granting density increases
and thereby enabling the development of a proposed Senior Citizen Housing project. Five
Senior Citizen Housing projects (i.e.; Tyler Court Apartments, Chinquapin Apartments,
Jefferson House I, Jefferson House II, and St. Francis Court) have been approved within the City pursuant to the existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations.
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING FEBRUARY 16, 1994
PAGE 2
On April 20,1993 the Carlsbad City Council adopted a Density Bonus Ordinance (Chapter
21.86 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code). This Ordinance which implements State
Government Code Section 65915, requires the City to grant a minimum of a 25% density
bonus over the otherwise maximum allowable density and at least one additional incentive
in return for a developer guaranteeing that a residential project will reserve either: 20%
of the total units as affordable to low-income households, or 10% of the total units as
affordable to very low-income households, or 50% of the total units for qualified (senior)
residents.
The primary reasons for amending the City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations
are as follows:
1.
2.
Under the City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations, there is no requirement to restrict any of the units as affordable to lower-income households. This zone
code amendment will add a provision requiring that all Senior Citizen Housing
projects shall be required to comply with the City’s minimum 15% inclusionary
housing requirement. The code will also be amended to specify that any Senior
Citizen Housing project requesting a density increase be required to be processed
pursuant to the provisions of the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance. In effect, Senior
Citizen Housing projects would now be subject to the same inclusionary housing
and density bonus provisions as all other housing projects within the City.
To eliminate the 75 du/acre density provision included within the City’s existing
Senior Citizen Housing regulations. The City has committed ,through program
(Density Bonus Ordinance) and policy (#19 of the Land Use Element), to allow
density increases to enable the development of affordable housing. However, in
order to not exceed the Citywide and quadrant dwelling unit limitations of the
Growth Management Plan, any density increases granted would have to come from
the City’s “excess unit bank”. City Council Policy #43 allocates the use of the
“excess units” in order of priority for: 1) low and very low income housing, and 2)
Senior Citizen Housing.
The deletion of the 75 du/acre provision is necessary to ensure that available units
within the excess unit bank are allocated consistent with City Council priority (first
priority being affordable housing) and that they are not inequitably absorbed for
Senior Citizen Housing.
3. To establish specific criteria and standards for Senior Citizen Housing projects which
respond to senior citizen needs. The City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations do not address important criteria which should be considered in the
location of, design of, and amenities provided as part of, senior citizen housing
projects. Planning staff reviewed a number of Senior Citizen Ordinances from other
jurisdictions for purposes of identifying new design and development criteria which
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
PAGE 3
respond to the special housing needs of senior citizens. Based upon this review,
staff is recommending that new locational criteria, design and development
standards be incorporated into the City’s Senior Citizen Housing regulations.
4. To delete the Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requirement for Senior Citizen Housing.
This is consistent with one of the primary objectives of Housing Element Law, which
specifies that cities provide sufficient sites with zoning that permits owner occupied
and rental multifamily residential use by right. “Use by right” means that the use
(in this case Senior Citizen Housing) does not require a Conditional Use Permit.
Consistent with Housing Program 3.4.a., this project is a Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 93-
05) to the Carlsbad Municipal Code to: (1) amend the City’s existing Senior Citizen
Housing regulations to conform to the provisions of Government Code Section 65915, and
(2) establish new design and development standards for Senior Citizen Housing.
Specifically, this Zone Code Amendment, amends Section 21.18.045 to (1) eliminate the
Conditional Use Permit (CUP) requirement for Senior Citizen Housing projects and replaces
this with a Site Development Plan (SDP) requirement (consistent with Chapter 21.86 of
the Carlsbad Municipal Code) and (2) adds new Senior Citizen Housing provisions
including: locational criteria, tenant eligibility, project development standards and design
criteria, dwelling unit requirements, density increase provisions, application submittal
requirements and review process, and monitoring and enforcement.
III. ANALYSIS
Included below is an analysis of the major planning issues associated with each proposed
major revision to the City’s Zoning Ordinance relating to the development of Senior Citizen
Housing. Reference can be made to Exhibit “X” to review in detail all text revisions.
Planning Issues
1) What revisions to the City’s Senior Citizen Housing regulations are recommended
to conform to State Government Code Section 65915?
2) What new design and development standards are recommended for Senior Citizen
Housing?
3) Is the proposed Zone Code Amendment consistent with the General Plan?
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
PAGE 4
DISCUSSION
Revisions Promsed to Senior Citizen Housing Regulations
Table “A” includes a summary of the City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations, and
revisions which are recommended to: 1) conform to Government Code Section 65915, and
2) establish new standards which respond to Senior Citizen needs. Each proposed revision
is discussed below.
Processing - New Subsection 21.18.045
Existing subsection 21.18.045 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code currently allows the
development of Senior Citizen Housing at a density of up to 75 du/acre subject to the
approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The CUP requirement provides the City with
a means for granting density increases for Senior Citizen Housing while providing the City
with considerable (annual) review authority to monitor and mitigate (as necessary) a
project’s potential neighborhood impacts and to ensure that the conditions (including age
restrictions) of the permit are being complied with.
Consistent with the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance (Chapter 21.86 of the Municipal Code),
staff is recommending that Section 21.18.045 be amended to delete the CUP requirement
for Senior Citizen Housing and replace this with a requirement to process Senior Citizen
Housing projects through a Site Development Plan (SDP). The new Senior Citizen Housing
provisions proposed to be added to Section 21.18.045 (discussed later in this report) in
association with the Site Development Plan requirement will provide the City adequate
project review, monitoring and enforcement authority. As discussed earlier, the deletion
of the CUP requirement for Senior Citizen Housing is also consistent with the objectives
of Housing Element Law.
Density Permitted - New Subsection 21.18.045(c)(7)(A)
Existing Subsection 21.18.045(e)(2) stipulates that a maximum density of 75 du/acre may
be permitted for a Senior Citizen Housing project. This density provision is recommended
to be deleted and replaced by Subsection 21.18.045(c)(7)(A) as follows: “a minimum
density increase of at least twenty-five percent (25%) over the Growth Control Point of the
applicable General Plan designation or the otherwise maximum permitted residential
dwelling unit density as specified by the applicable master plan or specific plan may be permitted for a Senior Citizen Housing project”. This provision is consistent with
Subsection 21.86.030(b) of the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance. As previously discussed,
this proposed revision will also ensure that units within the City’s “excess unit bank” are
not absorbed for senior citizen housing but remain available to grant density increases for
affordable housing projects.
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
PAGE 5
Affordable Housing Requirement - New Subsection 21.18.045(c)(7)(C)
The City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations do not require that any of the
approved senior units be reserved for and affordable to lower-income households.
However, consistent with the City’s Inclusionary Ordinance (Chapter 21.85 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code), a new Senior Citizen Housing affordability provision is recommended to
require that, “not less than 15% of all approved senior citizen units in any Senior Citizen
Housing project shall be set aside for occupancy by and shall be affordable to lower-income
households”. In that all new residential projects within the City are subject to the City’s
15% lower-income Inclusionary mandate, all Senior Citizen Housing projects, regardless
of whether a density bonus is granted, shall be required to comply with the minimum 15%
inclusionary requirement.
Development Standards - New Subsection 21.18.045(c)(3)(A)
Existing Subsection 21.18.045(d)(3) requires that all development standards of the
underlying zone must be complied with. Consistent with subsection 21.86.070(j) of the
City’s Density Bonus Ordinance, this provision is proposed to be amended to specify that,
Senior Citizen Housing projects shall be required to comply with all applicable development
standards of the underlying zone, except those which may be modified as an additional
incentive granted pursuant to the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance.
Locational Criteria - New Subsection 21.18.045(c)(l)
Senior citizens need just about everything in their homes that other segments of the
population require. The difference is that seniors typically need facilities to be located
closer and more immediate to them. In that many seniors either cannot or desire not to
drive an automobile, location of senior housing in proximity to commercial, social and
community services and a bus or transit stop is an extremely important consideration.
Seniors should also not be expected to negotiate hills or long slopes to gain access to
shopping/services and/or transportation. Accordingly, new Subsection 21.18.045(c)(l)
establishes the following locational guidelines which will be used in evaluating proposed
locations for Senior Citizen Housing projects:
A) The proposed project should be located in close proximity to a wide range of
commercial retail, professional, social and community services patronized by senior
citizens;
B) The proposed project should be located within two to three blocks of a bus or
transit stop unless a common transportation service for residents is provided;
C) The proposed project should be located in a topographically level area; and
D) Development of a Senior Citizen Housing project at the proposed location should
not be detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare.
C
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
PAGE 6
Parking - New Subsection 21.18.045(c)(4)
Existing Subsection 21.18.045(e) (2) establishes a minimum Senior Citizen Housing parking
standard of one (1) space for each two (2) dwelling units and no required guest parking
spaces. In view of the fact that existing Senior Citizen Housing projects within the City, which are parked per this standard, appear to have adequate parking, no revision to this
parking standard is proposed. However, it is recommended that the parking requirements
for Senior Citizen Housing projects be amended to require in addition: one (1) parking
space for the on-site manager’s unit (when one is provided), and one (1) guest parking
space. The required guest parking space will provide needed parking for project shuttle
busses (where provided) and emergency service vehicles.
In the interest of creating parking spaces which are easier to drive into and back out of,
a provision has also been included to, whenever possible, design senior citizen parking
spaces at either 30, 45 or 60 degree angles.
Project Design Criteria - New Subsection 21.18.045(c)(S)
A number of Senior Citizen Housi::y project design criteria are proposed to be added as
new subsection 21.18.045(c)(S). The purposes for adding project design criteria are to:
(1) achieve project compatibility with, and relationship to, existing neighborhood and
community development, and (2) incorporate project oriented amenities which respond to
senior citizen needs.
New Senior Citizen Housing projects should not be intrusive elements in a neighborhood
and can avoid being so by proper siting, compatibility in height, bulk and scale with
surrounding structures, and use of similar building materials and architectural elements
from other buildings in a neighborhood. The design criteria proposed will achieve the
above-noted use compatibility objective.
The proposed project oriented amenities include: project laundry facilities (1 washer and
1 dryer/as dus), common use areas (20 SF/DU) and an on-site manager. Common use
areas provide for socialization opportunities among residents. Examples of common use
areas would be a recreation/social room, common cooking and dining facility, reading/T.V.
room or passive open space.
The amended ordinance recommends that an on-site manageis unit be provided. All
projects which do not have an on-site manager shall provide a posted phone number of the
project owner or off-site manager for emergencies or maintenance problems.
Dwelling Unit Requirements - New Subsection 21.18.045(c)(6)
In an effort to respond to the special needs of senior citizens and to provide a quality of
life which is safe, secure, and healthful, particular amenities are recommended to be
required for each senior citizen dwelling unit. These amenities include:
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CAiUSBAD
. SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
FEBRUARY 16,1994
PAGE 7
(1) Tubs equipped with one grab bar;
(2) Tubs/showers equipped with temperature regulating devices;
(3) Tubs/shower bottom surfaces which are slip resistent; and
(4) Peepholes in entry doors.
All Senior Citizen Housing projects shall also be required to comply with Title 24 of the
State Building Code (Disabled Access Regulations).
Tenure - New Subsection 21.18.045(a)
Existing Subsection 21.18.045(a) specifies that the Senior Citizen housing CUP provisions
apply only to senior citizen rental housing units. New Subsection 21.18.045(a) specifies
that the SDP provisions of this section will apply to either rental or for sale housing. This
is consistent with the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance.
Application and Review Process - New Subsection 21.18.045(d)
This new subsection provides the submittal requirements and guidelines for the review of
Senior Citizen Housing project proposals. Consistent with Subsection 21.86.090 of the
City’s Density Bonus Ordinance, all Senior Citizen Housing project proposals shall be
required to undergo a preliminary project review prior to submitting a formal application
for development. The purpose of the preliminary review is to identify major project issues
up front and to provide feedback regarding any economic incentives requested (i.e.; density
bonus or standards modifications). As discussed earlier, a formal application for a Senior
Citizen Housing project shall require a Site Development Plan application. Any proposal
requesting an incentive from the City shall be required to submit a project pro-forma to
justify that the request is necessary to make the project economically feasible.
Monitoring and Enforcement of SDP Conditions - New Subsection 21.18.045(e)(l)
Existing Subsection 21.18.045(g) mandates that the developer(s) of a Senior Citizen
Housing project approved pursuant to the special standards and density increases of this
section shall grant the City an equity position in the project. This provision exists to
ensure that the Senior Citizen Housing project is constructed, operated, and maintained in
accordance with the requirements of Section 21.18.045.
This subsection is proposed to be deleted and replaced by Subsection 21.18.045(e)(l).
This new subsection requires applicants/owners of Senior Citizen Housing projects to
submit annually to the Department of Housing and Redevelopment an updated list of all
project tenants and their ages. This will provide the City adequate authority to monitor and enforce the age restrictions of this permit. Because Senior Citizen Housing projects
would no longer be a conditionally permitted use (under CUP) but instead a use permitted
by right (under Density Bonus Law), there is no necessity or authority for the City to hold
an equity position in the project. All unique considerations or conditions of the project
(including age restriction or affordability provisions) will be incorporated into the required
density bonus housing agreement.
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
PAGE 8
Consistencv with the General Plan
The Housing Element of the General Plan sets forth a major program which is supported
by the proposed Senior Citizen Housing Zone Code Amendment. This program specifies
the following:
PROGRAM 3.4.a - (Senior Citizen Housing)
Amend the City’s current Senior Citizen’s housing regulations to conform to
the provisions of Government Code Section 65915 (Density Bonus).
Establish standards for location, parking, safety, recreation facilities, medical
care, and other aspects of senior oriented housing. Consider requiring all
senior citizen projects to be approved under Conditional Use Permit.
Establish appropriate monitoring and reporting procedures to assure
compliance with approved project conditions.
Consistent with the intent of this program, the proposed zone code amendment would: 1)
amend the City’s Senior Citizen housing regulations to conform to Government Code
65915; 2) establish new standards which respond to the needs of Senior Citizens; and 3)
establish a monitoring and reporting procedure to assure compliance with project
conditions.
Iv. ENVIRONMENTALREVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that this zone code amendment, to amend the City’s
existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations to conform to Government Code Section 65915
and to establish new design and development standards for Senior Citizen Housing, will
not have a significant impact on the environment and therefore has issued a negative
declaration. The environmental analysis concluded that since: (1) this zone code
amendment is not associated with any specific development project; and (2) will not
directly result in any significant physical, biological, or human environmental impacts, no
project specific impacts are anticipated. There were no letters of comment received during
the public review period for this Negative Declaration.
-
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD
. SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
PAGE 9
ATTACHMENTS ’
1. Table “A” Summary of Senior Citizen Housing Revisions
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3563
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3564.
CDD:lh
SEPTEMBER 29, 1993
-
ZCA 93-05 CITY OF CARLSBAD
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
FEBRUARY 16, 1994
PAGE 9
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3563
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3564.
3. Table “A” Summary of Senior Citizen Housing Revisions
CDD:lh
SEPTEMBER 29, 1993
- -. TABLE “A”
A
[ i
‘
[
1
‘;
1
1
1
1
t
1
1 ,
1
t
1
1
4
SUMMARY OF SENIOR CITIZEN
HOUSING REVISIONS
ZONING c
REQUIREMENTS ZXISTJNG
?ROCESSING :UP REQUIREMENT PURSUANT TO
!1.18.045
DENSITY JP TO 75 DU/AC
?ERMIlTED I
,
4FFORDABLE VOT ADDRESSED
!JOUSING
XCUPANCY klINIMUM AGE OF ALL OCCUPANTS -
i2 YRS OR MINIMUM AGE OF AT I /
-EAST 1 OCCUPANT SHALL BE 55
YEARS SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC : I
:ONDITIONS
PERMITTED ZONES X-3, R-P, R-T, R-W, R-D-M
DEVELOPMENT tiUST COMPLY WITH ALL
STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OF THE
JNDERLYING ZONE
LOCATIONAL VOT ADDRESSED
CRITERIA
PARKING
PROJECT DESIGh tiL BUILDINGS EXCEEDING TWO
CRITERIA STORIES SHALL INCLUDE
ZLEVATORS
/
3NE SPACE PER EVERY TWO UNITS , / I
REVISED REVISED
S~~~~~~~~.~.~~~~~~~~~~~;~~.~~ S~~~~~~~~.~.~~~~~~~~~~~;~~.~~ ~f’:~~~~~~~~~~~ ~f’:~~~~~~~~~~~ * * ,.,.,. ,.. .,.,.,...,.,.,. ,. ,.,.,. ,.. .,.,.,...,.,.,. ,. .,..., . . . . . . . . . . . .,. ..,_,. .,..., . . . . . . . . . . . .,. ..,_,. _,. .,. ,.,.. _,. .,. ,.,.. ~~~~~~~~:~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~:~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .,.,.,. ,.,.,., .,., .,.,.. . . . . . . .,.,.,. ,.,.,., .,., .,.,.. . . . . . . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ . . . . . . . . . . . . .:. .i.:.:: : .:.... . . . . .:. .i.:.:: : .:.... . . .:I:.,...: . . . . ‘...-.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~:.:.~~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:::.:::::.:.:.~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~~.:.:.:.~:.:.:...~~:.:.:.;.:.;.:.:.: :.: .,.(_.,.,.(.,.,.,. ~, ,....._, . . .:I:.,...: . . . . ‘...-.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~:.:.~~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:::.:::::.:.:.~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~~.:.:.:.~:.:.:...~~:.:.:.;.:.;.:.:.: :.: .,.(_.,.,.(.,.,.,. ~, ,....._, ~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~ :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.):.:.)..:.:...:.:...:.:...:.:.:.:.:...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:...~ . . . . . . . . . . . . :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.):.:.)..:.:...:.:...:.:...:.:.:.:.:...:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:...~ . . . . . . . . . . . . .,.(.....,....... .,.(.....,....... . ..., :j ,.,..... . ..., :j ,.,..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~-~~.:.:.~:.~~..~..~~ ..i........i. . . . ~~~~~~~~-~~.:.:.~:.~~..~..~~ ..i........i. . . .
~~~~~~~L occupANTs _ 62 yEARs MINIMUM AGE OF ALL OCCUPANTS - 62 YEARS
OR MINIMUM AGE OF AT LEAST 1 OCCUPANT
SHALL BE 55 YEARS, SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC
CONDITIONS
R-3, R-P, R-T, R-W, R-D-M
MUST COMPLY WITH ALL DEVELOPMENT
STANDARDS OF THE UNDERLYING ZONE,
* .:,:.:.:.:.:,:.:,:,:.:.:,:,:,:,:,’,’,’,’.’.~.”.‘.‘.‘.’ S~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
x . . ..l......_..........._........................~........... . . . . . . . . . . . :,:,: ,:,:,:.:, :,: .:,:.):.:,:,~,:.:. ;.; ,:.:.:.:,:,;.:.;.: .:.:.:. > P~~~~.~~~~~~~~~~~~. ,.,.,.,
s * ._...............,,...,(,,,(.,((. .:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:.:.~.:.:...:.:.~.~~.~:.~.:.~.~~.~.:.:.~.~.~.:.~.:.:.:.:.:.~.:,:.:.:.:...: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., .,.,., .,...,. ,...,.,., ,,
ALL BUILDINGS EXCEEDING TWO STORIES
SHALL INCLUDE ELEVATORS.
HOUSING REVISION
Z 0 N I N G
REQUIREMENTS
DWELLING UNIT
REQUIREMENTS
TENURE
APPLICATION AND
REVIEW PROCESS
MONITORING &
ENFORCEMENT
ZXISTING REVISED
JOT ADDRESSED X%.!li~~r’i~iE~~~~~~,~~~::~~~~~~~~ :+ :,:.):.:.‘.....‘.......... ~:.>~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:::~:~:~: ‘(.. >.::.:: :..: . . . . . ..I.... . . . . . . . . ..:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~.:.:.~.:.:.:.: .;:....,. :.:.:.:.:.:.):.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.~..:.:.:.:.~:.~.:. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~ ..:,:.::,::~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ i.. . . ::..: .‘..“..‘.....‘...).,.,...,. . . . . . ~~:.:.:.~~~:‘:~:.:.:.:.:::.:.:.:.:.~::.::~~.::.:...~::::::~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.::~:.:.:.:.~..~;,:.:.~:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,:.:.:,: :.:+:.> . . . . . ...,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > . . . . . . :.:.:. ~~~ii~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~e~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _: . . . . . :.:.:.::::ii:.:.:::::.:::.:.: . . . . . . . . . :: I... :..:z:.:.::: . . . . . . ..‘.......~...~.~.. ::. :..I.... . ...:.:.:.:.:.: .. ~::l:::::::::::::,rj:,:j::.~~~:~::~:~~~~~;~~~.~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ..,.,,, ~ ,....(,... :,: :,:,:;;;. : . . ..I.....,.,...,.......................... ~
~~~~,~,~~~~~~~~~:‘.~.~.~~~‘“‘.“‘~”~.’.~~”.”~”“”;” .‘.‘.‘. :.:...::.: :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: .,.,.......,.....,.......... . . . . . . ..(.................................,.,.....,.,.,.....,
tENTAL ONLY RENT& ~~~~~~ .,.... . . . . . . . . . . . . .:,.:: . . . . . ..,.....,....., . . . . ..i........ .I..
gOT ADDRESSED ~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~ .:/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..,............._.... . . . . . . . . . .._......., v... .._... . . . . . . .._....._.............. ,../ ,... ,.,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /.
;ITY HOLDS AN EQUITY POSITION ~.~~~~~,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~~~~~~~
N PROJECT ~~~~~~~~~. . . .
Zcx!Bo5.TBL
EXHBIT 5
PLANNING COMMISSION February 16,1994 PAGE 2
e resolution of approval. Prior to the start of the meeting, Mr. Westman had handed out a letter from
s F. and Kit S. Crawford dated February 14, 1994 which supports the zone change.
Erwin inquired if this was a request on behalf of the property owner. Mr. Westman replied
property owner who came to the City and requested the change.
ry invited the applicant to speak.
Vera Cruz, Oceanside, representing the applicant, addressed the Commission and
th the staff report and recommendation. If negative comments are made during
would like an opportunity to respond.
Chairman Savary open e public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
Jack Gerhardt, 4170 Andro , Oceanside, addressed the Commission and stated that he is an
Oceanside resident on the order of the property. He inquired if any type of livestock would be
allowed with the proposed s concerned about odors emanating from livestock.
Leonard Rosen, 4134 Andros Way, , addressed the Commission and stated that he lives in
Leisure Village which abuts the site. the Commission will approve the zone change because it
sounds like a great idea. He commen nster Westman for his expertise and the way he explained
everything in complete detail to the residen
The applicant declined further comment.
There being no other persons desiring to address mission on this topic, Chairman Savary declared
the public testimony closed and opened the item f sion among the Commission members.
Commissioner Hall requested staff to respond to the Ii . Mr. Westman replied that the
existing zoning as well as the proposed zoning both a amount of livestock on the property.
However, he noted that there are restrictions on the number o als allowed per acre. He did not bring
that information with him to the meeting.
Commissioner Erwin commented that he hopes people understand t rezoning this property to L-C does
not put it into Open Space. This zoning is only temporary and the pr can be rezoned in the future for
development.
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Hall, and duly secon
Commission Resolution No. 3624 recommending approv egative Declaration
issued by the Planning Director, and adopt Planning Commis Resolution No. 3625
recommending approval of ZC 93-06, based on the findings a
conditions contained therein.
VOTE: 6-O
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ZCA 93-05 - CITY OF CARLSBAD - Request for approval of a Negative Declaration and an
amendment to various chapters and sections of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Title 21) to: (1) amend
the City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations to conform to the provisions of Government
Code Section 65915 and (2) to establish new design and development standards which respond to
Senior Citizen needs.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION February 16, i994 PAGE 3
Chris DeCerbo, Senior Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that Housing Program
3.4.a. of the City’s Housing Element states that the City shall amend its existing Senior Citizen Housing
regulations to conform to the provisions of State Density Bonus Law and to establish new standards for
location, parking, safety, recreational facilities, medical care and other aspects of senior housing. The
City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations allow the development of senior citizen housing within
the R-3, R-P, R-T, R-W, and R-D-M zones through Conditional Use Permit (CUP) at a density of up to
75 du/acre. The primary reasons for amending the City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing regulations- are
(1) to make sure the housing projects are consistent with the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance and
lnclusionary Housing Ordinance, (2) to delete the 75 d&acre density provision for senior citizen housing,
(3) to establish locational guidelines and design and development standards which respond to the special
housing needs of senior citizens, and (4) to delete the existing CUP requirement which will allow senior
citizen housing as a use by right, instead of a conditionally permitted use.
Mr. DeCerbo reviewed each of the specific revisions proposed to the City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing
Regulations as detailed in the written staff report. Staff recommends approval of the proposed ZCA
because it is consistent with the objective of the Housing Program 3.4.a., it amends the senior citizen
housing regulations to conform to the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance and lnclusionary Ordinance, it
establishes new standards which respond to the needs of senior citizens, and establishes a monitoring and
reporting procedure to ensure compliance with the project conditions.
Commissioner Schlehuber asked if the 20 s.f. of common area would include hallways. Mr. DeCerbo
replied that it would not include hallways. The ordinance specifies that stairwells and balconies or landings
of 40 sf. or less would not count. The common area would include items such as a recreational/social
room, common cooking and dining facilities, passive open space, reading/TV rooms.
Commissioner Schlehuber referred to the Steiger project which came before the Commission recently.
That project had 75 units and with 20 sf. per unit required for common space, it would be a total of
1,500 s.f. He believes that would be reasonable.
Commissioner Schlehuber has no problem with requiring projects to be located within 2-3 blocks of a
transit stop. Most of the senior projects he is familiar with near his office all have shuttle buses. They are
located about 314 mile from a bank or other services and the people don’t usually walk because the shuttle
buses are available. He remembers a senior project a few years ago that didn’t get built that was out near
the State beach. Commissioner Schlehuber thinks that would be a wonderful location for a senior project
but it would not meet the criteria of being in “close proximity” to a wide range of services. Mr. DeCerbo
replied that this is not a requirement, only a locational guideline. It was left vague intentionally so that staff
could work with the applicant. He feels that staff could make the finding that it is located within a
reasonable distance if a shuttle bus is provided.
Commissioner Schlehuber feels more comfortable with the present language. He would not want to stop a
senior project located near the beach just because it isn’t located in close proximity to commercial services.
Mr. DeCerbo replied that the new language states I’... should, whenever reasonably possible, be located...“.
Commissioner Hall referred to the Density Bonus Ordinance and inquired if the word “minimum” is used.
Mr. DeCerbo replied that it is the exact same language as the Density Bonus Ordinance.
Commissioner Hall inquired if this means that we can build to a maximum of anything. Mr. DeCerbo
replied potentially, but not realistically.
Commissioner Hall stated that one of the things that concerns him as a property owner is that you have
some general understanding of what can or cannot be built around you. It seems to him that with the
density bonus it goes far beyond what is realistic. If he were to purchase an R-l lot, he doesn’t feel that
anyone should have the right to come in next to him and build 75 stacked units. Commissioner Hall thinks
MINUTES
-
PLANNING COMMISSION February 16, 1994 PAGE 4
the language needs to be stronger. He doesn’t like the wording of a “minimum 25%” density bonus
because it leaves the maximum open-ended. Mr. DeCerbo replied that the State law says this and the City
merely implemented the State law when adopting the Density Bonus Ordinance.
Commissioner Hall stated that with this wording, it means that the density bonus could also be 100%. He
realizes that the project needs to be economically feasible. Mr. DeCerbo replied that page 6 of the
ordinance, subsection 4, states that “the Planning Director shall evaluate the request for the density
increase and make findings and recommendations based upon the following criteria.” Item 4.~. states that
“senior citizen housing shall not result in an overall development pattern that is incompatible with other
land uses in the immediate vicinity.” Commissioner Hall still feels that the language needs to be stronger.
Commissioner Hall commented about the parking standard and stated that the senior project on Tyler
Street needed more parking and had to purchase an adjoining lot in order to provide adequate parking.
This was due, in part, to the age requirement for senior housing being dropped from 65 to 55 years of age.
Commissioner Hall inquired about the change from conditional use to site development plan process and
how it affects the findings. Mr. DeCerbo replied that throughout the ordinance it states that senior citizen
housing cannot be detrimental to the neighborhood. In either case, CUP or SDP, staff would have to make
findings that the project is desirable. Commissioner Hall stated that he is trying to look at it from a property
owners viewpoint, as to what can or cannot be built on adjoining lots.
Commissioner Noble inquired about the accountability requirement. He would like to know if a report must
be submitted every time there is a change or if it is only on an annual basis. He foresees a paperwork
nightmare if a report must be made every time there is a change. Mr. DeCerbo replied that a report must
be made annually.
Commissioner Noble stated that there is a fine line between senior rental units and retirement homes.
Retirement homes have various forms of assisted living. He thinks this probably would cover what
Commissioner Schlehuber has in mind.
Commissioner Schlehuber stated that he would feel more comfortable if the following words were added to
Section 21.18.045(c)(l)(A): “or have a private shuttle available to the residents to obtain these services”.
Commissioner Erwin referred to item #7 at the bottom of page 4 regarding Chapter 21.86. He inquired if
this refers to the density bonus under our inclusionary housing. Mr. DeCerbo replied that there are two
separate ordinances, the Density Bonus Ordinance and the lnclusionary Ordinance. They are companion
in many respects. The Density Bonus reference was made for the purpose of doing affordable housing.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if they must provide affordable housing in order to qualify for the 25%. Mr.
DeCerbo replied that is correct.
Commissioner Erwin sees no mention of how they can get the second 25%. Mr. DeCerbo replied that it is
not included in this particular amendment. On page 5, line 6, item (C) it states that all requests for senior
housing density bonus must comply with the provisions of the City’s Density Bonus Ordinance.
Commissioner Erwin commented that it seems to him we are locking in a guaranty for a 50% increase in
density above the growth control point. Gary Wayne, Assistant Planning Director, replied that we are really
saying is that we are creating an ordinance which allows senior housing and the senior housing has these
standards. It must comply with the inclusionary requirement and provide 15% affordable. Also available to
the senior housing, as it is available to any other residential housing development in the City is the density
bonus. They can request this density bonus and, in so requesting the density bonus, it is a minimum 25%
which then says that they can also request an additional incentive. If they do that, they then have to
guarantee that 20% of those units (as opposed to 15%) are affordable. That additional incentive does not
PLANNING COMMISSION February 16, 1994 PAGE 5
necessarily have to be in density. It could also be a standards waiver. The ordinance must be flexible and
still give the City a large amount of control over how many units go into a certain area. The City does not
have to approve additional density. That is only a possible incentive and it may not apply to every project.
In effect, they can have one 25% density increase plus one other incentive.
Chairman Savary referred to line 20, of page 4, and stated that she would like to know what the code states
regarding safety. Pat Kelley, Principal Building Inspector, replied that the State Housing Code adds new
requirements every year in response to a very strong lobby in Sacramento. At this time, all multi-family
projects, even condominiums, must comply with the State disabled access regulations. In summary, all
ground floor units must now be accessible and adaptable for handicapped accessibility. In addition, all
units served by elevators must also be adaptable and accessible. It is becoming more and more restrictive.
If a senior citizen project is developed as multi-family or condominium, it must comply with the State code,
although there are many variables and exceptions for certain topographical situations.
Chairman Savary would like to add grab bars for toilets as well as tubs because many elderly people have
problems negotiating the toilet. Mr. Kelley replied that it is a great idea but the regulations only require
reinforcement in the framing so it can be added later. He doesn’t think a builder would challenge this small
item.
Chairman Savary inquired if elevators are required to have emergency telephones. Mr. Kelley replied that
there is an entire section in the code devoted to elevators.
Chairman Savary inquired about emergency power in the hallways. Mr. Kelley replied that it depends on
the hallway configuration and building layout. If natural light is available, emergency lighting may not be
required.
Commissioner Savary inquired if smoke detectors are required in the Code. Mr. Kelley replied that a
smoke detector is required in every bedroom, hallway, level, basement, and dwelling unit.
Chairman Savary opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no persons desiring to address the Commission on this topic, Chairman Savary declared the
public testimony closed and opened the item for discussion among the Commission members.
Commissioner Hall stated that he understands the density and senior housing but would like to hear what
the other Commissioners think. Personally, he thinks we are giving up our property rights because there
are no safeguards. Regardless of what zone a person buys into, he has no assurance as to what can be
built on a vacant lot next to him. Commissioner Hall is having a hard time with this. He wants some
guarantees.
Commissioner Schlehuber doesn’t think we will ever get 75 dus/acre with this amendment because it is
more restrictive than our existing ordinance. Mr. DeCerbo replied that this is correct. Commissioner
Schlehuber thinks we are aiming in the right direction but we did lose a lot of property rights when
affordable housing laws were enacted.
Commissioner Hall stated that when SRO’s (single room occupancy) comes into play, he thinks the density
will go very high.
Commissioner Erwin tends to see this amendment as more conservative than it was before. He doesn’t
see how the regulations would permit a project with 75 dus/acre. If anyone came in with something with
those densities, he doesn’t think staff would move forward with it.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION February 16, 1994 PAGE 6
Commissioner Erwin added that the Planning Commission used to have subcommittees to study these
types of things. He would like to see some thought given to using subcommittees again in the future.
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Schlehuber, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. 3563, recommending approval of the Negative Declaration
issued by the Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3564,
recommending approval of ZCA 93-05, based on the findings contained therein and
recommending that the City Council direct staff to subsequently open up the six week
public review period to amend the City’s six Local Coastal Program segments
accordingly, with a revision to 921.18.045(c)(l)(A) stating that private shuttle bus service
could fulfil1 the requirement that senior housing be located close to services.
VOTE: 5-l
AYES: Chairman Savary, Commissioners Betz, Erwin, Noble, and Schlehuber
NOES: Commissioner Hall
ABSTAIN: None
D ITEMS AND REPORTS:
lled the Commission to see who would be interested in attending the Planners Institute
Id in Mission Valley on March 9-l 1. Everyone was interested except Commissioners
er, whose terms on the Commission are expiring.
lanning Director, stated that there would be a General Plan Update Workshop
ry 24, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
Karen Hirata, Deputy Ci , reported back to the Commission on the State’s Right to Farm
Ordinance. In her researc und out that in the past few years a number of counties and a few cities
have passed right to far ions of these ordinances vary but one of the main
provisions is that there i of residential property by the seller that there is nearby
agricultural operations. is sometimes included is a mediation provision which
offers a means to mediate disputes operators and nearby residents. Another provision
which is sometimes included states operation can become a nuisance. In her legal
opinion, this would be preempted by ould not be in any county or city ordinance because
there is State law directly on point which states t re operation has been operating for at
least three years, and was not a nuisance at the ating, it cannot become a nuisance
is puts a limit on people coming to the
nuisance and then suing. It reinstates some provisions of old
to a nuisance action that someone has come to the nuisance.
to farm ordinance which includes all three of these provisions
unincorporated areas.
w which state that it is a defense
of San Diego does have a right
ordinance only applies to
Commissioner Erwin inquired if it would be a good idea to have this as a con new projects that the
agriculture operation has been there in excess of three years and has not been
replied that this would have to be a policy decision. From a legal standpoint, th
contain a provision that if you “knew” it was there. It is just a fact. It was there.
more aware and may diminish complaints later on. He would have to defer to Mr. W
making it a standard condition,
Karen Hirata, Deputy City Attorney, reported back to the Commission on the changes to the Brow
which go into effect on April 1, 1994. There were four items which were important. (1) The
contains a definition of a meeting, which was not there before. Now it states that a meeting
conferences, social or ceremonial occasions, and open community meetings which are organized by
private parties as long as a majority of the members of a legislative body do not discuss among themselves
MINUTES
.
r C
PROOF OF PUBLlCATlON
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Oiego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County sforssald: I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of
Blade-Citizen
a newspaper of general circulation, printed and
published daily in the City of Oceanside and qualified for
the City of Oceanside and the North County Judicial district with substantial circulation in Bonsall, Fallbrook, Leucadia, Encinitas, Cardiff, Vista and Cartsbad, County of San Diego, and which newspaper has been adjudged
a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior
Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, under the date of June 30,1989, case number 171349; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy
(set in type not smaller than nonpareil), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
April 8, 1994
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at Oceanside,Califomia, this day 8 of April, 1994
Signature
BLADE-CITIZEN
Legal Advertising
1722 South Hill Street
P.O. Box 90 Oceanside, CA 92054
(619) 433-7333
This space is for the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
'. Notice of Public Hearing
?!I have quesl ia I f=‘- n^fi-rk Y
-Tons regarding this matter, please urIIS uGWl~o in the Planning Department, at 14p4 x1.4445. Iu aldlltinge the Zone Code Amendment in wur W may be limited to raisineonly those IssUeS .?- . * -_ __-.wL a a st ttw nhllf! heafin(
sring at the ~ii’i%i&dWtae Drive,
,) au0 ii utdtion for SeniOr ----.I .L^ dY*,Q. .&+inn
emniern utw OWUV~I VVI -f, H design and development Starr tn Senior Citizen needs
w aenwmxr LU UK wy UI.WIIVYY- --, -.-..- - c.e at: or prior to,the publfc heanng. ,
APPLICANT: City of Cartsbad Legal 39148 April 8,1994 -.
6194398659 BLfinE-C
.
TIZEN 859 P82 APf? 06 ‘94 14:41
NOTEEOt:P~~ ZCA % BwwlallzElI sN6 FUNICE IS HEREBY MN that the ti Coumcil of the city of Carl&d will hold I publkj x earing at the clly Cwndl Chambels, 1200 callsbed vluage Drive Cdwi hliiomia at 6:Oi PM on Tuesday Aprlf 19 1994 to corsidec anrendmnts to vafious’~ lerb and hctions of Title 21 ol the tabbad Municipal Code to: citizen iialsin * (2. 1.) add a defmitipn for Senior
$hor Citizen PI ! amend the atyp existing ouslng Regulaiions t cpfp& he provisions of Gwemment Code ia ijnd (3.) Matdish new &sign and d@4!@mW sth flmls which remon to Senior Citizen needs
fepardllQ thls matter, pw rho In the Plannr~ D~arlnerd, at 438-1161 ext. 4445. - - if you chihnge Ihe Zone Code MeRdment in GO@ you may be liiikl to raisin r&&d by you M someme d IL only wss issues at the; public hearing described in thii notice or in writtei corre$ on- dorm delivered to the h@ of Carisb)d City Et erk’s Off&e at, w prior, to,the public heating.
APPLIUNT: City of Cartsbad hoal 39144 &ril8,1994
friday legab2x-4-8 susankud
.
A
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ZCA 93-5
SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold
a public hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive,
Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 P.M., on Tuesday, April 19, 1994, to consider
amendments to various chapters and sections of Title 21 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code to: (1.) add a definition for Senior Citizen Housing; (2.) amend the City's existing Senior Citizen Housing Regulations to conform to the provisions of Government Code Section 65915; and (3.) establish new design and development standards which respond to Senior Citizen needs Citywide.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Chris DeCerbo in the Planning Department, at 4381161, ext. 4445.
If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising
only those issues raised by you or someone else at the public hearing described
in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad
City Clerk's Office at, or prior, to the public hearing.
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad PUBLISH: April 8, 1994 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
rC
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold
a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, February 16, 1994, to consider an amendment to
various chapters and sections of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (Title 21) to: (1) add a
definition for Senior Citizen: Housing, (2) amend the City’s existing Senior Citizen Housing
regulations to conform to the provisions of Government Code Section 65915 and to (3)
establish new design and development standards which respond to Senior Citizen needs
Citywide.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the staff report will be available on and after February 10, 1994. If you
have any questions, please call Chris DeCerbo in the Planning Department at (619) 438-
1161, ext. 4445.
If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in
written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: ZCA 93-05
CASE NAME: SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING
PUBLISH DATES:
BLADE CITIZEN: FEBRUARY 4, 1994
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
CD:vd
.
-
(Form A)
TO:
FROM:
RE:
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice SENIOR CITIZEN HOUSING -
ZCA 93-05 for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the Council meeting of .
Thank you.
MARTY ORENYAK MARCH 21, 1994
Assistant City Manager Date
Attachments