HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-06-21; City Council; 12743; Time Share ProjectsCl-=? OF CARLSBAD - AGEI-)A BILL 114 kJ
\B # /di ~~~ T&j.&, ADOPTION OF ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO
ATG. L-@d%
TIONS AND CONDITIONAL USES SECTION OF TITLE
21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE
lEPT?@ PLN COMMERCIAL LIVING UNITS AND TO ALLOW TIME-SHARE
PROJECTS IN COMMERCIAL ZONES. ZCA 93-07
IECOMMENDED ACTION:
Adopt Resolution No. qqe /by . APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by the
Planning Director, and INTRODUCE Ordinance No. A/S- A8 4 . APPROVING ZCA 93-07.
ITEM EXPLANATION
On March 2, 1994, the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval of ZCA 93-07
which requests an amendment to the definitions section of the Zoning Ordinance, (Title 21&l), to
discriminate between residential dwelling units and commercial living units and an amendment to the
Conditional Uses section (Title 21.42) to allow time share projects in C-T and C-2 zone.
The Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan, dated September 16, 1986 states on page 7 that,
“Hotel, motel, time-share, board and care,... were not considered as units for the purpose of dwelling
unit calculations.” The proposed zone code amendment codifies this clarification.
Time-share projects are presently governed by Section 21.42.010(10) of the Zoning Ordinance which
allows time-share projects with the approval of a conditional use permit only in redevelopment and
residential zones. This ordinance was adopted in January of 1983 and reflected a minimal experience
with this land use. This included an assumption that the time-share may be occupied up to four
months by recurrent exclusive use thereby giving the impression of a residential rather than
commercial endeavor.
Experience with time-shares indicates that this is not the case. When the City Council accepted the
North Beach Planning/Traffic study dated April, 1987 it was already clear that in reference to time-
shares, “In appearance and function they often tend to operate more like a hotel or motel” (page
82). The Tamarack Beach Resort was conditioned to be converted to a hotel if it was not successful
as a time-share. Both the Tamarack Beach Resort and the Carlsbad Inn were conditioned to limit
sales to time increments not to exceed one month, which is more in keeping with a commercial
rather than residential use.
Given these precedents, staff and the Planning Commission recommend time-shares be conditionally
allowed within the C-T and C-2 zones subject to the condition of conversion to a hotel as well as
the conditions required of hotels to receive a conditional use permit under Chapter 21.42.010(12).
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Environmental review was conducted for the proposed project, and a Negative Declaration was
issued by the Planning Director on February 3, 1994.
FISCAL IMPACT
No fiscal impact is projected as a result of this zone code amendment.
EXHIBITS
1. City Council Resolution No. 4 q- /b Y
2. Ordinance No. A/S-&%?
-. 3 Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3632 and 3633
4. Staff Report dated March 2, 1994, with attachments
5. Planning Commission Minutes dated March 2, 1994
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
h
RESOLUTION NO. 94-164
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND TITTLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE, TO DISCRIMINATE BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND COMMERCIAL LIVING UNITS AND AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USES SECTION TO ALLOW TIME SHARE PROJECTS IN SPECIFIC COMMERCIAL ZONES. CASE NAME: TIME SHARE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT CASE NO: 0
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal
Code, the Planning Commission did, on March 2, 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. 3632, 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.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
I
. .
.
1
2
3
4
5
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
21st day of JUNE , 1994, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Stanton, Kulchin, Nygaard, Finnila
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST:
THA &&@TEt-j@iNZ, City Clerk
KAREN R. KUNDTZ, AMstant City Clerk (SEAL)
-2-
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
-. .-
ORDINANCE NO. NS - 2 8 4
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA AMENDING TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY
AMENDING CHAPTER 21.04 (DEFINITIONS) BY
ADDING SUBSECTION 21.04.093 TO DEFINE
COMMERCIAL LIVING UNIT, AMENDING
SUBSECTION 21.04.115 (DWELLING) TO EXCLUDE
COMMERCIAL LIVING UNITS, AND BY AMENDING
SECTION 21.42 (CONDITIONAL USES) BY AMENDING
SUBSECTION 21.42.010( 10) TO CONDITIONALLY
ALLOW TIME-SHARE PROJECTS IN C-T AND C-2
ZONES.
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted by resolution a city-wide facilities and
mprovements plan to implement the City’s general plan by securing provision of facilities
md improvements, and to ensure that development does not occur unless facilities and
mprovements are available; and
WHEREAS, that city-wide facilities and improvements plan, dated
September 16, 1986, states that hotels, motels, time-shares, and board and cares are not
o be considered as units for the purpose of dwelling unit calculations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has conditioned time-share projects to convert
o hotel use if unsuccessfully marketed as a time-share and/or limited sales to time
ncrements not to exceed one month; and
WHEREAS, the North Beach Planning/Traffic study dated April, 1987 states
hat in appearance and function time-share projects operate like a hotel;
The City Council of t1: Sity of Carlsbad, California does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Title 21, C’?-,;rter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
s amended by the addition of Section 21.04.093 to read as follows:
21.04.093 Commercial Living Unit.
“Commercial Living Unit” means a unit that may be within but is not limited
o a professional care facility, hotel, motel, time-share, or bed and breakfast that provides
he basic amenities for everyday living and may include but is not limited to a sleeping
Irea, or bedroom(s), closet space, restroom, sitting/entertainment area, and kitchen
facilities. Commercial living units are distinguished from dwelling units due to the
1 assistance/services provided in conjunction with the living unit and/or the use of the living
2 unit for temporary lodging.”
3 SECTION II: That Title 21, Chapter 21.04, Section 21.04.115 is amended
4 to include the following:
5 21.04.115 Dwellinp.
“Dwelling” means a building or portion thereof designed exclusively for
6 residential purposes, including one-family, two-family and multiple dwellings, but does not
7 include commercial living units.
8 SECTION III: That Title 21, Chapter 21.04, Section 21.42.010(10) is
9 amended to read as follows:
10 (10) V-R, R-P, R-3, RD-M, R-T, C-T, and C-2 zones only:
11 (A) Time-share projects as defined by Section 21.04.357 of this code and
subject to the following regulations:
12 (i) A conditional use permit shall be required for all time-share
projects. All projects shall be subject to the development standards and design criteria of
13 Chapter 21.45 of this code, except that:
(I) The city council may reduce the required residential
l4 parking down to one parking space per unit.
15 (II) The city council may waive the storage area
requirements of Section 21.45.090(l). Any reduction in the parking or storage requirements
16 shall be supported by a finding that the reduction is necessary for the development of the
17 project and will not adversely affect the neighborhood.
(ii) If a time-share project on a residentially zoned property is 18 proposed with reduced standards, the applicant shall provide a conversion plan showing
how the project can be altered to bring it into conformance with the development
19 standards and design criteria of the planned development ordinance. A conversion shall
be approved as and be made a part of the permit for the project.
20 (iii) If a time-share project is proposed in a non-residential
21 zone it shall be conditioned to be converted to a hotel use if it can not be successfully
marketed as a time-share project, and shall be subject to all conditions of Section
22 21.42.010(12)(A)(i) and (ii).
(iv) All prc :losals for time-share projects shall be accompanied
23 by a detailed description of the met! proposed to be employed to guarantee the future adequacy, stability and continuitv ,,I a satisfactorv level of management and maintenance.
24 A management and mainten?> c AAie plan shall be appl-oved as and made a part of the permit
25 for the project.
(v) All units in a time-share project shall be time-share units
26 except a permanent on-site management residence unit may be permitted. The maximum
time increment for recurrent exclusive use of occupancy of a time-share unit shall be four
27 months. A note indicating this requirement shall be placed on the final map for the
28 I/ project.
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
-
(vi) In addition to the four mandatory findings required for the
issuance of a conditional use permit under Section 21.42.020, the city council shall find that
the time-share project is located in reasonable proximity to an existing resort or public
recreational area and, therefore, can financially and geographically function as a successful
time-share project and that the project will not be disruptive to existing or future uses in
the surrounding neighborhood.
(vii) Time-share projects may be allowed in the P-C zone if
specified in the master plan for the area in which they will be located and the land use’
designation for the master plan area in which the proposed time-share project will be
located is similar to the R-P, R-3, RD-M, R-T, C-T, or C-2 zones.
(viii) All of the provisions of this section shall apply to the
conversion of an existing structure to a time-share project.
(ix) All time-share projects shall be processed in accordance
with this section except that subsequent to planning commission review, the matter shall
be set for public hearing before the city council. The city council may approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the project. The decision of the city council is final.
(x) A subdivision map filed in accordance with Title 20 of this
code shall accompany any application for a time-share project.
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 newspaper of general circulation within the City within
fifteen days after its adoption.
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad
City Council held on the day of , 1994, and thereafter
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of said City Council held
on day of , 1994, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
3
4
L EXkiBlT 3
*
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3632
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
THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO (1) DISCRIMINATE
BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND
COMMERCIAL LIVING UNITS AND (2) TO ALLOW TIME-
SHARE PROJECTS WITHIN THE C-2 AND C-T ZONES WITH
A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.
CASE NAME: TIME-SHARE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT
CASE NO: ZCA 93-07
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 2nd day of February, 1994,
10
11
12
13
14
15
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, a&zing 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
16
as follows: 17
18 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
19 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning
Commission hereby recommends APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration according 20 to Exhibit “ND”, dated February 3, 1994, and “PII”, dated January 19, 1994,
21 attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
22 Findims:
23
24
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant impact on the environment.
25 “’
26 0.0
27 . . .
28
i
2
3
4
S
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 Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of February, 1994,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Savary; Commissioners: Schlehuber, Betz, Noble,
Welshons, Erwin & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
CARLSBAD PLANNING-COMMISSION ATTEST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RESO NO. 3632 -2- 0
Carlsbad
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: Citywide
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zone Code Amendment to the definitions section to
discriminate between residtnrial dwelling units and
commercial living units and amc~ndrncnt to the
Conditional Uses section to allow lime share projects in
commercial zones.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of t hc above described project
pursuant to the Guidelines for [mplementation of the California Environmental Quality Act
and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said
review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant
impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this
action is on file in the Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the
public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Dcparrmcnt within
30 days of date of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Brian Hunter in the
Planning Department at (619) 438-l 161, extension 4457.
,
DATED: FEBRUARY 3, 1994 / 1 r.cl;<xL C’~~.~&~~~ y
MICI IAi’l. .J. f IOl‘.%MII.t,r’:R
CASE NO: ZCA 93-07 I’lanning Dircctot
CASE NAME: TIME SHARE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT
PUBLISH DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 1994
9
2075 Las Palmas Drive - Carlsbad, California 92009-l 576 - (619) 438-l 161 @
.
. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMEN’I’FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. ZCA 93-07
DA’I’E: January 19, 1994
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Time Share Zone Code Amendment
2. APPLICANT: Hofman Plannina Associates
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2386 Faraday Avenue. Suite 120
Carlsbad, CA 92008
(619) 438-1465
4. DATE EIA FORM PART 1 SUBMITTED: Julv 21. 1993
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zone Code Amendment to the definition section to discriminate
between dwellinn units from commercial living units and amendment to the Conditional Uses
section to allow timeshare proiects in commercial zones.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an
Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment.
The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This
checklist 8 identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed
project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an
Environmental Impact Report or Negative Declaration.
‘.. A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the 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 cvidcnce that any aspect of the
project may cause a sinnificant effectf 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-sig” and “YES-insig”
respectively.
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under
DISCUSStON OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing
mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
. PHYSICAL ENWKONMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR [NDIRECTLY:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Result in unstable earth conditions or
increase the exposure of people or property
to geologic hazards?
Appreciably change the topography or any
unique physical features?
Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
either on or off the site?
Result in changes in the deposition of beach
sands, or modification of the channel of a
river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake?
Result in substantial adverse*effects on
ambient air quality?
Result in substantial changes in air
movement, odor, moisture, or temperature?
Substantially change the course or flow of
water (marine, fresh or flood waters)?
Affect the quantity or quality of surface
water, ground water or public water supply?
Substantially increase usage or cause
depletion of any natural resources?
Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
Alter a significant archeological,
paleontological or historical site,
structure or object?
YES YES
big) (insig)
NO
x
A---
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
-2-
BIOLOGICAL ENVIKONMEN'I'
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR [NDIRECTLY:
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
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 or 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?
HUMANENVIRONMENT
WILLTHE PROPOSAL DIRECTLYORINDIRECTLY:
17. Alter the present or planned land use of an area?
18. Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services?
YES YES (\IR) (in5lgJ
NO
x
x
YES YES (six) (iilsig)
x
x
x
NO
x
x
-3-
HUMAN ENVIRONMEN'I L
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
2.5.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Result in the need for new or. modified sewer
systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems?
Increase existing noise levels?
Produce new light or glare?
Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
Affect existing housing, or Sreate 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?
YES YES (“K) (In\ig)
NO
x
-A.-
-L
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
-4-
-* - . .
MANDATOKY FINDINGS OF SIGNlI~lCANC~ .
LULL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: YES YES
33.
34.
35.
36.
hx) (iwig)
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.
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 current 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
-5-
- .
DISCUSS[ON OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
The proposed Zone Code Amendment is a change in text of the Zoning Ordinance that discriminates berbveen
residential dwelling units and commercial living units, as well as, allows rime share projects in commercial
tourist and general commercial zones with the issuance of a conditional use permit. ‘I‘he project therefore
is non site specific and prior to any approval of physical projects the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act will be met. Historically the City of Carlsbad’s Growth Management Plan has
considered uses such as time share projects and professional care facilities commercial enterprises, but the
Zoning Ordinance has not specifically recognized such distinction; the amendment may be viewed as a
clarification through codification of existing policy.
-6-
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATWES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS: .
a) Phased-development of the project,
b) alternate site designs,
c) alternate scale of development,
d) alternate uses for the site,
e) development at some future time rather than now,
f) alternate sites for the proposed, and
g) no project alternative.
The project is a zone code amendment without site or phasing specificity therefore an analysis of alternative
temporal and spatial relationships provides no potential benefit. Any physical project that is developed
through the auspices of this amended code section will be analyzed with complete regard for the California
Environmental Quality Act.
-7-
-.
d
. .
DETERMINATION (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) .
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
x I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the cnvironmcnt, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the
environmental effects of the proposed. project have already been considered in conjunction with
previously certified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required.
Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation mcasurcs described on an attached
sheet have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed.
I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
-la 2q, \wt
Date d Signature I ’
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLKABLE]
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGMM (IF APPLKABLE)
-8-
DISCLOSL'RE STATEMENT /
I A-‘m:cAflf STAP&*rr OF 3fSCtOSUM Of CEinAlN OWNEPSHIP ‘MEPESTS ON A& AP~C,AtlONS ,NHICH WILL a~.z~,.,q
t =!sC8E’:OMaY ACTiON CN “+ PAm 06 mfi Cm COUNC;l- OR ANY APpOIHTEO ~APO. COMMIS
1 :‘ersr a-,-n
“ke ‘oilowIng information must be disclosed:
1 Amlicant
JUL 2 1 I993 . 1
cg;TT Q? (;;,y::q;.. :. .’ :.
._, ., I . . ‘7‘
-VP’) .‘,.‘/ * . I.. ; .-“, i 5 :
y ‘-. ,. : i ‘, . _ ‘. . ,I ; - -. -
List the names and addresses of all persons having a financial interest in the application. . . Iam N l-k&man
7711 Rrrin Ctrryt
CA 97fMQ
2. gwnor -
List the names and addresses of all persons having any ownership intomt‘in the property involved
3. If any perron idonUW pukumt to (1) 01 (2) abovo ir a corpordon or p8rtnonhip, list the names aT: addresses of all indMdu8b owning mom than 1096 of the ahma in the corpor8Uon or owning any pannersr:
interest in m0 putnomhip.
4. n~p~id~~to(l)or(2)rbowb8nongro(llorgurbrtkrr#r~st,li~menunesar addr~afuy Fmron~w~or~~~tlW~~oru~~~orbeneficta
of tn. tfust
0 J,
FRM13 4/9l Pagelof?'
2075 Las Palmu Orivo l Carlmdrd. Californir 9200914669 0 (619) 439-1161
@
. -’
Disclosure Ststoment
iCvef)
Page 2
5. Have you had more fhan $250 wOt?h Of busmess transacted wrth any member of City staff, goarcs
Commissions, Commitfees and Council within the past twelve months?
Yes - No & If yes, p/8aS8 indiCat8 P8BOn(S)
%r~on 14 &fined u: ‘Any maiwdd firm. co04Rfw4k10. ~01nt vmturr. wocmtion. socd club. fratomti orpwx4non. eorwrmon **tat* !l-,st.
wcmv*f. synalcato. tlw mo 4ny omr couy. c* m6 county. cfty munW04llry. dmtn0t or 0Uw porfbcal submmon. of my emu puo c, I
comom4non mng u 4 unrC’
(NO-. Anacn aaaRK)naI pagea aa nuaaaary.)
Slgnatura d Chmwaar
Pm or rypa nitno d OwnOr
FRM 13 4/91
4 /&- 7.-21-43
d a&a- .(
Lc/‘, L&-l td AC C-lMda
Pm or typa mm0 d 8ppCrOn
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3633
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) DISCRIMINATE BETWEEN
RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS AND COMMERCIAL LMNG
UNITS AND (2) ALLOW TIME-SHARE PROJECTS WITHIN
THE C-T AND C-2 ZONES WITH A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT.
CASE NAME: TIME-SHARE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT
CASE NO: ZCA 93-07
WHEREAS, a verified application has been filed with the City of Carlsbad and
referred to the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request as provided by Title
21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning
Commission did, on the 16th day of March, 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 ZCA 93-07.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
~ of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
~ A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
FUXOMMENDS APPROVAL of ZCA 93-07, according to Exhibit “Z”, dated March 2,
1994, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Fir&m:
1. The City Council adopted by resolution a city-wide facilities and improvements plan
to implement the city’s general plan by securing provision of facilities and
improvements, and to ensure that development does not occur unless facilities and
imnrovements are available.
i
L
. , I -
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
22
24
25
26
27
28
2. The proposed amendment is consistent with the intent of the existing city-wide
facilities and improvements plan, dated September 16,1986 as that document states
that hotel, motel, time-share, and board and care projects were not considered as
units for the purpose of dwelling unit calculations.
3. The City Council has previously conditioned time-share projects to convert to hotel
use if unsuccessful and/or to limit sales to time increments not to exceed one month
thereby ensuring a commercial rather than residential land use.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 2nd day of February, 1994, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Savary; Commissioners: Schlehuber, Betz, Noble,
Welshons, Erwin & Hall.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
,~
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HxZMIkER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RESO NO. 3633 -2-
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
I.
STAFF REPORT
EXHIBIT 4
APPLICATION COMPLETE DATE:
AUGUST 20.1993
STAFF PLANNER: BRIAN HUNTER cc,e
0 6
MARCH 2, 1994
PLANNING COMMISSION
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ZCA 93-07 - TIME-SHARE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT - A request for
approval of a Zone Code Amendment to the definitions section of the Zoning
Ordinance to discriminate between residential dwelling units and commercial
living units and an amendment to the Conditional Uses section to allow time-
share projects in specific commercial zones.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution
No. 3632 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration issued by the P!anning
Director, and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 3633 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of ZCA 93-07, based on the findings contained therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The project as submitted is a request for approval of a Zone Code Amendment to the
definitions section (Chapter 21.04) of the Zoning Ordinance to discrimkate between
residential dwelling units and time-share units and an amendment to the Conditional Uses
section (Chapter 21.42) to allow time-share projects in C-T and C-2 commercial zones.
The Carlsbad Municipal Code contains two definitions pertaining to dwellings. The existing
definition of dwelling is found in Chapter 21.04.115. It states “Dwelling” means a building
or portion thereof designed exclusively for residential purposes, including one-family, two-
family and multiple dwellings, but does not include hotels. The existing definition of
dwelling unit is in Chapter 21.04.120. It states “Dwelling Unit” means one or more rooms
in a dwelling or apartment house and designated for occupancy by one family for living or
sleeping purposes, and having only one kitchen.
The applicant, Hofman Planning Associates (HPA), is requesting that both definitions be
amended to specifically exclude time-shares from consideration as dwelling units. Further
they have suggested a specific definition for Dwelling, Time-share which follows: “Dwelling,
Time-share” means a residential unit with a kitchen, designed for occupancy by one or
more families on a periodic basis.
F c I . b - ZCA 93-07 - TIMESHA ZONE CODE AMENDMENT
MARCH 2, 1994 . PAGE 2
The Citywide Facilities and Improvement Plan, dated September 16, 1986, states on page
7 that, “Hotel, motel, time-share, board and care,... were not considered as units for the
purpose of dwelling unit calculations.”
Presently time-share projects are allowed in V-R, R-P, R-3, RD-M, and R-T zones only with
the approval of a conditional use permit. The applicant is requesting that C-T and C-2
zones be added to this list and that if proposed in commercial zones shall be conditioned
to be converted to hotel use if it cannot be successfully marketed as a time-share project.
III. ANALYSlS
1. Is the proposed zone code definition amendment consistent with the General Plan
and Chapter 21.90 (Growth Management)?
2. Is the proposed zone code conditional uses amendment compatible and consistent
with existing allowed conditional uses?
The City Council adopted by resolution a city-wide facilities and improvements plan to
implement the city’s general plan by securing provision of facilities and improvements, and
to ensure that development does not occur unless facilities and improvements are available
(Chapter 21.90.090 (a)). As previously noted that plan deletes hotels, motels, time-share,
board and care, etc. from consideration as units for the purpose of dwelling unit
calculations. Although staff has no objection to the applicant’s request for specific
clarification as regards “time-share units”, the aforementioned history begs a broader
context to this zone code amendment. Rather than attempt an exhaustive list of distinct
definitions by title associated with dwelling units, it is suggested that a single inclusive
definition by attributes be adopted. This will allow the zone code to focus on use rather
than language. Therefore, staff is recommending against amending the zone code to
provide a special definition for time-share dwelling. Instead, staff is recommending that
the zone code be amended to provide a definition for “Commercial Living Unit.”
The distinction that is apparent within the City Council’s adoption of the caveat exempting
commercial living units from consideration as residential dwelling units needs clarification
via codification within the definition section of the Zoning Ordinance. “Commercial Living
Unit” means a unit that may be within but is not limited to a professional care facility,
hotel, motel, time-share, or bed and breakfast that provides the basic amenities for
everyday living and may include but is not limited to a sleeping area, or bedroom(s), closet
space, restroom, sitting/entertainment area and kitchen facilities. Commercial living units
are distinguished from dwelling units due to the assistance/services provided in conjunction
with the living unit and/or the use of the living unit for temporary lodging.
-
ZCA 93-07 - TIME-SHhk ZONE CODE AMENDMENT
MARCH 2, 1994
PAGE 3
Time-share projects are presently governed by Section 21.42.010(10) of the Zoning
Ordinance which allows t-ime-share projects with the approval of a conditional use permit
in V-R, R-P, R-3, RD-M and R-T zones only. This ordinance (#9663) was adopted in
January of 1983 and reflected a minimal experience with this land use. This included an
assumption that the time-share may be occupied up to four months by recurrent exclusive
use thereby giving the impression of a residential rather than commercial endeavor.
Experience with time-shares indicates that this is not the case.
The majority of time-share owners own one or two specific weeks at a specific resort. It
is common to trade both the resort location and the week(s) via a time-share exchange
company. In fact, per Owners Resorts and Exchange Services, Inc., it is not uncommon for
owners to never use their specific week or resort. Both the Carlsbad Inn and the Tamarack
Beach Resort are affiliated with Resort Condominiums International (RCI - a time-share
exchange company), which represents 2,400 resorts in 80 countries. There are 1.4 million
member families which availed themselves of RCI’s services approximately 1 million times
in 1992. In these situations where an exchange takes place the time-shares are treated
similar to a hotel, per the City’s Financial Management Director, Jim Elliott, and a transient
occupancy tax is collected on the daily or weekly rate paid.
When the City Council accepted the North Beach Planning/Traffic Study dated April, 1987
it was already clear that, ‘Time-share projects by nature are generally larger projects and
do not have the residential character of a bed and breakfast. In appearance and function
they often tend to operate more like a hotel or motel.” (page 82). This sense of hotel
instead of residence was further amplified when the City Council, sitting as the Housing
and Redevelopment Commission, conditioned the Tamarack Beach Resort time-share project
to be converted to a hotel if it was not successful as a time-share project, even though the
existing ordinance requires a conversion plan to a standard residential condominium. No
impropriety is suggested as the Housing and Redevelopment Commission is authorized by
Section 21.35.130 to grant exceptions from the limits, restrictions, and controls of the
zoning ordinance. Both the Tamarack Beach Resort and the Carlsbad Inn were conditioned
to limit sales to time increments not to exceed one month, even though the existing
ordinance as noted previously allows up to a four month recurrent exclusive use.
Presently, hotels are allowed by right within the C-T zone and with a Conditional Use
Permit within the C-2 zone. Since the City Council has accepted that time-shares operate
in a similar fashion to hotels and has previously conditioned a time-share to convert to a
hotel if unsuccessful as a time-share, staff recommends that considering those precedents time-shares be conditionally allowed within the C-T and C-2 zones subject to the condition
of conversion to a hotel as well as the conditions required of hotels to receive a conditional
use permit under Chapter 21.42.010(12).
ZCA 93-07 - TIME-SHAKE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT
MARCH 2, 1994
PAGE 4
Iv. EIWIRONMENTAL RE%IEW
The Planning Director has determined that this zone code amendment, to amend the
definitions section of the Zoning Ordinance to discriminate between residential dwelling
units and commercial living units and to amend the Conditional Uses section of the Zoning
Ordinance to conditionally allow time-share projects within the C-T and C-2 zones, 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.
SUMMARY
The applicant has proposed a Zone Code Amendment that would discriminate between
residential dwelling and time-share units plus allow time-share projects in the C-T and C-2
commercial zones. Although the applicant’s proposal would clarify the difference between
residential and time-share units, it is not broad enough to encompass commercial uses that
involve providing temporary shelter. Therefore, staff has recommended defining a new
class of uses “Commercial Living Unit” instead of the narrow term Time-share Dwelling.
Furthermore, staff is recommending that the zones conditionally allowing the proposed
commercial living units be expanded to include C-T and C-2 commercial zones.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3632
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3633
3. Disclosure Statement.
BH:vd:lh
February 3, 1994
EXHIBIT 5
PLANNING COMMISSION March 2, 1994 PAGE 11
rhood and he has never seen any problems. Many times college students will room together.
sioner Noble believes that this type of housing fills a definite need.
disapproves of being able to stack so many people to a small space. She thinks the
od point. She would like to see it come back.
lehuber commented that if wesend it back, staff might want to look at removing the
deed restriction . He thinks we might get more affordable units by letting it be voluntary. The
homeowner sho e the ability to buy out his contract at some point.
Commissioner Hall inqui has enough direction on what the Commission is looking for. Gary
Wayne, Assistant Planni r, replied that he wants the Commission to know that staff may not be
able to satisfy some of their c s. If there was some way to keep the rents down, there might not have
to be a deed restriction. He s the concerns about minimum lot size, banking, garage
conversions, and the level o strative permit versus having it come to the Planning Commission.
Commissioner Schlehuber doesn’t f size is a big issue because you can’t get a second unit on a
4,000 s.f. lot. He does feel that the ig issue although he knows that everyone won’t be satisfied
with everything.
Gary Wayne commented that Commissioner N es on a 6,000 sf. lot and he would not be able to
build a second unit. He thinks that lot size and me the required setbacks will preclude many people
from being able to build second units.
Commissioner Welshons would like to see this come bat h more visual information. She would also
like to have the concerns of the Encinitas Unified School 0 dressed as much as possible. Ms.
Hirata replied that she may be unable to elaborate fully du ending litigation with the Carlsbad
Unified School District.
Commissioner Hall would like to see a slide presentation showing th
Commissioner Schlehuber commented that there is tandem parking all o he City. Staff could take at
least 20 pictures with tandem parking.
Commissioner Erwin thinks tandem parking is different when everyone lives in t
than separate structures. His concern is what is the next step. He believes peopl
variances because the law is unworkable,
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Schlehuber, and duly seconded, to
92-94 to April 6,1994 so that staff will have an opportunity to rework the a
VOTE: 7-O
AYES: Chairman Savary, Commissioners Betz, Erwin, Hall, Noble, Schlehuber and
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ZCA 93-07 - TIME SHARE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT - For recommendation of approval of a
Negative Declaration and a Zone Code Amendment to the definitions section of the Zoning
Ordinance to discriminate between residential dwelling units and commercial living units and an
amendment to the Conditional Uses section to allow time share projects in specific commercial
zones.
Brian Hunter, Senior Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that this zone code
amendment speaks to two different items. The first issue is the bank, which Commissioner Schlehuber is
MINUTES w 1/
PLANNING COMMISSION March 2, 1994 PAGE 12
concerned with, and includes definitions. The second issue is a change in the locations where time shares
are allowed. Presently, they are only allowed in the redevelopment area and residential zones, Staff is
recommending that they be allowed in commercial zones, specifically the Commercial-Tourist (CT) and
the K-2 zone (Community Commercial). This ZCA was brought to the City by Hofman Planning
Associates, who requested a change to the definition of dwelling unit to specifically delineate it from a
residential unit. As staff looked into the history of time shares, they came to the conclusion that it would be
best to come up with a separate definition which speaks to commercial living units. Mr. Hunter reviewed
the proposed new definition of Commercial Living Unit and described how it differs from that of a normal
dwelling unit. He stated that the Carlsbad Beach Resort and the Tamarack Beach Resort are two excellent
examples of time share units in Carlsbad. Staff recommends approval of the proposed ZCA.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if time shares can presently be used as hotel rooms. Mr. Hunter replied yes.
Commissioner Betz inquired if the commercial living unit definition would also include SROs. Mr. DeCerbo
replied that managed living units can only be included in commercial zones.
Chairman Savary noted that the staff report states that occupancy in a time share can go from one week to
four months. Mr. Hunter replied that is correct. If the Commission agrees, staff will follow this ZCA up with
an actual amendment showing actions which have occurred over the past several years. Staff originally
felt that time shares would be more residential in nature but that has not been the case. He thinks the new
definition and ordinance will be much more clear.
Chairman Savary inquired if the hotel uses would also be covered in the new amendment. Mr. Hunter
replied that in 1986 hotels were disallowed in residential areas. Since time shares operate as hotels, it may
be appropriate to remove them from residential areas.
Chairman Savary invited the applicant to speak.
Mike Howes, Hofman Planning Associates, 2386 Faraday, Cartsbad, addressed the Commission and
stated that he agrees with the staff recommendation and would be happy to answer questions.
Commissioner Erwin asked Mr. Howes if he could describe the project coming down the line that this
change will relate to. Mr. Howes replied that he is currently working on a project for the C-T zone in the
southern part of the City. He hopes to get it to the Planning Commission by spring.
Chairman Savary opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
There being no other 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.
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Erwin, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. 3632 recommending approval of the Negative Declaration
issued by the Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3633
recommending approval of ZCA 93-07, based on the findings contained therein.
VOTE: 7-O
AYES: Chairman Savary, Commissioners Be@ Erwin, Hall, Noble, Schlehuber and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSTAIN: None
ADDED ITEMS w
Deputy Attorney Htrata stated that sent a memo to the Commissioners regarding the changes to
the Brown Act.
Fl)IlM
. ,, -
7. Q.lQR? -:?a P. T
Hofman Planning
Associates
l a 0 1
DATE JUNE 21, 1994 /
TO: CAR1SRAI-I CITY COUNCLL /
VU; CITY MANAOER’S OFFICE I
I
PROM: HOFMAN PLANNING ASSOCIATES ’
SUBJECT: ZONE CODE AMENDMENT (ZCA) 93 07: TXMESHARES
The applicant requests that the following minor rcvisi~n be made to the second sentence in 010(10)(A)(i) of the prnp~.wr! 7mc Code Amendment to the Carlabad Municipal
tence currently reads as follows; t I
“All projects shall be subject to the development $tandards and design ctiteria of Chapter 21.45 of this code, except that:'
The applicant i8 requesting that the following revision bc made to this sentence, new wording
is in bold type;
” All projects in r&dcnlinl zones shall 5e subject to the develcpncnt stindard, and design critctia of Chapter 2 1.45 of this code, while mll projectr in non-rssidenthl zone
&alJ be sub&t to lhc dcvclopment and design Criteria of the underlyiq mme, emxpt
that; ” 0 1
Staff supgorls the requested change and bc!itvcs that it is cmnsiatmt with the intent of the ZCA which was unanimously approved by the Planning Comn)ission. Mike Bowes of out oFf’icc will be nt tonight’s City Council meeting to answer any quo$tions rcgardiug this request.
CC: Michael Holzmifler / Gasy Wayne Brian Hunter /
i
.- r - , , -
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
93-7 ZCA
TINE SHARE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT
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, June 21, 1994, to consider an Amendment to Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to amend the definitions section of the Zoning Ordinance to define commercial living unit, and an amendment to the section regarding Conditional Uses to conditionally allow time share projects in specific commercial (C-T and C-2) zones in the City of Carlsbad.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Brian Hunter in the Planning Department, at 438-1161, ext. 4457.
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: June 10, 1994 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
r-
ZCA 93-07
TIME SHAREZONECODE
AMENDMENT
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST SANMARCOSSCHOOLDIST JOHNBLAIR 129OW SAN MARCOS BLVD 801 PINE AVENUE SAN MARCOS CA 92069 CARLSBAD CA 92008
LEUCADIACOUNTYWTR DIST VALLECITOS WTR DISTRICT 1960 LACOSTAAV 788SANMARCOSBLVD CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAN MARCOS CA 92069
CITYOF CARLSBAD CITYOFCARLSBAD
ENGINEERING DEPT COMMUNITYSERVICES
CITYOF ENCINITAS SOS S.VULCANAV ENCINITAS CA 92024-3633
CITYOFVISTA PO BOX1988 VISTA CA 92085
ENCINITAS SCHOOL DIST ATTN: SHARONSOUTH 101SRANCHO SANTAFERD ENCINITAS CA 92024
SAN DIEGOCOUN-IY DEPTOF PLANNING 5201 RUFFIN RD STE "B" SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CITYOFCARLSBAD
CMWD
CITYOFSANMARCOS 1OSW RICHMARAVE SAN MARCOS CA 92069
Dr. George W. Mannon, CITY OF OCEANSIDE
Superintendent of Schools 300 N. HILL ST.
Carlsbad Unified School Dist. OCEANSIDE, CA 92054
801 Pine Ave.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
A I . . - NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsl~~d will hold
a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad,
California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 2, 1994, to consiclcr a request for approval
of a Zone Code Amendment to the definitions section of the Zoning Ordinance to
discriminate between residential dwelling units and commercial living units and an
amendment to the Conditional Uses section to allow time share projects in specific
commercial zones in the City of Carlsbad.
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 24, 1994. If you
have any questions, please call Brian Hunter in the Planning Department at (619) 438-
1161, ext. 4457.
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 tlcscril)c~tl in this notice or in
tiritten correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the pul)lic hearing.
CASE FILE: ZCA 93-07
CASE NAME: TIME SHARE ZONE CODE AMENDMENT
PUBLISH: FEBRUARY 18, 1994
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
‘
(Form A)
TO:
FROM:
RE:
’ CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice ZCA 93-07 - TIME SHARE ZONE
CODE AMENDMENT, for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the Council meeting of .
Thank you.
MARTY ORENYAK APRIL 14, 1994
Assistant City Manager Date
Attachments
PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: 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 Carlsbad, Count! of San Diego, and which newspaper has been adjudgec 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:
June 10, 1994
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at Oceanside California, this lo day
of June, 1934 .
BLADE-CITIZEN
Legal Advertising
1722 South Hill Street P.O. Box 90
Oceanside, CA 92054 (619) 433-7333
This space is for the County Cferk’s Filing Stamp
Mf of Publication of
Public Hearing
w-w
I - .--yl awl wnsloer 0 Title 21 of the b,.,,zh.m., I
innmm +a d-z--‘-w~ 10 ramon “P a.,.---- . . 1
11 ‘y lnlS mat&r, Ming I
*lW, ext. 4457.
?.Zy@ Code Amendment h llmt@d to reising on4 those u or someone else et we tihnrl k r)l’ ,c nn&.” --.
I
P$ic kwin~~e&. .Ily ,,, .“.,- ,,yuIz: pr In
h’fsbed W Chws Office at. w pn’m to, d WV&n corWpondence delwered to &e Q f
Polk hewing.
A L mm: q Of &isbad
2 ARLSBAO My 0DuNcl~ pal 39702,~~~ 10. 1994
c
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: 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 Carlsbad, 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:
June 10, 1944
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Dated at Oceanside,California, this day 1 o of \nllw, 1994 .
_> .-
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
Public Eearinq ._-__-_--____-_-___-------------------------~---------