HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-08-02; City Council; 12812; R-W Zone Parking Requirementsp
Y
Cl- OF CARLSBAD - AGEPA BILL I/%
AB # Id, 81 s TITLE. AR-W ZONE PARKING REQUlREMENTS MTG. 812194 ZCA 93-08
DEPT. PLN ti
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
CITY MGR. %w 4.
Both Planning Commission and staff are recommending that the City Council ADOPT
Resolution No. %-&!a3 APPROVING the Negative Declaration issued by the Planning
Director, and INTRODUCk Ordinance No. us-&, APPROVING ZCA 93-08.
I
ITEM EXPLANATION:
At the meeting of May 18, 1994, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Zone
Code Amendment (ZCA 93-08) which revises parking requirements for residential Planned Unit
Developments (PUDs) in the R-W (Residential Waterway) Zone by creating an exception for
these developments. The amended wording will allow such units to satisfy resident parking
requirements by providing one covered and one uncovered parking space per unit rather than
the two covered spaces currently required and to provide one of the required spaces tandem within the front yard setback. The proposed amendment does not change the number of
parking spaces required.
The City has only one R-W Zone. It is known as Bristol Cove and is located along the northern
edge of Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Most of the lots are developed with duplex or similar units.
Due to the small lot sizes and narrow configuration, as well as requirements to provide direct
access to the waterway, and compliance with other City development standards, it is almost
impossible for these lots to provide two covered parking spaces per residence. Because of the
unique characteristics of this zone, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending the
creation of the proposed exception.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
On May 18,1994, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Negative Declaration
issued by the Planning Director on March 30, 1994.
FISCAL IMPACT
There should be no fiscal impacts to the City as a result of this amendment.
EXHIBITS
1. City Council Resolution No. 94-223
2. City Council Ordinance No. /vS- 258
3. Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 3653 and 3654
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated May 18, 1994
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated May 18, 1994.
-
1
2
3
4
5
6
RESOLUTION NO. 94-223
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTERS 21.44 AND 21.45 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTIONS 21.44.020(a)(2), 21.44.050(a)(l) and21.45.090(c) TO REVISE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE R-W ZONE. CASE NAME: R-W ZONE PARKING REQUIREMENTS CASE NO: ZCA 93-08
7
8 ode,
g
10
11
12 i
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal
the'planning Commission did, -on May 18, 1994, hold a duly
oticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said
eguest; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and
onsidering all testimony and arguments, examining the initial
analyzing the information submitted by staff, and
14 considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission
15 considered all factors relating to the Negative Declaration; and
16 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City
17 Council of the City of Carlsbad as follows:
18 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
19 2. That the findings and conditions of the Planning
ommission Resolution No. 3653, on file with the City Clerk and
herein by reference constitute the findings of the
ity Council in this matter and that the Negative Declaration is
ereby approved.
26 l .a
27 . . .
28 11. . .
L
- II
1 I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the
Zity Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the
2nd day of AUGUST I 1994, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Stanton, Kulchin, Nygaard, Finnila
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
g TTEST: IC
10
11
12 (SEAL)
15
16
17
18
19 II
20 II
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
3
i
: .
4
c .
t
:
t
5
1(
11
1:
1:
14
If
1E
17
1E
19
2c
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. NS - 7 8 &
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTERS
21.44 AND 21.45 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY
THE AMENDMENT OF SECTIONS 21.44.020(a)(2),
21.44.050(a)(l) AND 21.45.090(c) TO REVISE PARKING
REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENTS IN THE R-W ZONE.
CASE NAME: R-W ZONE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
CASE NO: ZCA 93-08
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: That Title 21, Chapter 21.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
is amended by the amendment of Section 21.44.020(a)(2) to read as follows:
“21.44.020(a) (2) Parking Spaces Required.
(2) Planned Unit Developments and Condominiums - Two standard-covered
parking spaces. Exceptions: studio - 1.5 spaces/unit, one covered/unit, planned unit
developments in ,the R-W Zone - two standard spaces, one covered/unit, and second
dwelling unit - 1 space/second unit, covered or uncovered. Any uncovered required
parking space for units in the R-W Zone may be located within a required front yard
setback and may be tandem. The parking space for a second dwelling unit may be
provided through tandem parking (provided that the covered parking spaces for the
primary dwelling unit are located within a two-car garage and the garage is setback a
minimum of twenty feet from the property line) or in the front yard setback. In addition, parking areas for guest parking must be provided as follows: 0.5 spaces for each unit up
through ten units, 0.3 spaces for each unit in excess of ten units. Credit for visitor parking
may be given for frontage on local streets that meet public street standards for detached
single-family residential projects subject to the approval of the planning commission; not
less than twenty-four lineal feet per space exclusive of driveway entrances and driveway
aprons shall be provided for each parking space, except where parallel parking spaces are
located immediately adjacent to driveway aprons, then twenty lineal feet may be provided.”
SECTION 2: That Title 21, Chapter 21.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
is amended by the amendment of Section 21.44.050(a)(l) to read as follows:
“21.44.050(a)(l) General Requirements.
“Size and Access. Each off-street parking space shall have an area of not less
than one hundred seventy square feet exclusive of drives or aisles and a width of not less
than eight and one-half feet. Subject to the approval of the planning director, up to a two-
and-one-half foot overhang may be permitted. Each space shall be provided with adequate
ingress and egress. Aisles to and from parking stalls shall not be less than:
(A) Fourteen feet wide for thirty and forty-five degree parking;
(B) Eighteen feet wide for sixty-degree parking;
(C) Twenty-four feet wide for ninety degree parking.
Circulation within a parking area must be such that a car entering the parking area need
not enter a street to reach another aisle and that a car need not enter a street backwards.
This provision shall not apply to off-street parking required for one and two-family
dwelling units.
When the required parking space for one-family, two-family or multiple-family
structure in any residential zone is not to be provided in a covered garage, each such
required car space shall be not less than two hundred square feet in area and shall be so
located and/or constructed that it may later be covered by a garage structure in accordance
with the provisions of this title, with the following exceptions: second dwelling units and
planned unit developments in the R-W Zone .‘I
SECTION 3: That Title 21, Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
is amended by the revision of Section 21.45.090(c) to read as follows:
“21.45.090(c) Development Standards.
“Resident Parking. All units must have at least two full-sized covered
residential parking spaces, except for studio units which shall be provided with a ratio of
1.5 parking spaces per unit, for which one space per unit shall be covered, planned unit
developments in the R-W Zone, for which one space per unit shall be covered and one
space may be uncovered, and second dwelling units which shall be provided with one space
(covered or uncovered) per second unit. Any uncovered required parking space for units
in the R-W Zone may be located within a required front yard setback and may be tandem.
The parking space for the second dwelling unit may be provided through tandem parking
(provided that the covered parking spaces for the primary dwelling are located within a
two-car garage and the garage is setback a minimum of twenty feet from the property line)
or in the front yard setback. In cases where a fractional parking space is required, the
required number of spaces shall be rounded to the nearest highest whole number.”
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the m day of _
AUGUST , 1994, held a duly advertised public hearing to consider said amendment and at
that time received the recommendations, objections, protests, comments of all persons
interested in or opposed to ZCA 93-08; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad as follows:
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
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the revised text for the Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 93-08) is
approved, and that the findings of Planning Commission Resolution No. 3654, on file in
the Planning Department and made a part hereof are the findings of the City Council,
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council
of the City of Carlsbad, California, on the - day of
vote, to wit:
, 1994, by the following
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
28
ExHm3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3653
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CFIY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A.ZONE
CODE AMENDMENT AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTERS 21.44 AND 21.45 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY AMENDING SECTIONS 21.44.020(a)(2), 21.44.050(a)(l) AND 21.45.090(c) TO REVISE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR
RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE R-W ZONE.
CASE NAME: R-W ZONE P
zcA93-08 Y
NG REQUIREMENTS
8 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission’did on the 18th day of May, 1994, hold
9
10 a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request, and
11 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering aII testimony
12 and arguments, examinin g the initiaI study, analyzing the information submitted by staff,
13 and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all
14 factors relating to the Negative Declaration.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
as foIIows:
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 March 30,1994, and “PII”, dated December
16, 1993, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
23
24
25
26
27
28
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a signifkant impact on the environment.
. . . .
. . . .
7
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 18th day of May, 1994, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Savary, Commissioners: Betz, Hall Noble, Schlehuber & Welshons.
NOES: Commissioner Erwin.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
A’I-IEST:
MICHAEL J. H~MIt?!ER
PLANNING DIRECTOR
PC RESO NO. 3653 -2-
a
GATWE DEClLARATION
PROJBCI- ADD RESWUXATION: Citywide
PROJECX D- ON: Zone Code Amendments to Chapters 21.44 and 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to delete wording requiring some parking spaces in residential zones to be “cover-able” and to clarify parking requirements for residential Planned Unit Developments.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carl&ad. 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 pub& 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 Brian Hunter in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension
DATED: MARCH 30, 1994
CASE NO: ZCA 93-08
CASE NAME: R-WZONBPARKING REQUIREMENTS
PUBLtSH DATE:. MARCH 30,1994
Ebd:lb
2075 Las Palmar, Drive l Car&bad. California 92009-l 576 l (619) 438-l 161 @
FNVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AS!XSSMENT FOM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. ZCF, 93-08
BACKGROUND DATE: December 16. 1993
1. CASE NAME: R-W Zone Parking Reauirements
2. APPLICANT: Steven She
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: PO Box 5201
San Qemente. CA 92674
4. DATE ELI FORM PART I SUBMITTED:
(7141498 9604 I
: 5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Revisions of Chauters 21.44 and 21 45 f th . . Mum CIDER Code to _ delete wording reauirinn some Darkinn snaces to be “CovedblePancle to clarif’v uarkinq geauirements for residential Planned Unit DeVebment$.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact hsessment to determine if a project may have a si@cant effect on the environment.
The Environmental Lmpact 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 Impact Report or Negative De&ration.
l A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or
any of its aspects may cause a sign&ant effect on the environment. On the checklist, ‘NO” will be
checked to indicate this determination.
l An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the
project may cause a sinnificm e&ct on the environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if adveme impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed I . . muflcan~. These hiings are shown in the checklist under the headings “YES-sig” and ‘YES-insig” respectively.
A c&u&on of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
PHYSICAL ENwRoNMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRJXIIY OR INDHIJXT’LY: YES YES NO
bigI (insig)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Result in unstabkearth 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 signifkant archeologica,& paleontological or historical site, structure or object?
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-2-
BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
WLLTHEPROPOSALDtRECXLYORINDtRE~Yz YES YES
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
NO
big) (ins@
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 baxzier 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?
HUMANENVIRONMENT .
WLLTHEPROPOSALDHWXL+YORINDHtECIZY:
bigI
17. Alter the present or planned land use
of an area?
18. Substantially afkt public utilities, schools, police, he, emergency or other public services?
YES
(in@
X
x
X
NO
X
X
-3-
. HuMANENvlRoNMENT
WILL THE PROPOSAL DIREmY OR INDIRECTLY:
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?
Increase existing noise levels?
Produce new light or glare?
Involve a significant risk of an explosion
or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
Substantially alter the density of the
human population of an area?
Affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing?
Generate substantial additional 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?
tnterfere with emergency response emergency evacuation plans? plans or
Obstnxt any scenic vista or create an
aesthetically offensive public view?
Affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities?
4
YES YES NO bigI (ins@
X
‘X
x
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
13
.
MANDATORY Fm-fXNGS OF SIGMmCANCE
WILL THE P,ROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY YES YES (siti (in@
33.
34.
3s.
36.
Does the project have the ,potentia.I
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
. D[SCUSS[ON OF ENVIRONMENTALEVALUATION
The proposed zone code amendments consist of revised wording for two chapters of the Municipal Code. The first would delete existing wording in Chapter 21.44 (Parking) which requires required
parking spaces for residential structures in residential zones to be located such that, if not covered, they
can be covered later (i.e., to be located not within the required setbacks). The second would revise
wording in Chapter 21.45 (Planned Unit Developments) to clarify the parking requirements for
residential PUD’s. The r-urrent wording requires that PUD units provide two’covered parking spaces
(except for studios). The new wording would allow one of the required spaces to be open (uncovered) for residences in the R-W (Residential Waterway) Zone. This wording would be consistent with wording in the Parking chapter which requires only one of the spaces to be covered.
PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT
l/4 No site-specific project is proposed as part of these zone code amendment. Therefore, no changes in topography resulting in unstable earth conditions, erosion of soils, or alteration of deposition
pattern will occur.
518 Because no site-specific project is proposed as part of these zone code amendment, no impacts to air quality or climatological indices are expected. Each subsequent project processed pursuant to the amended regulations will be subject to individual, site-specific review which will evaluate potential impacts to water courses and the quality and quantity of various water sources.
9/10 No site-specific development is proposed with these zone code amendments. Therefore this zone
code amendment will not deplete any natural resources or other form of energy.
11 Because no site-specific project is proposed, no impacts to historical resources will occur.
BIOLOGICA6,
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 will be reviewed for,possible biological-related impacts on a project-by-project basis.
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
17 These zone code amendments do not propose any changes in land use patterns. The amended
regulations will not directly alter the present or planned land use of a specik area. Any future
development application processed pursuant to these regulations, shall be required to undergo specific environmental review.
18/22 The amended regulations are not associated with any specik development. They will not substantially affect utilities, schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services nor will they
alter or result in the need for sewer, solid waste, hazardous waste or other systems. The proposed amendments 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.
45 rs
23/24 The density of any residential area within the City will not be directly affected by the proposed
zone code amendments, since they are not site-specific. Housing demand will not be affected.
25/30 The proposed amendments will not generate additional traffic, or alter existing transportation
systems. The proposed zone code amendments are not affiliated with any specific development
project and will not impact emergency evacuation response plans or increase tic hazards to motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists.
31 In that no specific development is proposed with these zone code amendments, no scenic vistas will be obstructed. Aesthetically offensive views will not be created by the implementation of the proposed amended regulations.
32 The proposed zone code amendments 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-
i?8wYSlS OF WLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT SUCH AS:
a) Phased development of the project, W alternate site designs, cl 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 significant 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 significant 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. tf the project has “NO” significant impacts
than there are no substantial adverse impacts and no justification for req&ring a discussion of alternatives, (There is no alternative to no substantial adverse impact). This project has no significant
impacts. Therefore no alternatives are required.
-a-
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 environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
- I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, because the
environmental effects of the proposed project have already been considered in conjunction with previously cenified environmental documents and no additional environmental review is required. Therefore, a Notice of Determination has been prepared.
- 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet
have been added to the project. A Conditional Negative Declaration will be proposed.
- I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
-- . ‘. ‘W/ 1’ -- Date
312 &q
Date
LIST MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE\
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE1
-9-
P;PPLICANTCONCURRENCEWITHMITIGATTNGMEASURES
THIStSTOCERTWYTHATIHAVEREVIEWEDTHEABOVEMITIGATINGMEASURES
ANDCONCURWITHTHEADD~TIONOFTHESEMEASURESTOTHEPROJECT.
Date Signature
E&L
-100
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3654
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE I CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT, AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTERS 21.44 AND 21.45 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE; BY THE AMENDMENT OF .SECI-IONS
21.44.020(a)(2), 21.44.050(a)(l) AND 21.45.090(c) TO REVISE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR RESIDENTIAL P’LANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS IN THE R-W ZONE. CASE NAME: R-W ZONE PARKING REQUIREMENTS
‘cAsEp30:~!93-06~ d
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 18th day of May, 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 aII 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.
Bl That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission recommends APPROVAL of ZCA 93-08, according to Exhibit ‘X’, dated May 18, 1994, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following fhdiIlgS:
1. The proposed Zone Code Amendments an consistent with the goals and objectives
of the Carhbad General Plan.
2. The proposed Zone Code Amendments are consistent with the intent of Chapters 21.44 and 21.45 of the C&bad Municipal Code!.
. . . .
C
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 18th day of May, 1994, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Savary, Commissioners: Betz, Hall, Noble, Schlehuber & Welshons.
NOES: Commissioner Erwin.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 3654 -2.
EXWIT 4 APPLICATION <OMPLETE DATE: NOVEMBER 5.1993 STAFF PLANNER: ELAINE BLACKBURN &
STAFF REPORT
DATE: ‘my la,1994
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: ZCA 93-08 - R-W ZONE PARKING REOUIRE- - Amendments to Title
21, Chapters 21.44 (Parking) and 21.45 (Planned Unit Developments) of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code by the amendment of Sections 21.44.020(a)(2),
21.44.050(a)(l) and 21.45.090(c) to revise parking requirements for residential Planned Unit Developments in the R-W (Residential Waterway) Zone.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Resolution No. 3653 recommending APPROVAL of
a Negative Declaration issued by the Planning Director, and ADOPT Resolution No. 3654 recommending APPROVAL of ZCA 93-08 based on the findings contained therein.
II. PROJJXT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
This project is a zone code amendment to Title 21, Chapters 21.44 (Parking) and 21.45 (Planned Unit Developments) (PUDs) of the Municipal Code. The revisions are being
proposed in order to create an exception from certain parking requirements for PUDs in the R-W Zone. Specifically, the exception will allow PUD developments in the R-W Zone to
meet their resident parking requirement by providing one covered and one uncovered
space, rather than the two covered spaces currently required and to provide one of the required spaces tandem within the front yard setback. The proposed exception will make possible the conversion of some existing dwelling units in the R-W Zone to condominiums. (A detailed discussion of the existing regulations and the proposed changes is provided in the “Municipal Code” section of this report.)
The City has only one R-W Zone which is located along the northern edge of Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The area is known as Bristol Cove and is bounded by Adams Street and Park Drive. The lots fronting onto Cove Drive, the southern section of Park Drive, and Marina Drive are within the R-W Zone. The zone is comprised of numerous small lots (4000 to 5000 square feet). Most of the lots are currently developed with duplex units.
zcA93-08 -R-WZONE~~~NG~QUIREMENTS
MAY@,1994
City regulations (Chapter 21.45 - PUDs) require existing dwelling units proposed to be converted to condominiums to meet all current PUD development standards. In the R-W Zone this is especially difficult. Most of the lots in the R-W Zone are small and narrow. Many of the dwelling units in this area were built in conformance with PUD regulations in effect in the early 1980s. Because of amended regulations, some of these existing duplex
units can not now convert to condominiums because they can not comply with the newer
development standards, particularly as they relate to parking.
Staff is now proposing to amend the wording in three sections of the Municipal Code to create an exception for PUDs in the R-W Zone. The exception would still require such units to provide two resident parking spaces, but would’ require that only one of those spaces be covered. It would also allow the uncovered space to be tandem and located within the front yard setback.
ANALYSIS
1. Are the proposed zone code amendments consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan?
2. Are the proposed zone code amendments consistent with the intent of Chapters
21.44 (Parking) and 21.45 (Planned Unit Developments) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code?
DISCUSSION
GENERAL PLAN
Circulation Element Policy D.a.l. is the only policy in the General Plan which addresses parking. It calls for safe, adequate, and attractively landscaped off-street parking facilities to be provided with all new development. -I-he proposed changes are consistent with this policy. The proposed amendment will not reduce the number of spaces required for the
uses, and proposed parking will still be subject to all City requirements for safety and
circulation considerations. Therefore, the amended Parking and Planned Unit Development sections of the Municipal Code remain consistent with the General Plan.
MUNICIPAL CODE
Background
There is only one R-W Zone in the City, and it is unique in several respects. The lots in the R-W Zone are generally small. Although current regulations require a minimum lot size of 5000 square feet, many of the existing lots are between 4000 and 5000 square feet. Most of the lots are also narrow (typically only 30 to 40 feet wide). This makes it difficult
zcA 93.08 - R-W zorw <ARKING REQUIREMENTS
my la, 1994
to provide adequate garage parking while complying with other City development standards. The difficulty of developing such narrow lots is acknowledged by the R-W Zone regulations which require a minimum side yard of only four (4) feet. In addition, 70% of
the lots must provide direct access to the Lagoon. This requirement limits the possibility
of locating the units closer to the rear of the lot, further ensuring small front yard setbacks.
Again, the R-W Zone acknowledges this constraint by establishing a minimum fi-ont yard setback requirement of 10 feet.
Many of the existing duplex units in the R-W Zone were ,built in the early 198Os, anticipating that some of these units would later be converted to condominiums. Consequently, such units were built to comply with the PUD regulations in effect at that time (i.e., with respect to parking, one covered and one uncovered resident parking space).
The PUD standards were amended in January, 1987, to require two covered resident
parking spaces for PUDs and condominiums. These standards were applied throughout the City. In other zoning districts, this did not result in a problem. However, in the R-W Zone it resulted in many of the existing units no longer being able to meet the PUD standards and, thus, no longer able to convert to condominiums.
Existing Regulations
Chapters 21 .+I and 21.45 of the Municipal Code regulate parking and residential Planned
Unit Developments (PUDs) and condominiums in the City. There is some overlapping of wording in several sections regarding parking requirements for PUDs and condominiums and for the R-W Zone. These sections are summarized below.
1. Section 21.44.020(a)(2) states that Planned Unit Developments and condominiums
must provide two standard covered parking spaces, except for studio units and second dwelling units.
2. Section 21.44.050(a)(l) requires that required parking for all residential structures in any residential zone be “cover-able”. That is, if the proposed required parking is
not’ to .be provided within a garage or other covered area, the parking spaces must
be located and/or constructed such that they may later be covered by a garage structure. (Because a garage is an accessory structure which would not be allowed within a required front setback, this wording effectively prohibits required resident parking from being located within this required setback.)
3. Section 21.44.120(a) allows tandem parking within the front yard setback for
existing substandard frontage lots (i.e., lot width .less than 50 feet) provided that there is at least one parking space per dwelling unit provided within the required setback lines and that the front yard setback is at least 20 feet.
4. Section 21.44.120(b) allows IO-foot front yard setbacks for second and third floors
in the R-W Zone when tandem parking is utilized in the front yard.
zc~ 93.08 - R-W ZONE rung REQUIREMENTS
MAY la,.1994
5. Section 21.45.090(c), requires two covered resident parking spaces per unit, except for studio units. For studios, this section requires only 1.5 spaces per unit of which
one resident space per unit must be covered.
Numerous sections of Title 21 were recently amended to also provide exceptions for second dwelling units. The exceptions allow second units to provide one uncovered resident parking space and allow parking within the required setback.
Based upon the various regulations cited above, it becomes impossible for duplex units in the R-W Zone to meet the necessary requirements to condominiumize.
* For new units it would be very difficult to provide two covered resident parking spaces (Items 1 and 5) because of the very narrow lots. Existing units were already allowed with only one covered space. Therefore, the existing units could not convert to condominiums.
* Existing R-W Zone units with one covered space cannot comply with Item 2.
Most existing R-W Zone units have a front setback of less than 20 feet. Given the narrowness of the lots and the small front yard setback, there is no place to locate additional covered parking. Therefore, existing units with one covered parking space cannot provide another covered space.
* The R-W Zone lots cannot satisfy the requirements in Item 3 because almost
all of the lots have only a lo-foot front setback, and therefore would not be
allowed to provide parking tandem under this section of the Code.
* Item 4 implies that tandem parking is being utilized in the R-W Zone, but does not specifically allow it.
Proposed Changes
The proposed change to the subject sections involves the addition of an exception for dwelling units in the R-W Zone similar to the exception recently approved for second units. The exception will allow such units to provide one covered and one uncovered resident
parking space. It will also allow tandem parking within the required front yard setback.
This amendment will then allow for the possibility of condominiumization of many of the
existing duplex units in the R-W Zone. A red-lined/strikeout version of the existing and proposed wording is attached to this staff report as Exhibit “Z”.
ENvRoIvImNTALR.EvIEw
The Planning Director has determined that the proposed zone code amendment will not create any signXcant adverse environmental impacts and has, therefore, issued a Negative Declaration on March 30, 1994.
zcA 93.08 - R-W ZONE .MNG REQUIREMENTS
MAY la, 1994
A-ITACHMENTS
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3653
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 3654
3. Exhibit “Z”, dated May 18, 1994.
EXHIBIT “Z” MAY la, 1994
SECTION 1: That Title 21, Chapter 21.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
is amended by the amendment of Section 21.44.020(a)(2) to read as follows: “21.44.020(a)(2) Parking Snaces Reauired. (2) Planned Unit Developments and Condominiums - Two standard covered
primary dwelling unit are located within a two-car garage and the garage is setback a minimum of twenty feet from the property line) or in the front yard setback. in addition’ parking areas for guest parking must be provided as follows: 0.5 spaces for each unit up through ten units, 0.3 spaces for each unit in excess of ten units. Credit for visitor parking may be given for frontage on local streets that meet public street standards for detached single-family residential projects subject to the approval of the planning commission; not less than twenty-four lineal feet per space exclusive of driveway entrances and driveway aprons shall be provided for each parking space, except where parallel parking spaces are located immediately adjacent to driveway aprons, then twenty lineal feet may be provided.”
SECTION 2: That Title 21, Chapter 21.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
is amended by the amendment of Section 21.+%050(a)(l) to read as follows:
“21.44.050fa) (1) General Reauirements.
“Size and Access. Each off-street.parking space shall have an area of not less than one hundred seventy square feet exclusive of drives or aisles and a width of not less
than eight and one-half feet. Subject to the approval of the planning director, up to a two- and-one-half foot overhang may be permitted. Each space shall be provided with adequate ingress and egress. Aisles to and from parking stalls shall not be less than:
(A) Fourteen feet wide for thirty and forty-five degree parking; (B) Eighteen feet wide for sixty-degree parking; (C) Twenty-four feet wide for ninety degree parking.
Circulation within a parking area must be such that a car entering the parking area need not enter a street to reach another aisle and that a car need not enter a street backwards. This provision shall not apply to off-street parking required for one and two-family dwelling units. When the required parking space for one-family, two-family or multiple-family structure in any residential zone is not to be provided in a covered garage, each such required car space shall be not less than two hundred square feet in area and shall be so
located and/or constructed that it may later be covered by a garage structure in accordance with the provisions of this title, with the following exception$ second dwelling unit@!! x.:Tm ,.I ~~~~~~~~~~~~ .<.>“1’ . ..>... . ..Y. . . . . . . . . . . . .,%.< ~:~~~:::::~~:j~::j~~~::~:::::~~~:~::~::~::~:~:~:~ii,:~~~:~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~ .” .:?:j!:!>.:.:<.*.:.. :.
* x .A.. . . ..A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..s.....T
SECTION 3: That Title 21, Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code
is amended by the revision of Section 21.45.090(c) to read as follows:
“21.45.090(c) DeveloDment Standards.
“Resident Parking. All units must have at least two full-sized covered residential parking spaces, except for studio units which shah be provided with a ratio of 1.5 parking spaces per unit, for which one space per unit shall be covered, ~~ , 3, < >v .A y$..v .A v ~:,,~~,;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~,~~~~~~~~~~~~ d@%@.....: .:. ‘..:~~~c:~~~~~.~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~:::~~~.~~~~:.,~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a. . . .x. Y,. ‘; n. Y, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..n.......... .x ..,..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ‘~~~~~~~~~~. ‘.:.:.Ffi.$..:.k .:.:. 3.3 :.:, 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,..... . . . ., , . . . ..A :., >.&,: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ‘ . . . . . :.x.y \.,. >&.~<j&. I’>?, >, : .~ ,,. ~.. >. ;,..) ,... ,... . ~ ,.._ .~, .~ ~ ,..,.. : . I +..Y ,A. ., ,...... .i . . . . . . . . : ,. . . . :...: v,..... > . . . . . . . . .,........I. . . . . . . . :...:.> . . . . . c )‘<A,. . ,C...,_Y,, j.>+.~,’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., ., ,. . .x . (,.... Q.~~~~~~~~~~~~i~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~.:.~.:.:.:.:.:.,:~.:.:.:.:.:.:~.j:...:.:.~..~:~.~:.:.:.:.:~.:::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:., *.,.,...,.,..... :.:.:.:.:.:.r:~.:~.:~::.~:.:.~:,.. .A. t. .. ,. ).‘..).<.,.<.,. . . . . . . . . . .,.,.,.,., ~ .,.,._. _,. ‘,~ _~ ,..:~<.:.:.:.j&~:.:.~<.j.&:.>:.:.:.. .&>. ..j>,.~<... ,.~.:.~.:.~~~...:.:.:,.:.:.:.~;: ,.+ ~.:.::sr.:.:.:.:.:.:., ,.,. ..,:.:.:,:.:.&+:.:.:.jp:.~...~p~.:.~. The parkmg space for the second dwelhng umt may be provided through tandem parkmg (provided that the covered parking spaces for the primary dwelling are located within a
two-car garage and the garage is setback a minimum of twenty feet from the property line)
or in the front yard setback. in cases where a fractional parking space is required, the
required number of spaces shall be rounded to the nearest highest whole number.”
f
PLANNING COMMISSION May l&1994 PAGE 6
ExHBrM
PUBLIC HEARING:
tinued to June 1, 1994.
iy seconded, to continue
ry, Commissioners Betz, Erwin, Hall, N
4. ZCA 93-03 - R-W ZONE PARKING REQUIREMENTS - Amendments to Title 21, Chapters 21.44
(Parking) and 21.45 (Planned Unit Developments) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code by the
amendment of Sections 21.44.020(a)(2), 21.44.050(a)(l) and 21.45.090(c) to revise parking
requirements for residential Planned Unit Developments in the R-W (Residential Waterway) Zone.
Elaine Blackburn, Associate Planner, reviewed the background of the request and stated that this proposal
is an amendment to three sections of the Parking and Planned Unit Development chapters of the Municipal
Code. The amended wording is intended to acknowledge the uniqueness of the R-W Zone by allowing
resident parking in PUDs in the R-W Zone to be satisfied by one covered and one uncovered parking
space rather than the two covered spaces currently required. This change does not reduce the number of
required spaces; it simply allows one of the spaces to be uncovered. The City has only one R-W Zone,
the Bristol Cove area, which consists of 62 lots. Using an overhead projection, she showed the
Commission the exact location of the Bristol Cove development. Ms. Blackburn stated that the zone has
almost been fully developed. It primarily contains duplex-type residences. Existing development
standards in the R-W zone recognize the uniqueness of the zone in the form of smaller lot sizes and
reduced setback requirements. However, current regulations do not recognize the difficulty of providing
the two covered spaces on the small narrow lots. Many of the lots in the zone contain two attached single
family dwelling units. With a typical lot width of 40 ft., it becomes impossible to provide the four covered
resident spaces and the guest parking, while still complying with other applicable requirements in our code.
There is a complete discussion of those difficulties contained in the staff report. Staff is proposing some
amended wording that would create an exception for PUD units in the R-W zone, to relieve them from the
requirement of providing two covered parking spaces. Staff recommends approval.
Commissioner Welshons referred to page 3 of the staff report which cites existing regulations, specifically
item #3. She inquired if those lots less than 50 ft. wide are now able to utilize tandem parking. Ms.
Blackburn replied no because they do not have a 10 ft. setback.
Commissioner Welshons inquired if any of those lots have a 20 ft. setback. Ms. Blackburn replied that
there may be some with 20 ft. but the majority of them have a reduced setback of between 10 and 20 ft.
Most of them are closer to 10 ft.
Commissioner Welshons would like to know, bottom line, how many units will be affected by the proposed
change. Ms. Blackburn replied it will affect units in that zone which want to develop under condominium
standards. She believes there are approximately 27 of the lots already condominiumized. The vast
majority are already developed. There is only a handful of lots which are not already developed. This
change would affect those duplex units not already converted or lots not developed.
ZGi
MINUTES
-
f
PLANNING COMMISSION May 181994 PAGE 7
Commissioner Welshons inquired how many units would need to convert and how many lots are empty.
Ms. Blackburn replied that she believes there are about six undeveloped lots. With 62 lots in the zone, and
27-30 of those already condominium&d, it would leave about 30 lots but she doesn’t know if all of them
want to convert. However, this change doesn’t mean that they can automatically convert because there are
other standards besides parking which need to be met. This change does not assume conversion, it is
merely one aspect.
Commissioner Welshons inquired if conversion is a right. Ms. Blackburn replied only if they can meet the
PUD standards.
Commissioner Hall inquired if the City is the applicant. Ms. Blackburn replied that there is an outside
applicant on this item.
Commissioner Hall inquired if all of the appropriate people have been noticed. Ms. Blackburn replied that
they were.
Chairman Savary invited the applicant to speak but he declined.
Chairman Savary opened the public testimony and issued the invitation to speak.
Keith Mahler, 4519 Cove Drive #7, Carlsbad, representing the Bristol Cove Property Owners Association,
addressed the Commission and stated that this subject was discussed at their last meeting. The
association is in agreement with the staff recommendation. As the parking now stands, it stifles future
development of the Cove. The only way the remaining six lots will be developed is to back down on the
covered parking requirement. When two covered parking spaces are required, both are not normally used
for parking. You usually see one vehicle and the rest is used for storage. Also, a typical boat trailer is 8 ft.
wide and it can’t be stored in a typical garage. By having one uncovered parking space, it would alleviate
the current problem with boat trailers at Bristol Cove. He is in favor of approval.
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.
Commissioner Erwin inquired if staff is proposing that the second parking space could be a tandem space
in the front yard. Ms. Blackburn replied yes.
ACTION: Motion was made by Commissioner Hall, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. 3653 recommending approval of the Negative Declaration
issued by the Planning Director and adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 3654
recommending approval of ZCA 93-08, based on the findings contained therein.
VOTE: 6-l
AYES: Chairman Savary, Commissioners Betz, Hall, Noble, Schlehuber and Welshons
NOES: Commissioner Erwin
ABSTAIN: None
8.02 acre parcel in L
Christer ‘Westman, Associat est and stated that the site has
of office and open rtion of the site that
MINUTES
.
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALlFORNlA County of San Oiego
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-entitied
matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of
Blade-Citizen
I ----s----B --m---- ____________-____---__________________
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 1.71349: 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 newspap and
/Ii
not in any supplement thereof on the
followi q d tes, to-wit:
\
\
*A% --A - ----B --------- a-------- ------- ------e--
Paste Clipping of Notice SECURELY
In This Space.
NDTtCE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council pf the City of Carts- bad will hold a public he-win % at the City Council Chambers..1200 Cadsbad Village Drive. Carls ad. California. at 6:00 P.m.. On TUGS- day August 2 1994. to consider a request for approval of a NegahVe De&ration akd amendments to Title 21 of the CadsbaG Municipal Code Chapters 21.44 (Palking) and 21.45 (Planned Unit DWelW menis) by the amendment of Sections 21.!4.02q(a)(2), 21.44.05b(~)(1) and 21.45.090(c) to revise the parkw requlr~me?ts for residential Planned Unit Developments in the R-W (Resldenbal Waterway) Zone in the City of Carlsbad.
If you have any quesbons v&ding this matter, please z;ik$ Blackburn in the Plannmg department at (619) 438-1161, 4471
I cezy (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is tme and correct.
1’
side,Califomia, this +39
/994
day
.
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 Filirig Stamp
-
Proof of Publication of
tf you challenge the Negative Declaration and/or Zone ye Amend- ments in court you may be limited to raising only those !ssu?s rai?ed by you or sombone else at the public hearing described In this nOtIC+ or in written correspondence delivered to,the City Of Cadsbad CW Clerk’s Office at. or prior to, the public hearing.
APPLICANT Steven SW
Legal 40014 July 22,1994
CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
. . . .
h
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ZCA 93-8
k
R-W ZONE PARKING REOUIREMENTS
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, August 2, 1994, to consider a request for approval of a Negative Declaration and amendments to Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, Chapters 21.44 (Parking) and 21.45 (Planned Unit
Developments), by the amendment of Sections 21.44.020(a)(2), 21.44.050(a)(l) and 21.45.090(c) to revise the parking requirements for residential Planned Unit Developments in the R-W (Residential Waterway) Zone in the City of Carlsbad.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Elaine Blackburn in the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161, extension 4471.
If you challenge the Negative Declaration and/or Zone Code Amendments 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: Steven Stipe PUBLISH: July 22, 1994 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
(Form A)
TO: CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notlde
ZCA 93-08 - R-W Zone Parkinn Requirements
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the council meeting of
.
Thank you.
Assistant City Man--
June 21, 1994
Date
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
h
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, May 18, 1994, to consider a request for approval
of a Negative Declaration and amendments to Title 21, Chapters 21.44 (Parking) and 21.45
(Planned Unit Developments) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code by the amendment of
Sections 21.44.020(a)(2), 21.44.050(a)(l) and 21.45.090(c) to revise parking requirements for residential Planned Unit Developments in the R-W (Residential Waterway)
Zone 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 May 12, 1994. If you
have any questions, please call Elaine Blackburn in the Planning Department at (619) 438-
1161, ext. 4471.
If you challenge the Negative Declaration and/or Zone Code Amendments 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 93-08
CASE NAME: R-W ZONE PARKING REQUIREMENTS PUBLISH: MAY 6,1994
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING COMMISSION
EEl:Vd
.
:\YFS C FlSSFT.1
9fi49 F wn”nr.-\un RD
TI.CSrT’r‘ :z A5749
R W :.TVTL’G *RI‘ST OR-II?-RR
PO ROX ??Q4
REVFRLY !lJTI'= CA 302' 3
JOSFPH :. ?l\lc, 755 S GRAND 3L.E !??O
rns l’:cF! ES “\
R.\\;“l F r\rR.\y “(1 RIlY 11:97
t-\Rr ss\n c-\ 92rllA
9 ‘. L, r !::‘-\R”\b!“\;“,>
'00 ~XRI.SB-\r i-Il.LXC;F Pq 1 '7V\ C-\RLS:Rn r1\ '7 ? 17 in 9 9?fllfi
R\y’1”un R & F~“TSF “~FRX
4444 :Ilr;:lL-\m x4 rwr.SSm r.1 9?0llR
,Al’DREY Y RR”WX 15qIl -\naYs ST CRT smn CA 9200R
R~?H\Ro .T PIER?E
1711 Lnk~rr~ SLvn c
rnyTT\ I‘\ ,,,-3:
RAY W h n?RA’.’ GRTX+l
PO R”Y 3501
R-\VC:l” S\,VT.\ FF C-? 92fl67
WJLi,I.\!l R i RFRRI-CC.\ F’J\\S
llA0 4DAYS ST
c\RLSBAn c \ 97nnR
.ICI~,USOY '\YlLY TRr'qT ':6-:12-a I
1113 TRABERT ?\Sr-H ?7
FL’CIUIT1S r\ I’“?$
92fi13
V 1 P P\RTL'FRS
7432 nONNA nR
CAR1 SB\D PA 12”!)‘1
nAr..rlT & Fr.AlVF SAKXR-TA
PO ROY 59Ah
4Ra.UC.F r\ RZhl7
92fi17
r AC,!-\;-\ -\SS”CTITFS IVC
?h2rl xr1.u.a CT
r-\Rr.sSAn r-A 91009
C.lrRFRT R 6. XFVTVF Fll.FS
,721 RR!‘?!- R”
c\Rl.SRl\D r\ 92nflfl
Dnu vosr"
7036 I-IA ‘I.aRIPOSA R"YSA1.L C.% 92nn3
DXVTD h UtrRISE ?:r,AF”“SE
143n RI:F\;A L-ISTA nR
VlSTS c\ ‘92nR3
“lJ?fi
C;FA,\r.n W h C1\Rl.lUF RRY,%S
PO R”Y 718
raRr..ywn c-\ 92r3lR
S-\Y -\ 6 GRArE L"Vl.1.L"
lhR2i RA.TT” RD cuc1u0 (1.a 9143h
91436
c,T.FVCl.IFF DFVFl.“P?-lFUT CO .?.DRlXN 6 \?4N G”“r’l?,!! 4554 PETIT .AVF
FNCTVO r.~ 7: 1’6
12770 HIGH BLI:FF
sax nTFG0 rA
DR 360
92130
PFxnr.mm F,~TLY TRIIST n7-nh-9
1 71 2 ,‘FPTl’NF 1VF
TXCTUlT.4S C.A 92n21
r)TRIrTA R EVEN
hill S WARY SANDS
P.ATA SPRINGS CA
RARTOS W m< Y-\RI”\: LFFFERnIUK
4576 r"rVF DR B
CARLSRAD C\ 32rlrlR
DR
92264
.TI’ANlTA P M”c.4’4
37996, fIA nF XI:J,
SAN .Tl‘?N CAPTSTRANO CA ‘)2675
Fl.AIIPRTY F4?1TLY T.TVlVG TRI!ST 1 Rfin W 25~~ ST
00
mr.avn c-\ 917R1
RORRY r. (i REVERLY PFTFRSFN
1145 L.ARKSPIIR 1.N
RTCHARD P & RflSAIEF FLJY
IR3ll HOLIDAY -1VF
IiPl.AND CA 917R.l 9?nnR
91730
91OliR
91476
92nnR
rmr.sRAD r-a
P-1CL h \L"UGIXA "L1VFR.A R-it? CAl.IE CARARF ST
RAVCII" rvrmoxGa ra
9?hI 3
sAr.r.Y A YI‘VDFT.1.
155h C”VF DR
rRr.SRAn CA
RORFRT P & FVFLYY .T”VFS
ii15 p\TAT.lb’A DR
~ART..SR~ r3 9lnnR
SAN A & GR.-\CE L"VfLL"
I hR25 R.?,,TTO RD
ENCIN” CA
TIYFS R h. ROUVTF X-CAIV RTCHARD 6 DEBRA YULLIN 649A CR>YPTO\: DR ‘4 4549 COVE DR B
KETIFR “R 977fli rARLSBAD CA
DAL.TlT S h FL.AISF S>RKARIA
P” ROX i76h
“RXNGF C.A 92hl3
WTT.llAY W DANTFT.
4550 cnvc nR
rARLSBSD r?, ??nnR
DONALD .J & LYSN TRISC:I 1 101 BEAVER WAY LA VERXF CA 91750
ANDREW & KATHFRINE PERRY
6-123 VIA nE L.A 9EISA
BONSXT,L f-.4 92nn7
-\X:T)RFW h K.ATlIFRISF PERRY
hl27 ‘.:74 oc r4 REINA
R”us4r.r. r> 92nn7
-\UnRFW h KATHERIIF PERRY
fi42? VTA DF 1.A RETNX
SnwAl,r. rs 92003
““‘CTnT m-n-F PPODFQ’V “WYFP9 A
.ll‘UE T SU”“CRASS
IOh Pal.?2 \VF
C.ARLSBArl CA 9zon,s
t !?I\13T PRrlPFRTTFS rvC
QFCTPQc?C,4r. TRI!ST 09-?5-9!
7674 SPYGL-\.SS P’--
OCF4NSTDF CA 72Oih
QTC:I,~RITS TQI’ST IA-70-‘)7
4615 PARK DR
r.\Rr..sRAn -J 92llflR
.TC)SFPH F QDPDY
112 YOYTECTTO c.LN
’ FSCONDTDO CA 92015
I
RcRnrrK .\r,vIu :I FI\YTLY TRI’ST n
RiJ H[‘C.O RFTD “I?
’ -\RC\rlI.\ c1\ 91nn7
i
DPRRFV YCKFVIJRY
-IhI P.\RK nR ?
l raRT.sRAn c.A 92nnR
\I RFRT S C YARTF KXRXY
7nclifl P-\SS?C,FWAY PT.
\C.Ol.RA CA 91 in1
IIFT,FV F PFnGRIFT
0 4S35 CnvF OR .A
CARr,SRW CA 92OOR
a
RORFRT F (c FT.TZARFTH TTYPSON
l 7695 VA1.F DR
WHTTTTFR CA 90602
l
Fl.F4VOR !4Tl.l.ER
a 2746l-l RUFNA VTSTA ST
:IFYFT CA 92443
0
THOYAS R I.FWTS
c 9A4 V RIDGFT.TUE Rn
ORAYGF CA 92669
nmrs FLG
c 227 HIJUTTVC,TflV
TRVTYF CA 9272n
0
. , . .lAY K h. CHFRTE FITZPaT!arru a “519 rnVE DR -,
- CARLSRAO CA 920nR
#
RAm1r.r. 1 SORRTC
21 nt7 ~YRFRWOO~ WAY l rscmnrno r\ 92025
0
K4THl FFU RARROSA 7521 n\FFOOTT, rTR
’ SFAl. RFXCH CA 90710
I
TV-OR b “Oli\? :\I?LT?IRS
’ 000 I-T.TYTQIDGF XVF
* r..a c3un.A CA 91011
qr.nFY F F, r.\Rnr. SFTFRTFO
915 S\Y:T)RA i-T
N RRFA CA 92621
RRTSTOl. CO”F PRDPCRTY OmFRS .A 7720 FL --\rlT\j” QFAL 2.4 CXRLSBAD PA 2009
KnTrHT nms3w-\Q\
:i:TFF I ‘,‘“SPrD.J,
:-,ii? ‘,-\R”C\; lQc!~-E -\VE’RC 91375
mm\; Q & KELLY mxmwTrZ
4627 P4RK nR
r\RI SR4D C
QICrIARn .A nl‘FFFV
I 141 FVERC,REFV DR
CAROIFF RY THF SF,\ CA
RTPHARD SAYON
1fi77 P?RK nR R
CAR1 SBSD r.3
TnVY c FIVY
7213 7RD ST
CVCTVTT\S C-\
PXTRTCTX RO'lFRO li4n W 187TH ST
C.ARDEN.4 CA
rHARl.OTTF Y GARRETT
2iA82 W OANA BT.F
(‘.\PTSTRANC) RFACH CA
VTcHAFr. .T T.E.\HY
221ll CRENSHAW RLVD
LflS ?UGFT.FS CA
RR,‘rE cr .myrE ROFI.OFS
1573 rnvE nR 3
C4RT~SR?.D c.4
92’108
92007
92008
92024
90248
91011
92624
9rlOl fi
920ne
P?NISSIOI STEPHEY6KAREN FA?ilLY
771 1 ROSSON RO
SAV OIEGO C.?, 92111
.TFFF A h DONA Dn8BS 118 AVE SAX P.?RLO
SAN rl.F!lFNTF CA 92672
nn”i-\r.n w ROSTOW 1547 COVF DR 7 CARLSRAO CA 92nn8
YAl.TN B h RI?TH SHRW
21007 E YFSARTC4 Rn
cnvIvA rx 91721
RICHARD K & PUTSAM ?lAHLER CHESTER "u‘ WTLLI-\YS
4519 COVE OR 7 PO BOX 17-l
CARLSRAO C.A 92008 nANA POIYT CA
DOTORES A KAUT.BACH
PO ROX 572
CARLSRAO CA 9201 A
RAMAT PROPERTIES rur 107 TOAST RLv” 9
r.A .mr.LA c.\
FIqr’i TRYST
-tG’q PARK 3R
:‘:RLSR~D ~4
VTCTOR H 4RYDT
loin E l%HITTIER R:.:x 3 s
1.A HARRX CA
TWFS b .rTLL GLX’FR
162’3 PARK DR B
?.ARLS@-\O C.3
'PYriY Y 6 FLTZARETH E\H?
Jfi1=1 P\RK DR YARLSBAO r\
YIr:IAFL c Y-\VCINI
Ati?9 YARYFORD DR
SAN nIEGO C1\
PATRIC ROYPRO
I 5An
A
'97TH ST r-. ENA CA
YAX D S ESTHER PnLING
1462 \: SKYLTSE DR
FI-LT.ERTOS CA
THOM4S X & T..AI‘REL FREY
1810 E POIVTE .4VE
CARLSRAD r\
xwrv YAPLF 15-i-4 COVE T)R B
CARLSBXO C4
RICAARO L nCQl:ETTE 4939 COVE DR x
CARLSBAD C4
AI.LAN R WEEDHA’
1930 S HTLL ST ?nR
OCFANSTDE CA
,
12c?77
il2OlR
llh31
4
Q?flflR 4
I
9.119
C)021R
92531
92nnu
9nnl6
92nn8
szona
THOMPSON FAMTLY TRI:ST 12-07-97 412 CAZADOR I.N
SAN CI.F?lEUTE CA 9?fi7?
OCIPC.l.AS h HIl,OA YOCYG
lR52 APACHE CIR P4T.M SPRISGS C.\ 922fil
BFRNARO B KAPLAN AR81 BFLLSHIRE DR '
HUNTINGTON REACH CA
I
92646
Parr. c SYTTll
A?1 I SrYFRD\r F r ‘.
r.\ P-\r.kl\ c1
TR\SK \ d wRRaR\ 2nif-l YV--\RT:II’R W?.
r~Rr.swn CA
SOL.-\\;GF .\l-IERll0l.DT
1637 PARK 0.R 7
r\Rr.smn c-\
8
.T~HN 4 5 TISFT w0YBr.Y
0 4525 CCIVF nR 2
raRT.smn CA
C W h P.\TRTCI\ RR.hY?lER
, ~:~~,q;:‘;IFr~R i
l
lY’J’i H PnRTFR
0 li?5 COVF DR R
!r4~1 SRAn CA
GFORGF 1 & T.0I.S KIYG
8 4525 COVF nR 11
rARLSaAn CA
8
YAR.TORTF VOvAK
l 1525 CnVF I’lR 14
rARr.smn rA
0
.TT’?YTT,A P lIOC,AV
0 77596 VTA nF XGT’A
SAV Tl:\V CqPTSTRANO CA
RORFRT V TANDO
a 1513 m-m rm 4
rARr~SRAn CA
9nf527
9?0flR
9?00R
02llOA
9?nnR
92nnfl
92llflR
9267i
92rlOA
TAYES P & Il‘nTTH QUrLL
994 H\WTHORVE CT
‘ST,\; YARCOS CX 92069
DFvFRl.Y -\ HOSY~R
2r,ln 4r7L-\c J~‘F 4
RF-,Cx.3,1 %F\,‘-H ‘-: ‘)il27R
QICIXRD F YI‘LLIV
790 nAK 1\VE F
C>RI.SR\O C.A 92008
QrlRFRT ,I nnV\;.A SWFDFr..SnV
?i SHCIRFRIRI)
-QT:i’:F “\ r)Z?lJ
QCTH Y KI:KKnYEU 6217 OAKRTDGF RD
SAS “IFGO ca 92120
SANDRA 1. yARKFT.2
1525 rnvE DR 3 I-ARLSRAO r.a 92nn8
.TOllV C & YARTLYV WTLn AS25 f-OVE OR 6
CARLSRAIJ CA Q?OllR
\ITVOR T & YAR.TORIE RICF
Pn ROX 33R
cART.SRAO CA 9201R
RRISTOL COVE ~0NOOMI'iTY.l ASSN VAYCE R GERRY 7777 ALVARAOO RD 323 4525 cnvE rm 13
LA YFSA CA 91911 raRr,SRAT) c-3
I\T.T.FV 0 & DAYA COTTT,F
25752 PASED nE LA PAZ
SAB .TI‘AN CAPISTRANO CA 92675
.TOIlU T VEnl-lER Prl ROX 3403
WFST COVTVA CA (11793
r.AI’GHl.TN FAMT1.Y 1993 T.IVIxG TR 36505 FLORIDA AVE 690
HE?lFT CA 92545
SATVTFRANK G&.TF?V F.aMTLV TR(!ST * 4513 COVP OR 7 C?RT,SRAn CA 9?00R
w
PFTFR .T ii TMFT.OA OT.SON
. 4517 rnvF nR 10
* I-Al7J.SRAl-l CX 92nnfl
w I
PCTF .T h SARA FSCMTT.LA
. 405 V PTUF ST
S-\V C;IRRIFr. CA 91775
w
RXT.PH F. SAVnRA c.nT.DFV
3
19c)fi RFI.YC)RF CT
Fr. cA.TnV CA 92020
0
.lnlIN .T RACK
92nnB
.TllnY L TOLAR 1513 rnw OR R
CXRl.SRAD CA 92OOR
IlOO & FARAH HELFERICH '2061 CAPE !.lAY LN
HIlNTlUGTON REACH CA 92646
TOHN T & CORNCLTA HOPFIFLTJ
971 rAmV rm
PASAnFXA CA 91106
.TXCK H f. T.I! TTCTZKF 6420 1VNSOAT.E DR
108 ANGFLFS CA 9006R
EDWARn HFCHT
pn ROX 1894. COST-\ YES.A/'C.A 9?6?R
.AN”RCW FTLIPPI
4637 PARK DR 3 CARLSRAi, CA 92nna
TRXUK \ i RARBXR: DI’:‘:
2flin Y.AC.AFIT!II-R \\‘E
r\RT.smn (7~ Q?lllR
.T4Y!CC K ?K.AVI!:E
4637 P.\RK DR 9
‘1’ARLSBSO C.3 9?008
FRYFST F & PF’*Y “HnF’;-i’<
‘I :: ‘.‘Tscq L\Rrm;
SF!>PDRT C’FJ+I‘H !‘I ‘J’fifl 4
4
T,,OMXS F d TCiYPE Y, HR.\\ 1515 r‘“VF OR ,
CARLSRX” CA “IOR
Ar.r EN w b PXTRI~TX h\r ~FQ 6191 RCSTIC LN
RIVERSIDE CA 92it7,7
RIC:!.AR!l & TEASVE :IETTT'-K
li25 COVE @R 7
r.ARLsRAn r-\ (f?ncq
OSNTEL & HEI.ESE SROWTE 4525 COVE nR 10
r\RLSBSO !-A 92908
92008
c,\yIvn REXL 42
s2nno
HEVRY R h .T[‘?STTA VFLSOS
4513 C0VF DR 3
CART.SRAn CA 92noo
.TXYFS R SHARP 4513 COVE DR 6
CARLSBAO CA 9’_?OR
ErlWARn .T HnCKFY
441 3 COVE OR 9
CARLSBAJl CA q?nnS
.TOHNSO?i fXW1J.Y TRIST I?-27-85 1140 S GJLRI!CL ST
ANAHEIM CA 928n2
KATHRYV .T CI’VYIUGrlA?l
451 3 COVE DR 16
C.\RLSRXO CA 92on8
GARY .T WILCOX 4513 COVE OR 19
CXRLSBArl c-4 '2 - (!l, 0 ._ /
.JCISFPH F h PATRTCI
P
PI'<;LIsI
265112 DAPPLEGREY L.AC,L‘NA HTT.LS C.A 426i7
rr'nv r. Tnr.AR
-\;I7 COVF nR 23
r~Rr.SR.~n cl.
Sr’S?v KrrTrr IfilR? mTFIawn s-r \ 4 :Il-YTI\;cTn\; RF\\C:, r-5 92fiJ7
TOHY r. nt'RF HA&RI. PO ROY 4Jii=l rwr smn c.4 92fll t7
G-\RY F 6 YARY 170 1776 P\DI!A XVF 9
l‘PT.AVrl r\ 31786
RTCHXRD F h YCRRTlFF DTCKFRSO\; 14?FIFs b V.?,IFRtF 4r.VflRD
4finn PARK nR 46n2 PARK DR C~Rl.SRan CA 92flllA "\RI.SRXD CA
RORERT-\ .T -\Slr 1711 F?Rl:CF RD
r-\Rr,SRan CA OZ(ll?R
l =* 177 Prlnbrl *** Pr~pnrerl For: \ttcnt1nn:
TnHY !J VASH
16fli fCl\'E 5R -\
r\RLSRaD r\ ')?rlr?R
RflCKY c h WF\;rlV R,'TI.TR 151) ' -n':F "la R r.\*r SR\rl c-\ 02flnl3
DXNTFT. !. YANSTR ?ll25 VTTTORI\ -\VF
OY!i?.RD r-3 97n75
POW?, .T nFG7T.F lift9 rOVF DR
CRLSRAl, CA 9?00A
SFCT‘RTTY P4CTFTC VATIOU$I. R\.VK 3300 N TORRFY PINES CT
I A .lrlI 1.a CA 920?7
KEXETH R h RRFXDA :I>W-lERTOY
ATR9 RIVFRCHASE DR
>lE.YPHIS T';
.?,LFREl3 6 .TERRY SA:I-\c;r'V 1614 DARK DR C.aRLSRAn CA
38179
92008
:O,SFPH DnDFLI\: !nlR SAY RFW nR “(‘E.A?iSrDF CA 9205.5
RI‘9CIFLL w b II‘“” WTUSTEA” JC”? rnv.7 OR A “\R,.SRAD CA 72008
rmxaro 6 r ISOR BI:W\rDX 460 S RRIiXF ':ltW DR
.J.Z.AHETY C.A l?AI1R
RRI.J,V V CII[:C:IC-\ 777 :< DRAXGFTHORPE i'.E PL.ACENTIA CX 9_1670
DO!4 R ; CYVTHIA EAI.?
27142 P-\SEfl OFL FSTF $\X .Tl'AN C.APTSTR.\\SO ,‘A "zF:T-
R.\PH.\FL .T 6 RIGSFY ROHnF lh?O PARK DR c3RLSRAn CA l?I)OR
ROl'ArD I, h .'\CQI'ELIVE C4STI.E 4fiin P.ARK nR
rART.SBaD r.\ 1210R
---
c- -
. ZCA 93-08 R-i ZONE ,PARKING
REQUIREMENTS
LABELS
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DIST ENCINITAS SCHOOL DIST
DR GEORGE MANNON SUPT DR LARRY MAW, SUPT DR PATRICIA CLARK WHITE
801 PINE AVENUE 1290 W. SAN MARCOS BLVD 101 S RANCH0 SANTA FE RD
CARLSBAD CA 92008 SAN MARCOS CA 92069 ENCINITAS CA 92024 ,
LEUCADIA COUNTY WTR DIST VALLECITOS WTR DISTRICT SANDIEGOCOUNTY 1960LACOSTAAV 788 SAN MARCOS BLVD DEPTOFPLANNING CARLSBAD CA 92009 SANMARCOS CA 92069 5201 RUFFIN RD STE "B" SANDIEGO CA 92123
CIlYOF ENCINITAS CITYOF OCEANSIDE CITYOFSANMARCOS 505 S.VULCANAV 320NHORNEST 105WRICHMARAVE ENCINITAS CA 92024-3633 OCEANSIDE CA 92054 SANMARCOS CA 92069
CITYOFVISTA PO BOX1988 VISTA CA 92085
1 fi”
., i CALIFDEPTOFFISH&GAME 330GOLDENSHORE#SO LONG BEACH CA"90802
A.RTOJ.NUUTINEN 4920CAMPUSDR NEWPORTBEACH CA 92660
i
/. .
., ,:. : ’
C
‘, . . .;;
* ’ \ v ‘I ‘8, . /
.
:
.
I
--A..
‘l . .._ ---... ‘-.
* . . .
.,
. .
:
.‘. ,.
.
: ‘* ,.
. t.
’ . :
:
.‘.
: - ‘.
i ,
. . .