HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-09-09; City Council; 14345; Incidental Outdoor Dining Areash h
ZITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
AB# /4= m: DEPT. HD.
MTG. g/9/97 INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS CITY All-Y.
ZCA 96-lO/LCPA 96-lO/MCA 96-04
DEPT. PLN -& CITY MGR-F’
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That City Council ADOPT Resolution No. y+ IS/ APPROVING the Negative Declaration and
LCPA 96-10 and INTRODUCE Ordinances No. NS- Yw and ~.q - Y&I APPROVING ZCA
96-10 and MCA 96-04.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
This zone code amendment (ZCA), local coastal program amendment (LCPA), and municipal code
amendment (MCA) item is being processed pursuant to City Council direction. The Zone Code
Amendment/Local Coastal Program Amendment will allow incidental outdoor dining areas
associated with restaurants citywide, outside of the Redevelopment Area, on private property with
an administrative permit, and will exclude such areas from parking requirement calculations. The
Municipal Code Amendment will exclude incidental outdoor dining areas from sewer impact fee
calculations. The Planning Commission heard the ZCA and LCPA at a public hearing on May 7,
1997, and voted unanimously to recommend approval. (The Planning Commission was not required
to take action on the related MCA because the establishment of fees involves Council action only.)
Staff previously prepared an agenda bill, at Council’s request, relating to the possibility of allowing
small outdoor eating areas associated with sit-down restaurants to be excluded from certain City
requirements, such as parking, sewer impact fees, and water impact fees. At that time, staff
presented to Council some preliminary recommendations and identified some potential issues which
would need to be resolved prior to the development of a proposed zone code amendment. Council
directed staff to pursue resolution of those issues, develop specific recommendations, and prepare
the necessary zone code amendments to implement appropriate changes. Staff surveyed
numerous cities regarding outdoor dining area regulations and any issues associated with them, and
developed the amendment attached to this report. The proposed amendment consists of numerous
text changes contained in the attached ordinances.
The ZCA/LCPA amendment will allow incidental outdoor dining areas of limited size on private
property citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area. The proposed amendment accomplishes
several objectives. First, it creates a definition for an “incidental outdoor dining area”. (See Exhibit
5, Section I.) This definition distinguishes “incidental,, dining areas from outdoor dining areas
generally and establishes size limits for these areas. The proposed limitations are: a maximum of
20% of the number of indoor seats up to a maximum of 16, a maximum of 6 tables, and a maximum
of 400 square feet of floor area. (Since the intent of the amendment was to allow incidental outdoor
dining areas as a part of otherwise allowed restaurants/deli’s, the amendment does not change the
zones in which restaurants are currently allowed.)
Second, the amendment creates an administrative permit requirement for incidental outdoor dining
areas. (See Exhibit 5, Section II.) This new Incidental Outdoor Dining Area Permit is an
administrative permit which would be processed like an administrative variance or second dwelling
unit permit).
Third, the proposed amendment provides design and locational standards for incidental outdoor
dining areas. (See Exhibit 5, Section II.) These standards were developed to ensure compliance
with all applicable regulations governing alcoholic beverage service and access for persons with
\ , PAGE 2 OF AGENDA ;L NO. JY, 3Y5
h
disabilities, and to ensure provision of adequate pedestrian and vehicular circulation and safety for
both the incidental dining area and for surrounding uses.
Fourth, the proposed amendment creates an exclusion from parking requirements for all incidental
outdoor dining areas by excluding these areas from the floor area calculations used to determine
the number of parking spaces required. (See Exhibit 5, Section Il.)
Currently, restaurants must provide parking for any indoor and outdoor use areas at the same ratio.
Because incidental outdoor dining areas are restricted in size (number of tables and chairs and
number of square feet) and are not usable at all times (e.g., during inclement weather), it has been
determined that there will be no significant impacts from this exclusion.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:
The project was reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and was
found to have no potentially significant effect on the environment. Therefore, the Planning Director
issued a Negative Declaration on October 31, 1996.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The potential fiscal impacts of this amendment are difficult to predict because some factors are not
known. First, we do not know how many restaurants/eating establishments (existing or future) will
be able to provide incidental outdoor dining areas. For example, some restaurants may not have
the physical space necessary to accommodate an incidental outdoor dining area, or they may have
other constraints which would prevent them from doing so.
Second, we do not know how many of those restaurants which could provide an incidental outdoor
dining area will choose to do so. There may be some situations under which a restaurant
operator/owner may not want to provide an incidental outdoor dining area.
Third, we cannot predict the dollar impact of the sewer impact fee waiver because the amount of the
sewer impact fee calculation in dollars varies with the size of the restaurant (in number of seats) and
the specific location of the restaurant. (The sewer impact fee is calculated as some amount of
dollars per EDU (equivalent dwelling unit). The basic sewer impact fee would be $I,81 0 per EDU.
In addition to this, a restaurant can be required to pay an additional fee amount if it is located in one
of the City’s sewer “benefit,, districts. This benefit district dollar amount can vary from $38 per EDU
to $1,981 per EDU. On this basis, assuming that an existing deli or drive-through restaurant wanted
to add a 16 seat incidental outdoor dining area, the amount of the sewer impact fee being waived
could be somewhere between $1,810 and $3,791, depending upon the location. For an existing
quality or sit-down restaurant adding 16 seats, the amount of the sewer impact fee being waived
could be somewhere between $5,430 and $11,373, depending upon the location.
When this project was first discussed, Council proposed to change both water and sewer impact
fees for incidental outdoor dining areas. Staff has made the necessary changes to sewer impact
fees in the attached municipal code amendment. During this time period, the Water District has
revised their water fee calculations (no municipal code amendment was required). Those
calculations are now based on the number and size of meters required only. Previously, the
number of seats was also a factor in the fee calculation. This change in water fee calculations has
resulted in some water fee savings to restaurants providing incidental outdoor dining areas and,
thus, some fiscal impact to the City. Staff is not able to evaluate the fiscal impact of the changes
made in the water fee calculation.
PAGE 3 OF AGENDA ;L NO. I’! 3q 5
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. 9 ‘7 -40 I
2.. City Council Ordinance No. hJ S - 4U
3. City Council Ordinance No. AIS 4 Ivn
4. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4038, 4039 and 4040
5. Redline/Strikeout Version of ZCA 96-l 0 and LCPA 96-l 0
6. Redline/Strikeout Version of MCA 96-04
7. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated May 7, 1997
8. Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes, dated May 7, 1997.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 97-601
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR ZCA 96- 1 O/LCPA 96-10 AND
APPROVING LCPA 96- 10.
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
CASE NO.: ZCA 96- 1 O/LCPA 96- 10
follows:
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
WHEREAS, on May 7, 1997, the Carlsbad Planning Commission held a duly
noticed public hearing to consider a Negative Declaration and a Zone Code Amendment (ZCA
96- 10) and a Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 96-l 0) relating to Incidental Outdoor
Dining Areas. At the conclusion of the hearing the Commission adopted Resolutions No. 4038,
4039, and 4040 recommending approval of the Negative Declaration and of ZCA 96-10 and
LCPA 96-10; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 9th , day
of September , 1997 held a public hearing to consider the Commission’s
recommendations and hear all persons interested in or opposed to the Negative Declaration and
the Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 96-l 0) and the Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA
96- 10) relating to Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad, California as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the City Council adopts and incorporates the findings of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 4038 approving the Negative Declaration for
Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 96-10)
and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 96-10).
a) Independent Judgment: The City Council finds that the Negative
Declaration reflects the City Council’s independent Judgment. . I
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
b) Location and Custodian of Record of Proceedings. Pursuant to
Public Resources Code section 21081.6(d), all the materials that
constitute the administrative record in this proceeding are in the
custody of and can be found in the offices of the City Clerk and the
Director of Planning in the City of Carlsbad. The administrative
record includes, but is not limited to: the Negative Declaration and
all public comments thereon received during the public review
period and responses thereto, and the proceedings of the Planning
Commission and the City Council thereon.
3. That the City Council adopts and incorporates the findings of Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 4039 and 4040 recommending approval of
the Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 96-l 0) and Local Coastal Program
Amendment (LCPA 96- 10).
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 9th day of September 1997, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Nygaard, Kulchin, and Hall
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
-2- -5
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
I 8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I ORDINANCE NO. NS-420
A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT AND LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO AMEND TITLE 21,
CHAPTERS 21.04,21.26, 21.27,21.28, 21.29, 21.30,21.32, AND
21.34 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW
AND REGULATE INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
ASSOCIATED WITH RESTAURANTS CITYWIDE OUTSIDE
OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
CASE NO.: ZCA 96-10
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California., does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Title 2 1, Chapter 2 1.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.04.188.1 to read as follows:
“21.04.188.1 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas.
Incidental Outdoor Dining Area” means, everywhere except within the Redevelopment
Area Local Coastal Program Segment, a small extension of an indoor restaurant, bona fide eating
establishment, or deli which extends outdoors beyond the walls of the restaurant and which is
used exclusively for eating, drinking, and pedestrian circulation therein. Incidental outdoor
dining areas shall be utilized only as extensions of restaurants providing indoor seating and
which are properly licensed for such service. Incidental outdoor dining areas may be located on
private property only (not in the public right-of-way). The maximum number of seats, tables,
and square feet allowed in an incidental outdoor dining area shall be limited to:
(0 a maximum of 20% of the number of indoor seats or a maximum of twenty (20)
seats, whichever is more restrictive; and,
(ii) a maximum of six (6) tables; and
(iii) a maximum of 400 square feet in area.
Incidental outdoor dining areas may be allowed pursuant to Chapter 2 1.26 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code. Any amount of outdoor dining area exceeding the above limitations shall not
be considered “incidental” for purposes of this definition.”
SECTION II: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 26 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.26.013 to read as follows:
“21.26.013 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas nermitted by administrative nermit.
Incidental outdoor dining areas may be approved by administrative permit for restaurants,
bonafide eating establishments, and deli’s in the C-l, 0, C-2, C-T, C-M, M, and P-M zones outside
of the Redevelopment Area. The owner of the subject property shall make written application to
the Planning Director. Such application shall include all materials deemed necessary by the
Director to show that the requirements of Subsection (c) hereof are met. If the site is in the Coastal
Zone, the application shall also constitute an application for a Coastal Development Permit.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-
(a) The Director shall give written notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the
subject property of pending development decision after the application is complete, at least fifteen
working days prior to the decision on the application as follows:
(1) Contents. The notice shall include all requirements of Section 21.54.061 of
this -code, including a notice of a public comment period of at least 15 working days sufficient to
receive and consider comments submitted by mail prior to the date established for the decision.
The notice shall also include a statement that a public hearing shall be held upon request by any
person and a statement that failure by a person to request a public hearing may result in the loss of
that person’s ability to appeal approval of the administrative permit by the Director to the Planning
Commission.
@I The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the permit. The
Director may waive a public hearing on an administrative permit if notice has been provided in
accordance with subsection (a)(l) of this section and a request for a public hearing has not been
received by the city within 15 working days from the date of sending the notice. If a request for a public hearing is received, a public hearing before the Director shall be held in the same manner as
a Planning Commission hearing. In either event, the Director’s decision shall be based upon the
requirements of, and shall include, specific factual findings supporting whether the project is or is
not in conformity with the requirements of Section 21.26.013(c).
The Director’s decision shall be made in writing. The date of the decision shall be
the date the writing containing the decision or determination is mailed or otherwise delivered to the
person or persons affected by the decision. If the matter includes a Coastal Development Permit,
unless the decision is appealed to the Planning Commission, the Director shall provide a notice of
final action in accordance with Sections 2 1.20 1.160 and 2 1.20 1.170.
(4 Development Standards. All Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas shall comply with
the following development standards:
(1) All applicable requirements of the State of California Disabled Access
Regulations (Title 24).
(2) All applicable requirements of the Alcoholic Beverage Commission, if
alcoholic beverages are served in the outdoor area.
(3) Be operated only during the hours of operation of the associated restaurant.
(4) Provide adequate circulation to accommodate normal pedestrian traffic and
circulation for the outdoor dining area. Pedestrian clearance between tables and/or walls/fences
shall be a minimum 42” wide.
(5) Not be located where the area would:
(A) encroach into the public right-of-way;
(B) eliminate any existing parking spaces;
cc> interfere with vehicle or pedestrian circulation;
m remove or reduce existing landscaping (unless equivalent additional
landscaping is provided elsewhere to the satisfaction of the Planning Director);
(E) present a traffic hazard; or,
(F) be incompatible with outdoor dining, in the opinion of the City
Engineelj because of the speed, volume, or nearness of vehicular traffic.
(6) When calculating square footage for purposes of determining parking
required per Chapter 2 1.44 of this Code, space used for incidental outdoor dining areas pursuant to
this section shall be excluded.
-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
~ SECTION III: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 27 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
~ by the addition of Section 21.27.035 to read as follows:
I . “21.27.035 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas nermitted bv administrative nermit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section 2 1.26.013(a).”
SECTION IV: That Title 21, Chapter 2 1.28 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.28.012 to read as follows:
“21.28.012 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted bv administrative nermit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section 21.26.013(a).‘:
SECTION V: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 29 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 2 1.29.045 to read as follows:
“2 1.29.045 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted by administrative permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section 2 1.26.013(a).”
SECTION VI: That Title 2 1, Chapter 2 1.30 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.30;015 to read as follows:
“21.30.015 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted by administrative nermit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section 2 1.26.013(a).”
s SECTION VII: That Title 21, Chapter 21.32 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended by the addition of Section 21.32.015 to read as follows: ,
“21.32.015 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted by administrative nermit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section 2 1.26.013(a).”
SECTION VIII: That Title 21, Chapter 21.34 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended by the addition of Section 21.34.035 to read as follows:
“21.34.035 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted bv administrative permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
-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
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section 2 1.26.013(a).”
SECTION IX: SUNSET CLAUSE: That this ordinance shall remain in effect only until
midnight September 9, 1998, and as of that date is repealed unless an ordinance which is enacted
before September 9, 1998, deletes or extends that date.
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 publication of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within
fifteen days after its adoption, (Not withstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be
eflective within the City’s Coastal Zone until approved by the California Coastal Commission.)
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the 9th day of September 1997, and thereafter.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the day of 1997, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: .
NOES:
ABSENT:
._ ABSTAIN:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
-4-
.
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-421
AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE 13, CHAPTER 13.10 OF THE
CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO CREATE A SEWER
IMPACT FEE EXEMPTION FOR INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR
DINING AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH RESTAURANTS ON
PRIVATE PROPERTY CITYWIDE OUTSIDE OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
CASE NO.: MCA 96-04
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: That Title 13, Chapter 13.10 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended by the amendment of Table 13.10.020(c)(7) to read as follows:
(7) Restaurants:
+ No seating 2.67
+ Seating 2.67 plus 1 .OO
(Exception: Seats allowed in “Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas” per each 7
as defined by Chapter 2 1.04.188.1 do not count toward seats or
generation of sewer impact fees.) fraction
thereof
Delicatessen or fast food, using only disposable tableware:
+ No seating 2.67
+ Seating 2.67 plus 1 .OO
(Exception: Seats allowed in “Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas” per each 21 as defined by Chapter 21.04.188.1 do not count toward seats or
generation of sewer impact fees.) fraction . . thereof
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
adoption, and the City Clerk shall certifjr to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
published at least once in a publication of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within
fifteen days after its adoption. (Not withstanding the preceding, this ordinance shall not be
effective within the City’s Coastal Zone until approved by the CaIifornia Coastal Commission.)
Ill
Ill
lo
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City
Council on the 9th day of September 1997, and thereafter.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the day of 1997, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKRANZ, City Clerk
(SEAL)
,.
-2-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
.‘EXHIBIT k
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4038 v
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVALOFANEGATIVEDECLARATIONFORAZONE
CODE AMENDMENT AMENDING TITLE 21, CHAPTERS
21.04, 21.26, 21.27, 21.28, 21.29, 21.30, 21.32, AND 21.34 OF
THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO ALLOW AND
REGULATE INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
ASSOCIATED WITH RESTAURANTS CITYWIDE OUTSIDE
OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
CASE NO.: ZCA 96- 101 LCPA 96- 10
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, “Developer”, has filed a verified application
with the City of Carlsbad regarding property owned by various property owners, “Owner”,
described as Citywide, (“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 7th day of May 1997, 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.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
W 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 November 2,1996, and “PII” dated October 27,
1996, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findinps:
1. The initial study shows that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a
significant impact on the environment.
/d
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
2. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and
considered the Negative Declaration, the environmental impacts therein identified for this
project and any comments thereon prior to recommending approval of the project.
Based on the EIA Part-II and comments thereon, the Planning Commission finds that
there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the
environment and thereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration.
3. The Planning Commission finds that the Negative Declaration reflects the independent
judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 7th day of May 1997, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioner Compaq Heineman, Monroy,
Noble, Savary, and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4038 -2- /3
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
.Project Address/Location: Citywide - Outside of the Redevelopment Area
Project Description: Zone Code Amendment, Municipal Code Amendment and Local
Coastal Program Amendment to modify the development standards
to allow incidental outdoor dining areas subject to an
Administrative Permit with exemptions from parking requirements
and some water/sewer fees.
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 Carlsbad. As a result of said review, a
Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not have a significant impact on the
environment) is hereby issued for the subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on file in the Planning
Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 92009. Comments from the public are
invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of date
of issuance. If you have any questions, please call Elaine Blackburn in the Planning Department
at (6 19) 43 8- 1161, extension 447 1.
DATED: NOVEMBER 2,1996
CASE NO: ZCA 96- 1 O/LCPA 96- 1 OMCA 96-04
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
PUBLISH DATE: NOVEMBER 2,1996
MICHAEL J. H&ZMIL%ER
Planning Director
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 - (619) 438-1161 - FAX (619) 438-0894 @
.-
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: ZCA 96- 1 O&CPA 96-l O/MCA 96-04
DATE: October 27.1996
BACKGROUND
1. CASE NAME: Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas
2. APPLICANT: Citv of Carlsbad
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: 2075 Las Palmas, Carlsbad, CA 92009
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: n/a
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zone Code Amendment. Municipal Code Amendment, and Local
Coastal Program Amendment to modifv the development standards to allow incidental outdoor
dining areas subiect to Administrative Permit with exemptions from parking requirements and
some water/sewer fees.
SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” or “Potentially Significant Impact
Unless Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
q Land Use and Planning q Transportation/Circulation 0 Public Services
0 Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities & Service Systems
0 Geological Problems
Cl Water
0 Energy & Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics
0 Hazards 0 Cultural Resources
0 Air Quality cl Noise cl Recreation
0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
I Rev. 03128196
DETERMINATION.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
IXI
El
cl
cl
0
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An is required,
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
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 all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been voided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier , including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore,
a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
-El Planher Signature
.
/B -30-96
Date
Planning Directo%Signatwe Date
Rev. 03/28/96
. -
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City
conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a significant
effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following
pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human
factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to
use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative
Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration.
l A brief explanation is required for all answers except “No Impact” answers that are
adequately supported by an information source cited in the parentheses following each
question. A “No Impact” answer is adequately supported if the referenced information
sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved. A
“No Impact” answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or
it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards.
l “Less Than Significant Impact” applies where there is supporting evidence that the
potential impact is not adversely significant, and the impact does not exceed adopted
general standards and policies.
l “Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated” applies where the incorporation
of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from “Potentially Significant Impact” to a
“Less Than Significant Impact.” The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the
City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the
effect to a less than significant level.
l “Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant.
l Based on an “EIA-Part II”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
effect on the environment, but aJ potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon
the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or
supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior
environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional
environmental document is required (Prior Compliance).
l When “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked the project is not necessarily required
to prepare an EIR if the significant effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR
pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a “Statement of
Overriding Considerations” has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR.
l A Negative Declaration may be prepared if tie City perceives no substantial evidence that
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
3 Rev. 03/28/96
l If there are one or more potentially significant effects, the City may avoid preparing an
EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce impacts to less than significant, and
those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this
case, the appropriate “Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated”
may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared.
l An EIR must be prepared if “Potentially Significant Impact” is checked, and including
but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant effect has
not been discussed or mitigated in an Earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and
the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the impact to less than
significant; (2) a “Statement of Overriding Considerations” for the significant impact has
not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR, (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce
the impact to less than significant, or; (4) through the EIA-Part II analysis it is not
possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or
determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant
effect to below a level of significance.
A discussion 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.
Rev.O3/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a)
b)
cl
4
e)
Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): ( )
Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? ( )
Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
0 Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts f?om incompatible
land uses? ( )
Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
established community (including a low-income or
minority community)? ( )
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local
population projections? ( )
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or
indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area
or extension of major infrastructure)? ( )
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable
housing? ( )
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? ( )
b) Seismic ground shaking? ( )
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ( )
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ( )
e) Landslides or mudflows? ( )
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ( )
g) Subsidence of the land? ( )
h) Expansive soils? ( )
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? ( )
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? ( )
c) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of
surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? ( )
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body? ( )
Potentially Significant
Impact
0
cl
0
0
cl
cl
0
0
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
Cl
0
0
0
cl
cl
Cl
0
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
0
0
0
Cl
q
Cl
Cl
Cl
cl Cl 0 cl cl cl
Cl Cl 0
0
Cl
Cl
cl
Less Than
Significan
t Impact
cl
cl
cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
0
0
cl
0
cl
cl
Cl
Cl
Cl
cl
cl
Cl
cl
cl
No
Impact
El
Ix]
lxl .
lxl
El
lx
Ix1
txl
lx4 IXJ lxl El txl Ix1
El (XI .IxI
lx
Ix]
lxl
IXI
5 Rev. 03128196 I?
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
e)
f-l
!a
h)
9
Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water
movements? ( )
Changes in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? ( )
Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ( )
Impacts to groundwater quality? ( )
Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater
otherwise available for public water supplies? ( )
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a)
b)
cl
4
Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation? ( )
Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants‘? ( )
Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate? ( )
Create objectionable odors? ( )
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
a)
b)
c)
4
e)
0
g)
proposal result in:
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ( )
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g. farm equipment)? ( )
Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
0 Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? ( )
Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ( )
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative
transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? ( )
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ( )
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
a>
b)
c>
4
e)
VIII.
in impacts to:
Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds? ( )
Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? ( )
Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? ( )
Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
0 Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ( )
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
6
Potentially Significant Impact
cl
0
0
0
0
0
0
cl
0
0
cl
0
0
0
0
0
0
cl
0
0
0
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation Incorporated
cl
0
0
0
0
cl
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0
0
0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0
0
0
0 0
0
0.
El
El
lx
El
El
IXI
Ia
IXI
!xl
I23
El
Ix1
lx/
lx
lx
IXI
IB
lxl
lx
Ix1
lx
Rev. 03128196
Less Than
Signitican
t Impact
No Impact
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
a> b)
cl
Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? ( )
Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner? ( )
Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of future value to the region and
the residents of the State? ( )
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
b)
cl
d)
e>
A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? ( )
Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? ( )
The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? ( )
Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? ( )
Increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass, or trees? ( )
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ( )
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ( )
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect
a) b) c> d) e)
upon, or result in a need for new or altered government
services in any of the following areas:
Fire protection? ( )
Police protection? ( )
Schools? ( )
Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ( )
Other governmental services? ( )
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS. Would the
4 b) cl
d) e> 0 g)
proposal result in a need for new systems or supplies,
or substantial alterations to the following utilities:
Power or natural gas? ( )
Communications systems? ( )
Local or regional water treatment or distribution
facilities? ( )
Sewer or septic tanks? ( )
Storm water drainage? ( )
Solid waste disposal? ( )
Local or regional water supplies? ( )
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than
Significan
t Impact
0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No
Impact
0 0 0 El 0 0 0 El
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
IXJ lxl IXI 1xI Ix1
Ix] Ix1 El
lzl El lxl IXI
Rev. 03/28/96
C
.
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a> Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? ( )
b) Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? ( )
c) Create light or glare? ( )
XIV.
4
b)
c)
d>
e)
CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
Disturb paleontological resources? ( )
Disturb archaeological resources? ( )
Affect historical resources? ( )
Have the potential to cause a physical change which
would affect unique ethnic cultural values? ( )
Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact area? ( )
XV. RECREATIONAL. Would the proposal:
a)
b)
XVI.
4
b)
c>
XVII.
Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? ( )
Affect existing recreational opportunities? ( )
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
Does the project have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife 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
endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or
prehistory?
Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
(“Cumulatively considerable” means that the
incremental effects of a 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 the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
EARLIER ANALYSES.
Potentially
Significant
Impact
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-
Potentially
Significant Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Less Than
Significan
t Impact
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0
0
0
0
0
No
Impact
(XI
[XI
IXI
Ix1
El
lxl
IXI
!a
El
lxl
IXI
0 lxl
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
8 Rev. 03128196 2s
:
-
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available
for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist
were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant
to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
C) Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated,“ describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-
specific conditions for the project.
Rev. 03/28/96 23
-
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The proposed project consists of a zone code amendment, municipal code amendment and local
coastal program amendment the result of which is to allow “incidental outdoor dining areas”
(i.e., accessory outdoor eating area extensions of limited size to existing or approved restaurants)
subject to the approval of an administrative permit in areas of the City outside of
Redevelopment. These incidental areas will be limited in size and will be exempted from
parking requirements and from payment of some water/sewer fees under certain circumstances.
It is the intent of this amendment to provide an outdoor eating opportunity for restaurant patrons
to enjoy which is not currently available. It is anticipated that these incidental outdoor eating
areas will be utilized in place of the currently utilized indoor seating during clement weather.
This amendment does not create a new use and does not change the locations in which restaurant
uses are currently allowed in any way. The code amendment will revise the wording contained
in the City Municipal Code, including the Definitions section (Chapter 21.04) and the Parking
section (Chapter 21.44), to allow the proposed incidental use ‘area with approval of an
administrative permit. The amendment will allow incidental outdoor eating areas up to a
maximum of 20% of the number of indoor seats or a maximum of 16 seats whichever is more
restrictive. Accordingly, a typical incidental outdoor eating area project, when considered
individually, would have no environmental impact, and in fact is exempt from environmental
review pursuant to Section 15301(e)(l) of the California Environmental Quality Act, which
allows additions to existing structures (up to 50% of the floor area of the structure or the addition
of 2,500 square feet, whichever is less). Additionally, given the fact that this amendment will
only apply to areas outside of the Redevelopment area, and all restaurants will not be able to
provide the outdoor area because of other constraints (e.g., inadequate space to accommodate the
eating area, or inability to comply with specific design requirements such as A.D.A. clearance
requirements or other standards), no significant adverse cumulative impacts are anticipated.
Therefore, staff has concluded that there will be no impacts resulting from this amendment.
A. Non-Relevant Items
1. Land Use and Planning - The proposed code amendment will not conflict with the
General Plan or zoning designations or any applicable environmental plans adopted by the City
as the incidental outdoor dining areas will, by definition, only be allowed as extensions of
existing and/or approved restaurant uses where such uses are already allowed. For the same
reason the amendments will not be incompatible with existing or planned land uses in any area
and will be not impact agricultural uses or established communities.
2. Population and Housing - The proposed code amendments will not impact population or
housing in that the amendments will only allow the outdoor dining areas as an extension of
existing or approved restaurants. Therefore, they will not induce growth or displace existing
housing.
3. Geologic Problems - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code
amendment, no changes in topography resulting in unstable earth conditions, erosion of soils,
ground shaking, landslides/mudflows, alteration of deposition patterns, or other geologic
problems will occur. Again, the outdoor dining areas will only be allowed as minor extensions
of existing or approved restaurants.
10 Rev. 03/28/96
4. Water - Again, no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code amendment.
Therefore, there will be no impact to water resources.
5. Air Quality - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code amendment,
there will be no impact to air quality.
6. Transportation/Circulation - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone
code amendment, there will be no impact to transportation/circulation.
7. Biological Resources - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code
amendment, there will be no impact to biological resources.
8. Energy and Mineral Resources - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this
zone code amendment, there will be no impact to energy or mineral resources.
9. Hazards - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code amendment,
there will be no exposure to hazards.
10. Noise - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code amendment, there
will be no noise impacts and no exposure to unacceptable levels of noise.
11. Public Services - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code
amendment, there will be no impacts to public services.
12. Utilities and Services Systems - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this
zone code amendment, there will be no impacts to utilities and service systems.
13. Aesthetics - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code amendment,
there will be no aesthetic impacts.
14. Cultural Resources - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code
amendment, there will be no impact to cultural resources.
15. Recreational - The proposed amendment will not increase the demand for parks or other
recreational facilities and will not affect existing recreational opportunities because the proposed
amendment will not induce growth in the city and the proposed amendment will not reduce the
number or amount of areas currently planned for recreational uses.
11 Rev. 03/28/96
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. 4039
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND
TITLE 21, CHAPTERS 21.04, 21.26, 21.27, 21.28, 21.29, 21.30,
21.32, AND 21.34 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE
TO ALLOW AND REGULATE INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR
DINING AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH RESTAURANTS
CITYWIDE OUTSIDE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
CASE NO: ZCA 96-10
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that a Zone Code Amendment to.:
amend Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, to allow and regulate incidental outdoor
dining areas associated with restaurants citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area, and
to exclude such areas from parking requirement calculations be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 7th day of May 1997, hold a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Zone Code Amendment; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of Zone Code Amendment ZCA 96-10,
according to Exhibit “X” dated May 7, 1997, attached hereto and made a part
hereof, based on the following findings:
. . .
db
Findinqs:
That the proposed Zone Code Amendment is consistent with the goals and objectives of
the Carlsbad General Plan in that it does not create a new use not already
anticipated by the General Plan.
That the proposed Zone Code Amendment is consistent with the intent of Chapters
21.04, 21.26, 21.27,21.28, 21.29, 21.30,21.32, and 21.34 in that the amendment does
not change the types of uses allowed in any zoning district and continues to require
adequate parking for all allowed uses.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Car&bad, held on the 7th day of May 1997, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioner Compas, Heineman, Monroy,
Noble, Savary, and Welshons
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
/*
,. ;,--;--y7
..’
1 I*’ - .__,
.*A.
‘\ .~/.+------ ‘-- c.
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
MICHAEL J. HtiZMIk!ER
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4039 -2- a7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1%
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
C
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 4040
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO FIVE SEGMENTS
(EXCLUDING THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA) OF THE
CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO ADOPT
AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTERS 20.04, 21.26, 21.27, 21.28,
21.29,21.30, 21.32, AND 21.34 DEALING WITH INCIDENTAL
OUTDOOR DINING AREAS AS THE IMPLEMENTATION
ORDINANCES FOR CARLSBAD’S LOCAL COASTAL
PROGRAMS
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
CASE NO: LCPA 96-10
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program, and the
implementing zoning provisions for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conformance; and
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, “Applicant”, has filed a verified application
for an amendment to the Local Coastal Program designations regarding property owned by
various property owners, “Owner”, described ‘hs Citywide, (“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal
Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit “Y” dated May 7, 1997, as provided in Public
Resources Code Section 30574 and Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 5.5 of Title
14 of the California Code of Regulations of the California Coastal Commission Administrative
Regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 7th day of May 1997, hold a
duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment.
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six week public review period for
any amendment to the Local Coastal Program. n8
.
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
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
4
W
That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on November
7,1996, and ending on December 19,1996.
C) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of LCPA 96-10 based on the following findings,
and subject to the following conditions:
Findinqs:
1.
2.
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment is consistent with all applicable
policies of the Mello I, Mello II, Agua Hedionda, East Batiquitosmunt, and West
Batiquitos/Sammis segments of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program, in that the
proposed amendment is limited in its nature and will not change existing regulations
prohibiting or restricting development on sensitive slopes, bluff tops, or agricultural
lands, and will not change any requirements for vista points/view corridors.
That the proposed amendment to the Mello I, Mello II, Agua Hedionda, East
Batiquitos/Hunt, and West Batiquitos/Sammis segments of the Carlsbad Local Coastal
Program is required to maintain consistency between the proposed amendment zone
code and the City’s Local Coastal Program.
PC RESO NO. 4040 -2-
-
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 7th day of May 1997, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES: Chairperson Nielsen, Commissioner Compas, Heineman, Monroy,
Noble, Savary, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT:
None
None
ABSTAIN: None
.._. ., I
,..’ /y-:/p .y -k ,,,s; . I /‘
ROBERT NIELSEN, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4040 -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
- h EXHIBIT 0
REDLINEBTRIKiOUT VERSION OF ZCA 96-10 AND LCPA 96-10
SECTION I: That Title 2 1, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.04.188.1 to read as follows:
621.04.188.1 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas.
Incidental Outdoor Dining Area” means, everywhere except within the Redevelopment
Area Local Coastal Program Segment, a small extension of an indoor restaurant, bona fide
eating establishment, or deli which extends outdoors beyond the walls of the restaurant and
which is used exclusively for eating, drinking, and pedestrian circulation therein. Incidental
outdoor dining areas shall be utilized only as extensions of restaurants providing indoor
seating and which are properly licensedfor such service. Incidental outdoor dining areas may
be located on private property only (not in the public right-of-way). The maximum number of
seats, tables, and square feet allowed in an incidental outdoor dining area shall be limited to:
0 a maximum of 20% of the number of indoor seats or a maximum of sixteen (16)
seats, whichever is more restrictive; and,
(ii) a maximum of six (6) tables; and
(iii) a maximum of 400 square feet in area.
Incidental outdoor dining areas may be allowed pursuant to Chapter 2L26 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code. Any amount of outdoor dining area exceeding the above
limitations shall not be considered “incidental”forpurposes of this definition.”
SECTION II: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 26 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.26.013 to read as follows:
“21.26013 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas uermitted bv administrative uermit.
Incidental outdoor dining areas may be approved by administrative permit for
restaurants, bonafide eating establishments, and deli’s in the C-l, 0, C-2, C-T, C-M, M, and P-
M zones outside of the Redevelopment Area. The owner of the subject property shall make
written application to the Director. Such application shall include all materials deemed
necessary by the Director to show that the requirements of Subsection (c) hereof are met. If the
site is in the Coastal Zone, the application shall also constitute an application for a Coastal
Development Permit.
(a) The Director shall give written notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the
subject property of pending development decision after the application is complete, at least
fifteen working days prior to the decision on the application as follows:
(1) Contents. The notice shall include all requirements of Section 21.54.061
of this code, including a notice of a public comment period of at least 15 working days sufficient
to receive and consider comments submitted by mailprior to the date establishedfor the decision.
The notice shall also include a statement that a public hearing shall be held upon request by any
person and a statement that failure by a person to request a public hearing may result in the loss
of that person’s ability to appeal approval of the administrative permit by the Director to the
Planning Commission.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(-4 The Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the permit. The
Director may waive a public hearing on an administrative permit tf notice has been provided in
accordance with subsection (a)(l) of this section and a requestfor a public hearing has not been
received by the city within 15 working days from the date of sending the notice. If a requestfor a
public hearing is received, a public hearing before the Director shall be held in the same manner
as a Planning Commission hearing. In either event, the Director’s decision shall be based upon
the requirements oJ and shall include, specific factualfindings supporting whether the project is
or is not in conformity with the requirements of Section 21.26.013(c).
The Director’s decision shall be made in writing. The date of the decision shall
be the date the writing containing the decision or determination is mailed or otherwise delivered
to the person or persons affected by the decision. If the matter includes a Coastal Development
Permit, unless the decision is appealed to the Planning Commission, the Director shall provide a
notice offmal action in accordance with Sections 21.201.160 and 21.201.170.
(4 Development Standards. All Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas shall comply with
the following development standard&
(1) All applicable requirements of the State of Caltfornia Disabled Access
Regulations (Title 24).
(2) All applicable requirements of the Alcoholic Beverage Commission, if
alcoholic beverages are served in the outdoor area.
(3) Be operated only during the hours of operation of the associated
restaurant.
(4) Provide adequate circulation to accommodate normal pedestrian traLtt(ic
and circulation for the outdoor dining area. Pedestrian clearance between tables at&or
walls/fences shall be a minimum 42” wide.
(5) Not be located where the area would:
0 encroach into the public right-of-way;
0 eliminate any existing parking spaces;
Cc) interfere with vehicle or pedestrian circulation;
@9 remove or reduce existing landscaping (unless equivalent
additional landscaping is provided elsewhere to the satisfaction of the Planning Director);
(I$+) present a traffic hazard; or,
(0 be incompatible with outdoor dining, in the opinion of the City
Engineer, because of the speed, volume, or nearness of vehicular traffic.
(6) When calculating square footage for purposes of determining parking
required per Chapter 21.44 of this Code, space used for incidental outdoor dining areas
pursuant to this section shall be excluded
(7) No heating devices shall be allowed in incidental outdoor dining areas.”
SECTION III: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 27 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.27.035 to read as follows:
“21.27.035 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted bv administrative permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section
21.26.013(a). ”
-2- 3a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A
~ SECTION IV: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 28 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
~ by the addition of Section 21.28.012 to read as follows:
“2I.28.012 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted bv administrative permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section
21.26.013(a).”
SECTION V: That Title 2 1, Chapter 2 1. 29 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.29.045 to read as follows:
‘21.29.045 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted bv administrative permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section
21.26.013(a).”
SECTION VI: That Title 21, Chapter 21.30 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.30.015 to read as follows:
“21.30.015 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted bv administrative permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section
21.26.013(a). ”
SECTION VII: That Title 21, Chapter 21.32 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended by the addition of Section 21.32.015 to read as follows:
‘21.32.015 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted bv administrative permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section
21.26.013(a). ”
SECTION VIII: That Title 21, Chapter 21.34 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended by the addition of Section 21.34.035 to read as follows:
‘21.34.035 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas permitted bv administrative permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental Outdoor Dining
Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section 21.26.013(a).”
-3- J3
. -
REDLINE/STRIKEOUT VERSION OF MCA 96-04
TABLE 13.10.020(c)
Type of Building, Structure or Use Equivalent Dwelling Units
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
Each space of a trailer court or mobilehome park
Each duplex
Each separate apartment in an apartment house
Each housing accommodation designed for occupancy by
a single person or one family, irrespective of the number
actually occupying such accommodation
Each room of a lodginghouse, boardinghouse, hotel,
motel or other multiple dwelling designed for sleeping
accommodations for one or more individuals
+ Without cooking facilities
+ With cooking facilities
Churches, theaters and auditoriums, per each unit of
seating capacity (a unit being one hundred fifty persons or
any fraction thereof)
Restaurants:
+ No seating
+ Seating
(Exception: Seats allo wed in “lnciden ta1
Outdoor Dining Areas” as defined by Chapter
21.04.188.1 do not count toward generation of
sewer impact fees.)
Delicatessen or fast food, using only disposable
tableware:
+ No seating
+ Seating
+ (Exception: Seats allowed in “Incidental
Outdoor Dining Areas” as defined by Chapter
21.04.188.1 do not count toward generation of
sewer impact fees.)
Automobile service stations:
+ Not more than four gasoline pumps
+ More than four gasoline pumps
Self-service laundries, per each washer
1.00
2.00
1 .oo
1 .oo
0.60
1 .oo
1.33
2.67
2.67 plus 1 .OO per each 7
seats or fraction thereof
2.67
2.67 plus 1 .OO per each 21
seats or fraction thereof
2.00
3.00
0.75
EXHIBIT 6
TABLE 13.10.020(c)
Type of Building, Structure or Use Equivalent Dwelling Units
(10) Office space in industrial or commercial establishments Divide the gross floor area
not listed above and warehouses of the building in square feet
by 1800
(11) Schools:
+ Elementary schools
For each sixty pupils or fraction thereof 1 .oo
+ Junior high schools
For each fifty pupils or fraction thereof 1 .oo
+ High schools
For each thirty pupils or fraction thereof 1 .oo
(12) In the case of all commercial, industrial and business
establishments not included in subdivisions 1 through 10,
inclusive, of this subsection the number of equivalent
dwelling units shall be determined in each case by the
City Engineer and shall be based upon his estimate of the
volume and type of wastewater to be discharged into the
sewer. The provisions of Chapter 13.16 shall apply to all
cases under this subsection and an industrial waste
permit shall be required. Any such permit, issued for any
use hereunder, shall include a specific volume of sewage
authorized for such use. If said amount is exceeded, it
shall be grounds for revocation of the permit.
me City of CARLSBAD Planning Departmeuc EXHll3lT 7
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSiON
ItemNo. 4 0
Application complete date: n/a
P.C. AGENDA OF: May 7,1997 Project Planner: Elaine Blackburn
Project Engineer: n/a
SUBJECT: ZCA 96-lO/LCPA 96-10 - INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS - A
Zone Code Amendment and a Local Coastal Program Amendment to modify
Chapters 21.04, 21.26, 21.27, 21.28, 21.29, 21.30, 21.32, and 21.34 of the
Municipal Code to allow Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas associated with
restaurants on private property citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4038
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration and Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 4039 and 4040 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of ZCA 96-10 and LCPA
96-l 0 based upon the findings contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
This zone code amendment is being processed pursuant to City Council direction. The
amendment will allow incidental outdoor dining areas associated with restaurants citywide on
private property outside of the Redevelopment Area with an administrative permit, and will
exclude such areas from parking requirements and from sewer impact fees.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Staff previously prepared an agenda bill,’ at Council’s request, relating to the possibility of
allowing small outdoor eating areas associated with sit-down restaurants to be excluded from
certain City requirements, such as parking, sewer impact fees and water impact fees. At that
time, staff presented to Council some preliminary recommendations and identified some
potential issues which would need to be resolved prior to the development of a proposed zone
code amendment. Council directed staff to pursue resolution of those issues, develop specific
recommendations, and prepare the necessary zone code amendments to implement appropriate
changes. Staff surveyed numerous cities regarding outdoor dining area regulations and any
issues associated with them, and developed the zone code amendment attached to this report.
The proposed amendment consists of numerous text changes contained in the attached exhibits.
Exhibits “X” and “Y” are draft Council ordinances for the proposed ZCA and LCPA,
respectively. Exhibit “I” contains essentially the same information but in a redlined/strikeout
version for easier reading. Staff has also attached Exhibits “Z” and “II”, a draft Council
ordinance for a Municipal Code Amendment to exempt the proposed incidental outdoor dining
areas from sewer impact fee calculations. Because this action involves the establishment of fee
amounts, it will be heard by City Council only. Therefore, the Planning Commission would not
.
ZCA 96- 1 O/LCPA 96- 10 - WJ CIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AbAS
MAY 7,1997
take action on this item. The ZCA/LCPA amendment will allow incidental outdoor dining areas
of limited size on private property citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area. The proposed
amendment accomplishes several objectives as discussed in detail below.
A. The amendment defines an “incidental outdoor dining area”.
The proposed amendment includes a definition of an “incidental outdoor dining area” to
be added to the “Definitions” chapter of the Municipal Code. (See Exhibit I, Section I.)
This definition distinguishes these “incidental” dining areas from outdoor dining areas
generally for permitting purposes. The proposed definition of an “incidental outdoor
dining area” was developed based upon Council’s general direction to staff and the
results of the surveys of related literature and other cities’ experiences with outdoor
dining areas.
The City’s current Municipal Code uses several terms for uses which primarily serve
food and which have indoor seating including “bona fide eating establishment”,
“restaurant”, and “deli”. The definition of an incidental outdoor dining area, therefore,
specifically includes each of these types of food service establishment.
The proposed definition establishes a maximum number of seats, tables, and size in
square feet for an “incidental outdoor dining area”. This was done in order to ensure that
the incidental outdoor dining area remains accessory to the associated indoor restaurant.
The proposed limitations are: a maximum of 16 or fewer seats (depending upon the
number of indoor seats), 6 tables, and 400 square feet of floor area.
B. The amendment allows incidental outdoor dining areas only in the zones in which
restaurants and/or deli’s are already allowed (i.e., the C-l, 0, C-2, C-T, C-M, M, and P-M
zones).
Under current regulations, restaurants and/or deli’s are allowed in the zones cited above.
The intent of the proposed amendment was to allow incidental outdoor dining areas as a
part of otherwise allowed restaurants/deli’s. Consequently, the proposed amendment does
not change the zones or locations in which restaurants or deli’s are allowed. In some of
these zones the restaurants/deli’s require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The proposed
amendment will allow incidental outdoor dining areas equally whether the restaurant/deli
is allowed by right or by CUP only. In either case, the same administrative permit will be
required. If a CUP is required for the restaurant/deli, the administrative permit for the
incidental outdoor dining area would be processed concurrently and could be approved by
the Planning Director following the CUP approval by the Planning Commission.
37
ZCA 96-1 O/LCPA 96-10 - WJCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
MAY 7,1997
C. The amendment creates an administrative permit requirement for incidental outdoor
dining areas. (See Exhibit I, Section II.)
It was the desire of Council to provide an incentive for restaurants to provide small
outdoor dining areas with a minimal amount of cost and time to the applicant wherever
possible. Consequently, staff has developed a recommendation requiring a new
administrative permit (an “Incidental Outdoor Dining Area” Permit) for incidental
outdoor dining areas.
The administrative permit/procedure proposed is similar to that required for
administrative variances and second dwelling units. It will involve minimal cost to the
applicant ($150.00) and can be processed quickly, while ensuring adequate review of
applications. The procedure requires a 15-day noticing period for neighboring property
owners within 300 feet. (Again, this is similar to the noticing area for administrative
variances and second dwelling units.) The Planning Director’s decision on a permit
request could be appealed to the Planning Commission.
D. The proposed amendment provides design and locational criteria for incidental outdoor
dining areas. (See Exhibit I, Section II.)
The proposed design and locational criteria were developed in order to accomplish
several objectives. First, it was necessary to ensure compliance with all applicable
regulations governing alcoholic beverage service and access for persons with disabilities.
The proposed criteria specifically require compliance with such regulations. Second,
staff wanted to ensure provision of adequate pedestrian and vehicular circulation and
safety for both the incidental dining area and for surrounding uses. In addition, the
proposed incidental dining area should not negatively impact traffic circulation. The
proposed criteria establish these requirements. Each Incidental Outdoor Dining Area
Permit application will be reviewed by Engineering and Planning staff to ensure that
there are no negative impacts to traffic circulation. Staff also wanted to preserve
compliance with current regulations which provide for aesthetic considerations (e.g.,
landscaping). The proposed criteria also address this issue by prohibiting landscaping
changes without Planning Director approval.
E. The proposed amendment creates an exclusion from parking requirements for all
incidental outdoor dining areas.
The proposed amendment excludes all incidental outdoor dining areas from the floor area
calculations used to determine the number of parking spaces required. (See Exhibit I,
Section II.) Currently, restaurants must provide parking for any indoor and outdoor use
areas at the same ratio. Because incidental outdoor dining areas are restricted in size
(number of tables and chairs and number of square feet) and are not usable at all times
(e.g., during inclement weather), it has been determined that there will be no significant
impacts from this exclusion.
-
ZCA 96-l O/LCPA 96-l 0 - n\ICIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING A&AS
MAY 7,1997
IV. ANALYSIS
The project is subject to the following regulations and requirements:
A. City of Carlsbad General Plan;
B. Zoning Regulations Chapters 21.04 (Definitions), 21.26 (C-l Zone), 21.27 (0
Zone), 21.28 (C-2 Zone), 21.29 (C-T Zone), 21.30 (C-M Zone), 21.32 (M Zone),
and 21.34 ((P-M Zone) of the Municipal Code; and
C. Carlsbad Local Coastal Program.
A. General Plan
The proposed zone code amendment is consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the
General Plan. The General Plan Land Use Element (Commercial Land Uses) contains several
goals including “a healthy and diverse economic base” (Goal A.l), promotion of “economic
development strategies” for commercial and other land use types (Goal A.3), and the promotion
of “tourist oriented land uses” which serve a variety of users. These goals are to be implemented
through a variety of policies and programs including “to establish and maintain commercial
development standards” to address various design concerns and ensure compatibility between the
commercial use and the surrounding land uses (Objective B.3). The proposed zone code
amendment is consistent with these goals, objectives and policies. Restaurants which include
outdoor dining areas represent an amenity (an alternative dining opportunity) which is attractive
to both tourists and residents/employees in the City. The proposed amendment will not change
the uses allowed in any zone. In addition, the amendment includes design and locational
standards, among other requirements, which will ensure compatibility with surrounding uses.
B. Zoning Regulations
Under current regulations, restaurants and/or delis are allowed by right in the C-l (Neighborhood
Commercial), C-2 (General Commercial), C-T (Commercial-Tourist), C-M (Heavy Commercial-
Limited Industrial), and M (Industrial) zones and with a CUP in the 0 (Office) and P-M (Planned
Industrial) zones. The code requirement for restaurant parking is one space per 100 square feet
(for restaurants less than 4,000 square feet in size) and 40 spaces plus one space per 50 square
feet of floor area in excess of 4,000 (for restaurants of 4,000 square feet or greater). Restaurants
which incorporate outdoor seating areas are allowed provided they satisfy all applicable
requirements, including providing required parking at the appropriate restaurant parking ratio.
The proposed zone code amendment would not change the zones in which restaurants or delis
(with or without outdoor seating areas) are allowed. It simply allows a limited amount of such
outdoor seating to be provided without having to provide parking and without paying sewer
impact fees. (A restaurant which is designed to provide a larger outdoor dining area (e.g., one
containing 600 square feet of area) would be required to provide parking for the portion of the
outdoor dining area which exceeds the “incidental” definition.) 39
-
ZCA 96-l O/I-CPA 96-10 - 11KIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AI&AS
MAY 7,1997
C. Local Coastal Program
Because the project includes areas within the Coastal Zone and amends the City’s Zoning
Ordinance, the project requires a Local Coastal Program Amendment which must be approved by
the Coastal Commission following City Council action. The proposed amendment will be
applicable citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area. Consequently, it will involve the Mello
I, Mello II, Agua Hedionda, East BatiquitosJHunt, and West Batiquitos/Sammis segments of the
Carlsbad Local Coastal Program. Staff has reviewed the proposed project with regard to the ’
various Coastal segment programs and has determined that the proposed wording is consistent
with all Coastal segment regulations. The proposed amendment is limited in its nature and will
not change existing regulations prohibiting or restricting development on sensitive slopes, bluff
tops, or agricultural lands. It also will not change any requirements for vista points/view
corridors. Any proposed restaurant development in the Coastal Zone (with or without an ’
incidental outdoor dining area) will be subject to essentially the same regulations and restrictions
on development as currently exist except for parking requirements. The proposed parking
exclusion for incidental outdoor dining areas will not affect public parking in the Coastal Zone as
the proposed incidental outdoor dining areas will only be allowed on private property. Further, it
has been determined that the proposed parking exclusion is “de minimus” in nature and will,
therefore, have no negative impacts. Therefore, staff believes the proposed amendment is
consistent with all existing Coastal regulations.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This project was reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
was found to have no potentially significant effect on the environment. (See discussion in the
EIA Part II, attached.) Therefore, the Planning Director issued a Negative Declaration on
October 3 1, 1996.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4038
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4039
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4040
4. Exhibit “I” dated May 7, 1997 (italics reflect proposed changes to the CMC)
6. Exhibit “Z”
7. Exhibit “II”.
EB:bk
EXtWlT 8
4. ZCA 96-1OlMCA 96-04/LCPA 96-10 - INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS - A Zone Code
Amendment and a Local Coastal Program Amendment to modify Chapters 21.04, 21.26, 21.27,
21.28 21.29, and 21.34 of the Municipal Code to allow Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas associated
with restaurants on private property citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area.
MINUTES 41
PLANNING COMMISSION May 7,1997 Page 14
Chairperson Nielsen announced that if the Commission recommends approval of this item, it will be
forwarded to the City Council for its consideration.
Project Planner Elaine Blackburn briefly described the Zone Code Amendment for Incidental Outdoor
Dining areas and that the amendment will provide specific definition for these areas and establish permit
requirements and development standards for them. She stated that this amendment has been prepared
pursuant to Council direction.
Ms. Blackburn ~presented slides to show the key features of the ordinances.
1. Provides a definition of what is an incidental dining area, i.e., extensions of indoor
restaurants and other types of eating areas, areas not designed for any establishment
that does not have indoor seating, only applies outside the Redevelopment Area, it
establishes a maximum size for the incidental dining area, it restricts the number of tables
and chairs and the total square footage.
2. The ordinance creates the requirement for an Administrative Permit handled very much
like an Administrative variance, having the same type of noticing requirements and being
a Planning Director decision which then would be appealable to the Planning
Commission.
3.
4.
Development Standards would require compliance with ADA requirements, ABC
requirements, the hours of operation would be required to be consistent with the regular
hours of operation of the restaurant and adequate pedestrian circulation.
Specific Location Criteria: 1) no tables or seating in the public right-of-way; 2) elimination
of existing parking will not be permitted; 3) no interference with vehicle or pedestrian
circulation; 4) no reduction or removal of existing landscaping but substitutions of plants,
etc., may be accomplished with the Planning Directors approval; 5) cannot create a
traffic hazard; and, 6) cannot be incompatible with vehicular traffic.
5. The 400 sq. ft. of the incidental dining area would be excluded from any calculation done
to determine the parking requirements.
6. No heating devices will be allowed.
Ms. Blackburn concluded her presentation by stating that staff has reviewed the ordinance under CEQA
and reviewed it for consistency with the various Local Coastal Program segments and is recommending
that the Commission recommend approval. Also, Ms. Blackburn called attention to a memorandum from
the Assistant City Attorney, dated May 7, 1997, and stated that if the Commission votes for approval, the
wording in the memorandum will have to be substituted in and will apply to Exhibits X and Y, which are
part of the 2 resolutions that the Commission will be taking forward and also Exhibit I, which Is the red line
strike out version of the ordinance text.
Commissioner Monroy asked Ms. Blackburn to again explain why heaters will not be allowed in these
outdoor dining areas.
Ms. Blackburn explained that it is staffs way to restrict the use of the areas to incidental use only (for an
alternative to indoor seating) in an attempt to have them used incidentally, and not used as a standard
extension.
Seeing no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Nielsen closed Public Testimony.
MINUTES 42
PLANNING COMMISSION May 7,1997 Page 15
ACTION:
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
Motion by Commissioner Heineman, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commission Resolutions No. 4038, recommending approval of the Negative
Declaration and Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4039 and 4040,
recommending approval of ZCA 96-10 and LCPA 96-l 0 based upon the findings
contained therein and including the amendments.
7-o
Nielsen, Noble, Heineman, Savary, Monroy, Welshons, and Compas
None
43
-
_. .~ ‘.
September 9, 1997
Mayor and City Council Members
Carlsbad, CA
A
lead A6ENMnEhl#
u Mayor city CoulIcil city lblanager
City Attorney
city clerk
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
My husband and I have owned Don’s Country Kitchen for 7 years.
We were very pleased with the recommendation that city staff has made
regarding the usage of outdoor seating in the Redevelopment Area.
Their recommendation will allow us to continue to provide a special
atmosphere that may be lacking in other areas along the coast. It wiIl also
allow us to maintain the level of service that our customers are used to
receiving.
We are optimistic that the council will decide to vote in favor of the
proposed recommendations. Carlsbad has a uniqueness that other cities do
not possess. This is what makes it a special place to live, and a great place
for people to visit.
Respectfully
-72 Sharon McAnally
Don’s Country Kitchen
2885 Roosevelt St.
Carlsbad, CA 92008
PROOF OF PUBLICA- .ON
(2010 & 2011 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
North County Times
formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The
Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been
adjudged newspapers of general circulation by the
Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of
California, under the dates of June 30, 1989
(Blade-Citizen) and June 21, 1974 (Times-
Advocate) case number 171349 (Blade-Citizen)
and case number 172171 (The Times-Advocate)
for the cities of Escondido, Oceanside, Carlsbad,
Solana Beach and the North County Judicial
District; 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:
August 30,&1997
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
San M3rcos Dated at California, this -day
----- ______---------------- I Signature
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
This space is ,-. the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
I
--------------------------
I IX
-ii6%E iS iii$aBY GIVEN t&t theI%ji&j&dl $&I Citj$@m- -_-._. z _
holdapuMichbaringatthoCiiyCoundlChnnberql290CarbbedVRsOe[Mvs Carlsb+, California, at 6:OO P.M. on Tuepdrry, BeptWWr 0,1X47, tocofskier 3pptwWofaZoneCodeAme&wmt and a Lomt Cosstal Program Amwdmwt EomodHyChapters21.~,21.~,21.27,21.28,21.29.21.34,8nd21.44dthe Carlsbad Municii Code to akw incideMal Outdoof Dining m m with restaurants, on private property gewraUy located outsida of the Redevelopment Area.
Ifyou~anyquestionsrepardingth*~,plse~oE~Btadcbwnin. ttKJPlanningDepaenM,atCIBb)4381161, sxt.4471. I,
-
(Form A)
TO: C1T.Y CLERK’S OFFTrC
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the matetlals necessary for you to notide
ZCA 96-lO/LCPA 96-lO/MCA 96-04 - INCIDENTIAL OUTDOOR DINING
for a publfc hearing before the Clty Council.
Please notice the item for the council netting of FIRST AVAILABLE HEARING
.
-i
.a
Thank you.
Assistant City Man-- .
s”t/P 9l9lw Jw,
JUNE 16, 1997 Date
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
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, April 16, 1997, to ‘request a Zone Code
Amendment and a Local Coastal Program Amendment to modify Chapters 21.04,
21.26, 21.27, 21.28, 21.29, 21.34 and 21.44 of the Municipal Code to allow incidental
Outdoor Dining Areas associated with restaurants on private property generally located
citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area.
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 April 10, 1997. If
you have any questions, please call Elaine Blackburn in the Planning Department at
(619) 438-l 161, extension 4471.
.
If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment, and/or Local Coastal Program
Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence
delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
CASE FILE: ZCA 96-l O/LCPA 96-l 0 7: . .
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS
PUBLISH: APRIL 4, 1997
CITY OF C.AJRLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2075 Las Palmas Dr. - Carlsbad, CA 92009-l 576 - (619) 438-1161. FAX ((319) 438-0894 @
.! -
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST
801 PINE AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
SAN DIEGUITO SCHOOL DIST
701 ENCINITAS BLVD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
VALLECITOS WATER DIST
788 SAN MARCOS BLVD
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME
SUITE 50
330 GOLDENSHORE
LONG BEACH CA 90802
LAFCO
1600 PACIFIC HWY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
CITY OF CARLSBAD
ENGINEERING DEPT
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPT
ELAINE BLACKBURN
SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DIST
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
LEUCADIA CNTY WATER DIST
1960 LA COSTA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SD COUNTY PLANNING
SUITE B
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NORTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST
9150 CHESAPEAKE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
CITY OF CARLSBAD
COMMUNITY SERVICES
ENCINITAS SCHOOL DIST
101 SO RANCH0 SANTA FE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF VISTA
PO BOX 1988
VISTA CA 92085
SANDAG
SUITE 800
400 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
I.P.U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND
URBAN STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
CITY OF CARLSBAD
MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT
LABELS FOR ZCA 96-IOlLCPA 96-10
/MCA 96-04 - INCIDENTIAL
OUTDOOR DINING
- . .:
H:\ADMIN\LABELS\LCP
INTERESTED PARTIES
UPDATED 1 l-96
OLIVENHAIN M.W.D.
1966 OLIVENHAIN ROAD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CRAIG ADAMS
SIERRA CLUB
SAN DIEGO CHAPTER
3820 RAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LESLIE ESPOSITO
1893 AMELFI DRIVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
LANIKAI LANE PARK
SHARP; SPACE 3
6550 PONTO DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
KIM SEIBLY
SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC
PO BOX 1831
SAN DIEGO CA 92112
PERRY A LAMB
890 MERE POINT ROAD
BRUNSWICK MAINE 04011
RICHARD RETECKI
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
SUITE 1100
1330 BROADWAY
OAKLAND CA 94612
DALE/DONNA SCHREIBER
7163 ARGONAURA WAY
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CITY OF ENCINITAS
COM.DEV. DEPARTMENT
505 S. VULCAN AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
REGIONAL WATER QUAL. BD
EXECUTIVE OFFICER
SUITE B
9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92124
GUY MOORE JR
6503 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CYRIL AND MARY GIBSON
12142 ARGYLE DRIVE
LOS ALAMITOS CA 90702
JOHN LAMB
1446 DEVLIN DRIVE
LOS ANGELES CA 90069
MARY GRIGGS
STATE LANDS COMMISSSION
SUITE 100 SOUTH
100 HOWE AVE
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
PLANNING & LAND USE DEPT
JOAN VOKAC - SUITE B-5 .
5201 RUFFIN ROAD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
ANTHONY BONS
1124 BLUE SAGE
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
MR/MRS MICHAEL CARDOSA
6491 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
TABATA FARMS
PO BOX 1338
CARLSBAD CA 92018
KENNETH E SULZER
SANDAG - EXEC DIRECTOR
IST INT’L PLAZA, SUITE 800
401 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
JAN SOBEL
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
PO BOX 1605
CARLSBAD CA 92008
BILL MCLEAN
c/o LAKESHORE GARDENS
7201 AVENIDA ENCINAS
CARLSBAD CA 92009
SPIERS ENTERPRISES
DWIGHT SPIERS
SUITE 139
23 CORPORATE PLAZA
NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660
SUPERVISOR BILL HORN
Al-l-N: ART DANELL
COUNTY OF SD, ROOM 335
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LEE ANDERSON
CRA PRESIDENT
5200 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FLOYD ASHBY
416 LA COSTA AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CARLENE TIMM
SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC
PO BOX 1831
SAN DIEGO CA 92112
COPIES TO:
CITY CLERK
‘MAIN LIBRARY
BRANCH LIBRARY
WATER DISTRICT
. ! I
LABELS - 5 163
LCPA MAILING LIST (GOVERNMENT AGENCIES)
SANDAG (SAN DIEGO COUNTY)
WELLS FARGO PLAZA
SUITE 800
APPENDIX A (PER COASTAL COMMISSION)
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
ROOM 700
110 WEST A STREET
SANDIEGO CA 92101
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION
350 MCALLISTER STREET
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94 103
BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION & HSG AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
WILLIAM G. BRENNAN ROOM 5504
DEPUTY SECRETARY AND SPECIAL COUNCIL 1120 N STREET
SUITE 2450 SACRAMENTO CA 95814
980 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DISTRICT 11 CALTRANS
TIM VASQUEZ, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
2829 SAN JUAN ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92 138
401 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92 101
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH
OFFICE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT AFAIRS
1400 TENTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE
STEVE SHAFFER, AGRICULTURE RESOURCES
ROOM 100
1220 N STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
RESOURCES AGENCY
RM 1311
1416 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 958 12
AIR RESOURCES BOARD
ANNE GERAGHTY, MANAGER
GENERAL PROJECTS SECTION
PO BOX 2815
SACRAMENTO CA 958 12
ENERGY RESOURCES, CONSERVATION
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
CHUCK NAJARIAN
I5 I6 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 958 14
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
SUITE 1100
1330 BROADWAY
OAKLAND CA 946 12
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
DON LOLLOCK, CHIEF
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
RM 1206-20
1416 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 958 14
MARINE RESOURCES REGION, DR & G DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR DOUG WICKIZER, ENVIROMENTAL COORD
350 GOLDEN SHORE RM 1516-2
LONG BEACH CA 90802 14 16 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
SOUTHERN REGION
JOHN WALSTROM, TECHNICAL SERVICES
8885 RIO SAN DIEGO DRIVE
SAND DIEGO CA 92108
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
DWIGHT SANDERS
SUITE 1005
100 HOWE AVE
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
BILL TRAVIS
30 VAN NESS AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO CA 95814
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
PO BOX 100
SACARAMENTO CA 95801
‘- . - - . I
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
JOHN B. MARTIN, REGIONAL DIRECTOR COMMANDANT, ELEVENTH NAVAL DISTRICT
SUITE 2 10 DISTRICT CIVIL ENGINEER
1450 MARIA LANE SAN DIEGO CA 92132
WALNUT CREEK CA 94596-5368
GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
MOLLY BRANDT, DIRECTOR
OPERARIONAL PLANNING
525 MARKET STREET
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105
U. S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
BOB BARNEY
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
U. S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
LOWER COLORADO REGION
PO BOX 427
BOULDER CITY CO 89005
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
PHILLIP LAMMI, CHIEF
ROOM 1316
630 SANSOME STREET
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94111
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
CLIFFORD EMMERLING, DIRECTOR
SUITE 350
901 MARKET STREET
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVE
DUNCAN LENT HOWARD, REGIONAL ADMIN
450 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102
BRIAN O’NEILL, SUPERINTENDENT U. S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
GOLDEN GATE NATIONAL RECREATION AREA MID-PACIFIC REGION
BUILDING 20 1 FORT MASON 2800 COTTAGE WAY
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94123 SACRAMENTO CA 95825
,- I, -
, .
SUPERINTENDENT
CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARK
190 1 SPINNAKER DRIVE
SAN BUENAVENTURA CA 93001
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
RONALD M. JAEGER
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SUITE 200
3 111 CAMINO DEL RIO NORTH
SAN DIEGO CA 92108
DOUGLAS WARNOCK, SUPERJNTENDENT
REDWOOD NATIONAL PARK
DRAWER N
1111 2ND STREET
CRESCENT CITY CA 9553 1
U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
JAMES MCKEVITT. FIELD SUPERVISOR
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
BARRY BRAYER, AWP-8
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
WESTERN REGION
PO BOX 92007
LOS ANGELES CA 90009