HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-06-15; City Council; 15260; Incidental Outdoor Dining Areash A
CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGEIWA BILL
AB# Ij,kLbt) -- TITLE-
MTG. 6115199 INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
ZCA 99-011LCPA 99-01
DEPT. PLN Id
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
0 6
* . . I
CITY MGRa
That City Council ADOPT Resolution No. ciq -d/T APPROVING the Negative Declaration and
LCPA 99-01 and INTRODUCE Ordinance No. #S- L(92 APPROVING ZCA 99-01.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
This zone code amendment (ZCA) and local coastal program amendment (LCPA) item is being
processed pursuant to City Council direction. The ZCA/LCPA will allow “Incidental Outdoor Dining
Areas” (IODA) associated with eating establishments citywide, outside of the Redevelopment Area
and outside of the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone with some exceptions. These uses will
be allowed on private property only, with an administrative permit, and will exclude such areas from
parking requirement calculations. The Planning Commission heard the ZCA and LCPA at a public
hearing on April 21, 1999, and voted unanimously to recommend approval.
City Council has previously adopted a ZCA/LCPA very similar to the attached draft document.
However, that ordinance expired prior to Council’s hearing the Coastal Commission’s modifications
to the text. Consequently, staff has revised the ordinance to include those recommended
modifications. (The modified wording precludes approval of an Incidental Outdoor Dining Area
Permit on sites which are botJ west of the railroad right-of-way and do not provide parking for their
indoor seating in compliance with Chapter 21.44 (Parking Ordinance) of the Municipal Code.)
Since the original IODA ordinance was adopted, Council has also been developing a
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone for some areas of the City. Since that Overlay Zone
includes more restrictive parking requirements than the current Parking Ordinance, staff has also
revised the IODA ordinance wording to prohibit IODA permits (and the associated parking waiver)
on properties within the Overlay Zone boundaries.
The attached draft ZCAILCPA amendment will allow Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas of limited size
on private property citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area and outside of the
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone, with the exception already mentioned. The proposed
amendment accomplishes several objectives.
1. The amendment creates a definition for an “Incidental Outdoor Dining Area”. (See Exhibit 2,
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 20, 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/delis, the amendment does not change the zones in which such uses are
currently allowed.)
2. The amendment creates an administrative permit requirement for Incidental Outdoor Dining
Areas. (See Exhibit 2, 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).
3. The proposed amendment provides design and locational standards for Incidental Outdoor
Dining Areas. (See Exhibit 2, Section Il.) These standards were developed to ensure
PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. 15.26 0
compliance with all applicable regulations governing alcoholic beverage service and access
for persons with disabilities, and to ensure provision of adequate pedestrian and vehicular
circulation and safety for both the incidental dining area and for surrounding uses.
4. 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 2, Section II.)
Currently, restaurants must provide parking for any indoor and outdoor use areas. 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 their exclusion from the parking requirement
calculation.
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 February 5, 1999.
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.
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. 94 @Li 7
2. City Council Ordinance No. NS* Vci Z
3. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4482, 4483 and 4484
4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated April 21, 1999
5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated April 21, 1999.
RESOLUTION NO. W-217
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A NEGATIVE
DECLARATION FOR ZCA 99-011LCPA 99-01 AND APPROVING
LCPA 99-01.
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
CASE NO.: LCPA 99-01
6
follows:
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as
7
WHEREAS, on April 21, 1999, the Carlsbad Planning Commission held a duly
8
noticed public hearing to consider a Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 99-01)
9
10 and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 99-01) relating to Incidental Outdoor Dining
11 Areas II. At the conclusion of the hearing the Commission adopted Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 4482, 4483, and 4484 recommending approval of the Negative Declaration,
ZCA 99-01 and LCPA 99-01; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 15 day of
June , 1999, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Commission’s
16
17
18
19
20
recommendations and to hear all persons interested in or opposed to the Negative Declaration,
Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 99-01) and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 99-01)
relating to Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas II.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
of Carlsbad, California as follows:
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I 1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
I 2. That the City Council adopts and incorporates the findings of Planning
Commission Resolution No. 4482 approving the Negative Declaration for the Incidental Outdoor
Dining Areas II Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 99-01) and Local Coastal Program Amendment
(LCPA 99-01).
a. Independent Judgment: The City Council finds that the Negative
Declaration reflects the City Council’s independent Judgement.
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 administrap
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. 4483 and 4484 recommending approval of Zone Code
Amendment (ZCA 99-01) and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 99-01).
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the 15 June day of 1999, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Nygaard, Finnila & Hall
NOES: None
ATTEST:
City Clerk
KAREN R. KUNDTZ, A nt City Clerk
(SEAL)
-2-
1
2 ~
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. NS-492
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 RELATING
TO INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS ON
PROPERTY LOCATED CITYWIDE OUTSIDE OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND OUTSIDE OF THE
COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE.
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
CASE NO.: ZCA 99-01
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows:
SECTION I: That Title 21, Chapter 21.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is Fended
by the addition of Section 21.04.188.1 to r&ad as follows: : 1 ., .,,.
“2 1.04.188.1 Incidental Outdoor Dininp Areas.
Incidental Outdoor Dining Area” means, everywhere except within the Redevelopment
Area Local Coastal Program Segment and except within the CommerciaLVisitor-Serving
Overlay Zone, 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. On properties located west of the railroad right-of-way and outside of
the Village Redevelopment Area, Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas shall be allowed only where
the existing indoor restaurant, bona fide eating establishment, or deli provides on-site parking in
compliance with the parking ratios specified in Chapter 21.44 (Parking Ordinance) of the
Municipal Code. 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 21.26 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 2 1, Chapter 2 1. 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 uermitted bv administrative uermit.
Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas may be approved by administrative permit for restaurants,
bona fide 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 and outside of the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone except on
those sites located within the Coastal Zone west of the railroad right-of-way which do not provide
5
parking for their indoor seating on-site in compliance with Chapter 21.44 (Parking Ordinance) of
the Municipal Code. 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.
(4 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
calendar days prior to the decision on the application as follows:
(1) Contents. The notice shall include all requirements of Section 2154.061 of
this code, including a notice of a public comment period of at least 15 calendar 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.
0.9 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 tith subsection (a)(l) of this section and a requeit for a public hearing has not been
received by the city within 15 calendar 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 &he-same manner as
a Planning~Cornmission 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.
w 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 Incidental Outdoor Dining Area would:
0-v encroach into the public right-of-way;
03 eliminate any existing parking spaces;
(Cl interfere with vehicle or pedestrian circulation;
@> remove or reduce existing landscaping (unless equivalent additional
landscaping is provided elsewhere to the satisfaction of the Planning Director);
Q present a traffic hazard; or,
(F) 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
-2- 16
-
1 per Chapter 21.44 of this Code, space used for Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas pursuant to this
section shall be excluded.”
SECTION III: That Title 21, Chapter 21.26 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the amendment of Subsection 21.26.021(l) to read as follows:
“(1) All uses shall be conducted wholly within a building except such uses as gasoline
stations, electrical transformer substations, nurseries for sale of plants and flowers and other
enterprises customarily conducted in the open;”
SECTION IV: 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 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 21.26-.013(a).”
SECTION V: That Title 2 1, Chapter 21. 28 of the. Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.28.012 to read as follows: . 1 .
“21.28.012 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas uermitted 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 VI: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 28 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the amendment of Subsection 21.28.020( 1) to read as follows:
“(1) All uses shall be conducted wholly within a building except such uses as gasoline
stations, electrical transformer substations, horticultural nurseries, and other enterprises
customarily conducted in the open.”
SECTION VII: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 29 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended by the addition of Section 21.29.045 to read as follows:
“2 I .29.045 Incidental Outdoor Dining; Areas uermitted bv administrative uermit.
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 21.30 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 nermitted bv administrative Permit.
Subject to the development standards set forth in section 21.26.013(c) an Incidental
-3- 7
-
Outdoor Dining Area may be approved by administrative permit pursuant to section 21.26.013(a).”
SECTION IX: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 30 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the amendment of Subsection 21.30.020(2) to read as follows:
“(2) All uses shall be conducted wholly within a completely enclosed building, or
within an area enclosed on all sides with a solid wall or uniformly painted fence not less than five
feet in height, except such uses as gasoline stations, electrical transformer substations,
horticultural nurseries, and other enterprises customarily conducted in the open, provided such
exclusion shall not include storage yards, contractor’s yards and like uses;”
SECTION X: 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 nermitted 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 XI: 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 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 21.26.013(a).”
-4- 8
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
I 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
effective 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 of day 1999, and thereafter.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the of day
AYES:
1999, by the following vote, to wit:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
ALETHA L. RAUTENKR4N Z, City Clerk
(SEW
-5- 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
EXHIBIT 3
PJ,ANNING COMMISSION RESOJSJTION NO. 4482
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE
CODE AMENDMENT AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT RELATING TO INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR
DINING AREAS ON PROPERTY LOCATED CITYWIDE
OUTSIDE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND OUTSIDE
OF THE COMMERCIAL/VISITOR-SERVING OVERLAY
ZONE
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING
AREAS II
CASE NO.: ZCA 99-OlflCPA 99-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Director has prepared a Zone Code Amendment and a
Local Coastal Program Amendment pursuant to Section 21.52.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code regarding property owned by various owners, “Owner”, described as
Citywide outside of the Redevelopment area and outside of the
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction with said
project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of March 1999 and
on the 21st day of April 1999, 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:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
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) 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 February 5,1999, and “PII” dated January 20,
1999, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings:
Findi-:
1. The Planning Commission of the City, of Carlsbad has reviewed, analyzed and
considered the Negative Declaration (ZCA 99-Ol/LCPA 99-Ol), the environmental
impacts therein identified for this project and any comments thereon prior to
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project. Based on the EL4 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.
2. The Planning Commission finds that the Negative Declaration (ZCA 99-Ol/LCPA 99-
01) 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 21st day of April 1999, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compaq L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Segall, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner. Trigas common, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4482 -2- //
City of
GATIVE DECIJRATION
Project Address/Location: Citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area
Project Description: Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to
modify the development regulations to allow incidental outdoor
dining areas subject to Administrative Permit with some
exemptions from parking requirements.
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 tile 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 (760) 438- 116 1, extension 4471.
DATED: FEBRUARY 5,1999
CASE NO: ZCA 99-Ol/LCPA 99-01
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
PUBLISH DATE: FEBRUARY 5,1999
Planning Director
2075 La Palmas Dr. l Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 l (760) 438-l 161 - FAX (760) 438-0894 a9
ONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART II
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO: ZCA 99-O l/LCPA 99-O 1
DATE: January 20. 1999
BACKGROUND
1. . CASE NAME: Incidental Outdoor Dw Areas II
2. APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: ;
4. DATE EL4 FORM PART I SUBMITTED: N/A
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Zone Code &nendment and J,ocal Coastal Propr am Amendment to
modifv the de velonment repulanons to allow incidental outdoor dmmg areas sublect to
Administrative Permit with some exemntions from D . r&me reauiremen&
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.
0 Land Use and Planning
0 Population and Housing
0 Geological Problems
[XI Transportation/Circulation 0 Public Services
0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities & Service Systems
0 Energy & Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics
cl Water
0 Air Quality
cl Hazards 0 Cultural Resources
cl Noise cl Recreation
0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
1 Rev. 03/28/96
DETERMINATION.
.
(To be completed by the Lead Agency)
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 Master Environmental
Impact Review (MEIR 93-01) pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been voided
or mitigated pursuant to that earlier Master Environmental Review (MEIR 93-Ol),
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, a Notice of Prior Compliance has been prepared.
Date
Plkning Direc&#i Sigrkb re Date
2 Rev. 03/28/96
RNVmArd 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.
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.
“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.
“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.
“Potentially Significant Impact” is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an
effect is significant.
Based on an “EIA-Part II”, if a proposed project could have a potentially significant
effect on the -environment, but &I 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).
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.
A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that
the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant effect on the environment.
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 musf 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 ENVIRONMENTAT, EVALT JATION. Particular attention
should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined
significant.
4 Rev. 03/28/96 lL
C
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:.
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
(Source #(s): ()
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the
project? ()
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
0 d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impacts
to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible
land uses? ()
e) 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
4 b) c) 4 e> 0
Ed h) 9
expose people to potential impacts involving:
Fault rupture? ()
Seismic ground shaking? ()
Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? ()
Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? ()
Landslides or mudflows? ()
Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil
conditions from excavation, grading, or fill? ()
Subsidence of the land? ()
Expansive soils? ()
Unique geologic or physical features? ()
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
4
b)
c)
4
Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the
rate and amount of surface runoff? ()
Exposure of people or property to water related hazards
such as flooding? ()
Discharge into surface
surface water quality
oxygen or turbidity)? ()
Changes in the amount
body? ()
waters or other alteration of
(e.g. temperature, dissolved
of surface water in any water
5
Potentially Significant Impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Cl
cl
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Less Than
Significant Impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
El
0
cl
cl
cl
cl
No Impact
Rev. 03/28/96 17
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
g)
h)
i>
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) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants?
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause
any change in climate?
d) Create objectionable odors?
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
a)
b)
cl
4
e)
f-l
8)
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?
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
in impacts to:
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats
(including but not limited to plants, fish, insects,
animals, and birds?
b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)?
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors?
Potentially Significant Impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Cl
cl
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Less Than
Significant
Impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
II7
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
No
Impact
El
El
El
[x1
El
IXI
6 Rev. 03128196
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
VIII.
4
b)
c)
ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal?
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:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)? ()
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency evacuation plan? ()
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health
hazards? ()
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential
health hazards? ()
e) 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
4 b) c> 4 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
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? ()
4 Sewer or septic tanks? ()
e) Storm water drainage? ()
f) Solid waste disposal? ()
g> Local or regional water supplies? ()
Potentially Significant Impact
cl
cl
0
cl
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated
cl
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
cl
cl q cl
Less Than Significant
Impact
No Impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
Cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
El
El
El
Ix1
El
lxl
El
Ix]
El
El
El
/xl q Ix] El
Ix1 Ix1 lxl
lxl lx [XI El
Rev. 03/28/96
Issues (and Supporting Information Sources).
XIII.
4
b)
cl
XIV.
a>
b)
4
4
6
AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
Affect a scenic or vista or scenic highway? ()
Have a demonstrate negative aesthetic effect? ()
Create light or glare? ()
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) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional
parks or other recreational facilities? ()
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ()
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) 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?
b) 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)?
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will
cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
Potentially Significant Impact
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
0
cl
0
Cl
cl
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated
cl
cl cl
cl cl cl cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
cl
Less Than Significant Impact
cl
cl cl
cl cl
cl
0
cl
0
cl
cl
cl
cl
No Impact
Ix1
El
[XI
ixl
lx
El
ix]
El
lx
Ix1
El
Rev. 03128196 a0
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
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)@). In this case a discussion should identify the
following on attached sheets:
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.
Cl 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
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAI~ SETTING
The proposed project consists of a zone 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 otherwise-approved restaurants) subject to the
approval of an administrative permit in areas of the City outside of the Redevelopment Area.
These incidental areas will be limited in size and will be exempted from parking requirements in
some locations/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 dining 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’s Municipal Code in various chapters to allow the
proposed incidental use areas with approval of an administrative permit. The amendment will
incidental outdoor dining areas up to a maximum of 20% of the number indoor seats or a
maximum of 20 seats whichever is more restrictive. Accordingly, a typical incidental outdoor
dining 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 not
all restaurants will 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 Americans with Disabilities Act 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.
It should be noted that nothing in this amendment limits the nature or extent of environmental
review required for any project which includes an incidental outdoor dining area. Such projects
will be subject to the normal environmental review process and, subsequently, to any mitigation
requirements which may be required for such projects. As with any other allowed use, such
projects will have to be evaluated on an individual basis for environmental impacts and, if
necessary, application of appropriate mitigation measures.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
A. Non-Relevant Items
1. Land Use and Planrring - 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 or approved restaurant uses where such uses are already allowed. For the same reason
the amendment will not be incompatible with existing or planned land uses in any area and will
not impact agricultural uses or established communities.
10 Rev. 03128196
2. Population and Housing - The proposed code amendment will not impact population or
housing in that the amendment 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.
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 - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code amendment,
there will be no impact to air quality.
6. portatton/Ctrculation - 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. Enerw Mineral Resources - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this
zone code amendment, there will be no impact to energy and mineral resources.
9. Kazards - 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 exposure to 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 services 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 Resom - As no site-specific project is proposed as part of this zone code
amendment, there will be no impacts 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 will not reduce the number or amount of areas
currently planned for recreational uses.
11 Rev. 03128196 43
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
PJANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO, 4483
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT TO AMEND
CHAPTERS 20.04,21.26, 21.27,21.28, 21.29,21.30,21.32, AND
21.34 RELATING TO INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING
AREAS ON PROPERTY LOCATED CITYWIDE OUTSIDE OF
THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA AND OUTSIDE OF THE
COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING
AREAS II
CASE NO: ZCA 99-01
WHEREAS, the Planning Director has prepared a proposed Zone Code
Amendment pursuant to Section 21.52.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to
allow Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas associated with
restaurants on private property citywide outside of the
Redevelopment Area and outside of the CommerciaWisitor-
Serving Overlay Zone
(“the property”); and
WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is set forth in the draft City Council
Ordinance, Exhibit “X” dated, March 17, 1999, and attached hereto INCIDENTAL
OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II zCA 99-01; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of March 1999 and
on the Zlst day of April 1999, 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:
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 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
COM-S APPROVAL of INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING
AREAS II (ZCA 99-Ol), based on the following findings:
Find-:
1. That the proposed Zone Code Amendment ZCA 99-01 is consistent with the General
Plan in that it does not create a new use not already allowed or anticipated by the
General Plan.
2. That the proposed ZCA reflects sound principles of good planning in that it does not
change the types of uses already allowed in any zoning district and is, therefore,
consistent with the intent of Chapters 21.04, 21.26, 21.27, 21.28,‘21.29, 21.30, 21.32,
and 21.34 and it continues to require adequate parking for allowed uses.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 21st day of April 1999, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Segall, and Welshons
NOES:
-ABSENT: Commissioner Trigas
ABSTAIN:
*.
CARLSBAD PLANNING C&MISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4483 -2- r;-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO . 4484
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF A LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT TO FIVE SEGMENTS (EXCLUDING THE
REDEVELOPMENT AREA) OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM BY AMENDING CHAPTERS 21.04,
21.26, 21.27, 21.28, 21.29, 21.30, 21.32, AND 21.34 RELATING
TO INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS AS THE
IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCES FOR CARLSBAD’S
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAMS ON PROPERTY LOCATED
CITYWIDE OUTSIDE OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA
AND OUTSIDE OF THE COMMERCIALMSITOR-SERVING
OVERLAY ZONE
CASE NAME: INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
CASE NO: LCPA 99-01
WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program,
General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conformance; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director has filed a verified application for an
15
16
amendment to the Local Coastal Program designations regarding property owned by various
owners, “Owner”, described as
18 /I Citywide outside of the Redevelopment area and outside of the
CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
19
20
21
22
23
24
(“the Property”); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal
Program Amendment dated January 12, 1999, 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
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 17th day of March 1999 and
on the 21st day of April 1999, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to
consider said request; and
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
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.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
4 That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) At the end of the State mandated six week review period, starting on February 3,
1999 and ending on March 17, 1999, staff shall present to the City Council a
summary of the comments received.
Cl That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
COMMENDS APPROVAL of INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING
AREAS II, LCPA 99-01, according to Exhibit “X” attached to Planning
Commission Resolution No. 4483, based on the following findings, and subject to
the following conditions:
Findiegs:
1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment is consistent with all applicable
polici& of the Mello I, Mello II, Agua Hedionda, East BatiquitoskIunt, 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.
2. 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.
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the “imposition” of fees,
dedications, reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as
“fees/exactions.”
PC RESO NO. 4484 -2- 27
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
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If
you protest them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section
66020(a), and file the protest and any other required information with the City Manager for
processing in accordance with Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely
follow that procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or
annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your ,right to protest the specified fees/exactions
DOES NOT APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning,
zoning, grading or other similar application processing or service fees in connection with this
project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any fees/exactions of which you have previously been given
a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute of limitations has previously otherwise
expired.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 21st day of April 1999, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES: Chairperson Heineman, Commissioners Compas, L’Heureux,
Nielsen, Segall, and Welshons
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Trigas
ABSTAIN:
1
CARLSBAD PLANNING CGMMISSION
ATTEST:
Planning Director
PC RESO NO. 4484 -3-
-_ EXHIBIT 4
The City of CARLSBAD Planning Department
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 1 0
Application complete date: n/a
P.C. AGENDA OF: April 21,1999 Project Planner: Elaine Blackburn
Project Engineer: da
SUBJECT: ZCA 99 a Ol/LC PA 99-01 - INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II -
A Negative Declaration, 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 and outside of the CommerciaWisitor-Serving Overlay
Zone.
I. RECOMMEM)ATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 4482
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the Negative Declaration and Planning Commission
Resolutions No. 4483 and 4484 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of ZCA 99-01 and LCPA
99-01 based upon the findings contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
This zone code amendment is being processed pursuant to City Council direction and does
generally three things. First, the amendment defines “Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas”
(I.O.D.A.‘s), distinguishing them from outdoor eating areas in general by size and location
limitations. Second, it regulates the location and design of I.O.D.A.‘s, requiring an
administrative permit for such areas. Third, it excludes I.O.D.A.‘s from parking requirement
calculations (with some exceptions). Subsections A through E (below) provide a detailed
discussion of the contents of the proposed ordinance and of the exceptions to and limitations on
the I.O.D.A. ordinance.
Outdoor dining areas associated with restaurants, deli’s, and other eating establishments can be
provided under current regulations. Such areas are treated like indoor seating areas and are
included in calculating the total floor area of the eating. establishment, which in turn, is used to
calculate the number of parking spaces required for the business. This proposed amendment
would provide an incentive to businesses to include small outdoor dining areas by excluding
those areas (up to 400 square feet in size) from the parking requirement calculation.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
As stated above, eating establishments in the City are already allowed to provide outdoor dining
areas (on their private property). The outdoor dining area, like the indoor dining area, is included
in the calculation of total floor area. The total floor area is the basis for determining how many
-
ZCA 99-Ol/LCPA 99-Ol- INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
April 21,1999
parking spaces are required for a particular business. (See Subsection “E” below for a detailed
discussion of parking requirements for restaurants and other eating establishments.)
In the summer of 1997, the City Council indicated that they wanted to provide an incentive to
encourage eating establishments to provide outdoor seating areas. It was noted that, within the
Redevelopment Area, “sidewalk cafes” are allowed both on private property and within the
public right-of-way and form an attractive addition to the area. Council members recognized
that, outside of the Redevelopment Area, privatization of public right-of-way was problematic
and was not desirable. However, they wanted to provide encouragement for outdoor dining areas
wherever they could be accommodated on private property. In response to this direction staff
prepared a draft ordinance known as the Incidental Outdoor Dining Area (I.O.D.A.) ordinance.
In September 1997 City Council approved the Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 96-l 0) and Local
Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 96-10) which created and regulated Incidental Outdoor
Dining Areas. This ordinance allowed eating establishments to provide small outdoor dining
areas which would be exempt from parking requirements (because they were not included in the
business’ floor area calculation) by getting an Incidental Outdoor Dining Area Permit. (Note: An
Incidental Outdoor Dining Area Permit was not required for &outdoor dining areas. It was only
necessary if the applicant wanted to take advantage of the waiver of parking requirements
available through the permit. If the applicant wanted to provide parking for an outdoor dining
area at Code requirements, he could do so with no special permit required.)
When the LCPA was heard by the California Coastal Commission (in the summer of 1998) the
Coastal Commission approved the proposed amendment with modifications. The effect of the
modifications was to prohibit the possibility of Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas (and thus the
parking waiver) on those Coastal Zone sites which are west of the railway line and alsQ are
under-parked. Thus, those Coastal Zone sites on either side of the railway line which satisfied
Code parking requirements for their indoor dining areas could provide an Incidental Outdoor
Dining Area (with the attendant parking waiver); but those sites which were located west of the
railway line & are not providing parking at Code rtquirements for their indoor dining areas will
not be able to get an Incidental Outdoor Dining Area Permit (and the attendant parking waiver).
This exception was the result of the Coastal Commission’s concern over the lack of public
parking generally west of the railway line. They did not want to exacerbate any existing under-
parking situations by allowing such businesses to further expand.
In the mean time, the City Council has directed staff to prepare a new ordinance (the
Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone) which contains specific regulations for some of the
areas around the LEGOLAND development. This overlay zone creates more stringent parking
requirements in some areas. Therefore, to maintain consistency with those regulations, an IODA
permit would not be available within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
Unfortunately, due to the inclusion of a sunset clause in the original ordinance and the fact that
the Coastal Commission did not consider the LCPA until July of 1998, the approved ZCA
automatically repealed in October 1998 before those Coastal Commission modifications could be
adopted by the City Council. Consequently, staff has now prepared a new ZCA/LCPA
(“Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas II”) which is essentially the same as the original ordinance 30
except that it includes the necessary Coastal Commission modifications, precludes an IODA in
ZCA 99-OliLCPA 99-Ol- INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
April 21,1999
the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone, and does not include a sunset clause. These
“Incidental Outdoor Dining Area II” regulations will allow small outdoor eating areas associated
with restaurants outside of the Redevelopment Area to be excluded from City requirements for
parking except in those Coastal Zone locations west of the railway which are already under-
parked and except within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone.
The proposed amendment consists of numerous text changes contained in the attached exhibits.
Exhibit “X” (attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 4483) is a draft Council
ordinance for the proposed ZCA. Exhibit “Z” contains the same information but in a
redlined/strikeout version for easier reading. The ZCWLCPA will allow Incidental Outdoor
Dining Areas of limited size on private property citywide outside of the Redevelopment Area and
outside of the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone. 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 X, Section I.)
This definition distinguishes these “Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas” from outdoor
dining areas in general. This distinction is necessary because the size limitation is the
basis for allowing the parking waiver. The proposed definition of an “Incidental Outdoor
Dining Area” was developed based upon Council’s 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 land uses which primarily
involve food service and which have indoor seating, including “bona fide eating
establishment”, “restaurant”, and “deli”. The definition of an Incidental Outdoor Dining
Area specifically includes each of these types of food service establishment.
The proposed definition establishes a maximum number of seats and tables, and a
maximum floor area 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 20 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 31
ZCA 99-Ol/LCPA 99-Ol- INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
April 21,1999
Incidental Outdoor Dining Area Permit (an administrative permit) would be processed
concurrently and would be acted upon by the Planning Director immediately following
action upon the CUP by the Planning Commission.
C. The amendment creates an administrative permit requirement for Incidental Outdoor
Dining Areas. (See Exhibit X, 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 1%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 X, Section II.)
The proposed design and locational criteria were developed in order to accomplish
several objectives. First, it protects the public right-of-way. Incidental Outdoor Dining
Areas will be allowed on private property only, not in the public right-of-way. Second, 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 that Incidental Outdoor.Dining Areas comply with such regulations.
Third, staff wanted to ensure provision of adequate pedestrian and vehicular circulation
and safety for both the incidental dining area and for surrounding uses/areas. 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 Planning and Engineering staff to ensure that
there are no negative impacts to traffic circulation. Staff also wanted to preserve
compliance with current regulations which address aesthetic considerations (e.g.,
landscaping). The proposed criteria address this issue by prohibiting landscaping changes
without Planning Director approval.
E. The proposed amendment creates an exclusion from parking requirements for Incidental
Outdoor Dining Areas. The only exception is that those sites located within the Coastal
Zone west of the railway line which also do not provide on-site parking at Code-required
amounts will not be able to obtain an IODA Permit.
The proposed amendment excludes Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas from the floor area
calculations used to determine the number of parking spaces required. (See Exhibit X, 3a
h e .
ZCA 99-OVLCPA 99-Ol- INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
April 21,1999
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 floor area) 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.
The Coastal Commission was concerned about the permitting of additional eating areas
on sites west of the railway line which were also not parked at Code requirements.
Therefore, the Coastal Commission approved modified wording which prohibits
Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas on Coastal Zone sites west of the railway line which
also do not provide on-site parking at Code requirements for their indoor seating areas.
(Coastal sites located west of the railway line and which do provide on-site parking at
Code-required levels can qualify for an Incidental Outdoor Dining Area Permit. Only
those sites west of the railway line which are &Q under-parked could not qualify. ) That
wording has been incorporated into the attached draft ordinance.
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
A.
C. Carlsbad Local Coastal Program.
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.
33
ZCA 99-Ol/LCPA 99-Ol- INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
April 21,1999
Page 6
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 requirements for restaurant parking are: a) one space per 100 square
feet (for restaurants less than 4,000 square feet in size) and b) 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 will 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 for the area except for those areas
within the Coastal Zone west of the railway line which are not parked to Code requirements and
except for those sites within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay. For example, a restaurant
which is designed to provide an indoor seating area and a 600-square foot outdoor dining area
would be required to provide parking for all of the indoor seating area and for 200 square feet of
the outdoor dining area (i.e., the portion of the outdoor dining area which exceeds the 400-square
foot “incidental” definition.)
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 Batiquitos/Hunt, and west Batiquitos/Sammis segments of the
Carlsbad Local Coastal Program. Staff has revietied 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 some 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. In addition, those restaurants located within the Coastal Zone west of the railway line
which are currently under-parked will not be able to obtain an I.O.D.A. permit and the associated
waiver from parking requirements. Therefore, it has been determined that the proposed parking
exclusion is “de minimus” in nature and will have no negative impacts. Therefore, staff believes
the proposed amendment is consistent with all existing Coastal regulations.
34
ZCA 99-OVLCPA 99-Ol- INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II
April 21,1999
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
February 5, 1999.
ATTACHMENTS . .
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4482 (Neg Dee)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4483 (ZCA)
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 4484 (LCPA)
4. Exhibit “Z”, dated March 17, 1999
EB:ehmh
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
REDLINE/STRIKEOUT VERSION OF ZCA 99-01 AND LCPA 99-01
SECTION I: That Title 2 1, Chapter 2 1. 04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 2 1.04.188 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 and except within the CommerciaWisitor-Serving
Overlay Zone, a small extension of an indoor restaurant, bona Jide 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. On properties located west of the railroad right-of-way and
outside of the Village Redevelopment Area, Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas shall be allowed
only where the existing indoor restaurant, bona fide eating establishment, or deli provides on-
site parking in compliance with the parking ratios specified in Chapter 21.44 (Parking
Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. 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 21.26 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:
“21.2dOI3 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas vermitted bv administrative vermit.
Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas may be approved by administrative permit for
restaurants, bonacfide 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 and outside of the CommerciaWisitor-Sewing
Overlay Zone except on those sites located within the Coastal Zone west of the railroad right-of-
way which do not provide parking for their indoor seating on-site in compliance with Chapter
21.44 (Parking Ordinance) of the Municipal Code. 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.
(4 The Director shall give written notice to all property owners within 300 feet of the
subject property of pending development decision afleer the application is complete, at least
f@een calendar 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 commentperiod of at least 15 calendar days suflcient
to receive and consider comments submitted by mail prior to the date established for the decision. 36
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
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.
0 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 request for a public hearing has not been
received by the city within I5 calendar 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 offinal action in accordance with Sections 21.201.160 and 21.2Ol.I 70.
(4 Development Standards. All Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas shall comply with
the following development standards:
(4 All applicable requirements of the State of California Disabled Access
Regulations (Title 24).
(2) All applicable requirements of the Alcoholic Beverage Commission, tf
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 antior
walldfences shall be a minimum 42” wide.
(5) Not be located where the Incidental Outdoor Dining Area would:
(A) encroach into the public right-of-way,-
(B) eliminate any existing parking spaces;
(c) interfere with vehicle or pedestrian circulation;
(0) 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,
09 be incompatible with outdoor dining, in the opinion of the City
Engineer, because of the speed, volume, or nearness of vehicular
trafic
(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 ,’
SECTION III: That Title 21, Chapter 21.26 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by
the amendment of Subsection 21.26.020( 1) to read as follows:
“(1) All uses shall be conducted wholly within a building except such uses as gasoline
stations, electrical transformer substations, a& nurseries for sale of plants and flowers, and sk&la~
-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
other enterprises customarily conducted in the open;”
SECTION IV: That Title 2 1, Chapter 2 1. 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 vermitted bv administrative vermit.
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. 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 vermiffed bv administrative vermit.
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 2 1, Chapter 2 1. 28 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the amendment of Subsection 21.28.020(l) to read as follows:
“(1) All uses shall be conducted wholly within a building except such uses as gasoline
stations, electrical transformer substations, & horticultural nurseries, and ,;,;1,, other
enterprises customarily conducted in the open.”
SECTION VII: That Title 21, Chapter 21. 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 vermitted 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 21.30 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 vermitted bv administrative vermit.
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 IX: That Title 21, Chapter 21.30 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended by the amendment of Subsection 21.30.020(2) to read as follows:
-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
“(2) All uses shall be conducted wholly within a completely enclosed building, or within
an area enclosed on all sides with a solid wall or uniformly painted fence not less than five feet in
height, except such uses as gasoline stations, electrical transformer substations, and horticultural
nurseries, and ,;,;1,, other enterprises customarily conducted in the open, provided such exclusion
shall not include storage yards, contractor’s yards and like uses;”
SECTION X: 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 vermitted bv administrative vermit.
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 XI: That Title 2 1, Chapter 2 1.34 of the Carfsbad Municipal Code is amended
by the addition of Section 21.34.035 to read as follows:
“21.34.045 Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas vermitted bv administrative vermit.
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). ))
-4- 3?
-
PLANNING COMMISSION April 21, 1999
EXHIBIT 5
Page 4
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
1. ZCA 99-011LCPA 99-01 - INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREAS II - Request for approval of
a Negative Declaration, 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.
Assistant Planning Director, Gary Wayne introduced the item and stated that the Commission’s action on
this item is not final and will be forwarded to the City Council for its consideration.
Mr. Wayne introduced Senior Planner, Elaine Blackburn, who presented the staff report as follows: This is
a request for a Zone Code Amendment and a Local Coastal Program Amendment to create a category
called Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas. These will be small, limited size dining areas associated with
indoor seating at restaurants and other food service establishments. A few years ago, City Council
requested that staff develop an ordinance that would provide some sort of incentive for restaurant and
other eating establishment management to provide some small outdoor seating areas associated with
their restaurants and delicatessens, etc. Staff researched the subject and ultimately recommended
something called an Incidental Outdoor Dining Area. It had to be given a special name in order to give it
special regulations. Staff then recommended that these areas be a maximum of 400 square feet in size
with a maximum of 6 tables. The number of outdoor seats then would be limited to 20% of the number of
seats inside the restaurant, up to a maximum of 20 seats. That ordinance was approved and sent to the
Coastal Commission. When the ordinance came back from Coastal Commission, the Zone Code
Amendment had nearly expired. Council had put a 1 year sunset clause on it to give it a test period.
During that period, no applications were received for Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas and consequently it
had a very short life. The wording was then re-drafted to adopt the Coastal Commission’s recommended
modifications which consisted of a very limited amount of exception. The Coastal Commission was very
concerned about allowing these Incidental Outdoor Dining Areas in locations west of the Railroad in areas
where there is not enough parking, per the City Code, for the indoor eating areas. The ordinance was
subsequently revised to include the modified wording. In the meantime, Council has been working on
special regulations for the Carlsbad Ranch area, otherwise known as the Commercial/Visitor Serving
Overlay Zone. The regulations that are being created for that overlay zone actually require more parking.
It is a more restrictive parking requirement than might be in place elsewhere. The desire was not to allow
these Incidental Outdoor Dining Area permits in that area, because it essentially waives 4 parking spaces.
When this Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment were originally approved,
also associated with it was a Municipal Code Amendment that changed some of the regulations regarding
the water fees and how the water fees for a particular restaurant or food service use were calculated.
That change remains in place as it did not expire and does not need to be addressed again. The only
remaining benefit from this Incidental Outdoor Dining Area permit, at this point, is the waiver of
approximately 4 parking spaces. This revised ordinance (with the Commission’s recommendation for
approval) will go forward to City Council and perhaps be re-implemented.
Commissioner Welshons asked Ms. Blackburn to review the errata sheet dated April 21, 1999.
Ms. Blackburn pointed out that the following corrections:
1) The phrase . . . and outside of the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone . . . has been
added to the end of the original title of Resolution No. 4483.
2) The phrase . . . and except on those sites located within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving
Overlay Zone , . . has been added to line 30 of Ordinance No. 21.26.013.
3) The phrase . . . and except on those sites located within the Commercial/Visitor-Serving
Overlay Zone . . . has been added to line 24 of Ordinance No. 21.26.013 on the
REDLINE/STRIKEOUT VERSION OF ZCA 99-01 AND LCPA 99-01.
MINUTES &?
-
PLANNING COMMISSION April 21, 1999 Page 5
Referring to Line 1, Page 2, Exhibit X (the old version of the Ordinance No. 21.26.013) Commissioner
Welshons asked why the phrase . . and the Commercial/Visitor-Serving Overlay Zone . . was not added
immediately after . . . of the Redevelopment Area . . . rather than at the end of the ordinance, as it now
appears.
Ms. Blackburn replied that the exception is that it is outside of the Redevelopment Area. Ms. Blackburn
then stated that it is possible that it does not make any difference where the phrase is located and asked
Mr. Rudolf for his opinion.
At the request of Commissioner Welshons, Chairperson Heineman called a recess at 6:30 p.m. The
Commissioner reconvened at 6:32 p.m., with six Commissioners present.
Chairperson Heineman stated that Mr. Wayne and Mr. Rudolf had reviewed the language and found that
the language is appropriate in either place and is clear about the exception.
Commissioner Welshons asked Ms. Blackburn to state some of the experiences staff found while
researching outdoor dining ordinances in other cities.
Ms. Blackburn replied that they had called many cities and asked if they have similar outdoor seating
allowances and whether the allowances applied to the entire city or just to their redevelopment areas. In
most cases it was found to be just in redevelopment areas. However, there were examples of outdoor
dining outside of redevelopment areas. That information formed the basis on which staff based their
recommendation for this ordinance. Some of the cities stated that in some cases, they allowed the
outdoor areas to get too large and there were parking problems as a result. This information, too, was
helpful in crafting Carlsbad’s ordinance. Also, they learned that they had to be careful of the ADA
requirements and be sure that there is adequate pedestrian circulation.
Commissioner Welshons referred to the design standards in Exhibit X, and asked if there is more detail on
what those A.D.A. standards are.
Ms. Blackburn replied that what staff wanted to do was to require compliance with whatever was
applicable at that time, since those regulations may change over time. Generally, what applied here was
enough aisle width for circulation of pedestrians and food servers, etc. The reason the ordinance is
worded as it is, is because regulations may change from time to time and it is important to stay current
with them.
In terms of counting seating, Commissioner Welshons asked if outdoor bar-type seating, with stools
instead of chairs, count as seats.
Ms. Blackburn replied that the stools are counted the same as chairs and are included in the maximum
number of seats allowed.
Chairperson Heineman opened Public Testimony and offered the invitation to speak. Seeing no one
wishing to testify, Chairperson Heineman closed Public Testimony.
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Compas, and duly seconded, to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. 4482, recommending approval of the Negative
Declaration and Planning Commission Resolutions No. 4483 and 4484,
recommending approval of ZCA 99-01 and LCPA 99-01, based upon the findings
contained therein, including errata sheet dated April 21, 1999.
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
6-O
Heineman, Compas, L’Heureux, Segall, Welshons, Nielsen
None
None
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2010 8 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:
June 4, 1999
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that
the foregoing is true and correct.
!?a!! Marcos Dated at California, this 4th day
of June, 19%
74&r&----- ----___ _ ____------
NORTH COUNTY TIMES
Legal Advertising
This space is for the County Clerk’s Filing Stamp
Proof of Publication of
Notice of Public hearing
-__________--------_______
-------___----------------
NOTLCE OF PUBLIC HEARM&
.NO‘UCE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City ‘Council of the Cii qf Carlsbad will hold a public hearing atthe City Ctinoil Chambers, 1200 CailSbad WI
% TutMayJtie 15,l D&e, Calisbad, California, at.6:00 p.m., on , to conk&r d request for approval ofa ‘- ’ Me@ve De&at& Zone Code Amendment, a?d a Local Coastal Program Ainendment to.modii Chapters 21.04,21.26,21.27,2t.28, 21.29,21.30,21.32 afu21.34 of the Municipal$&le to allow outdoor dining areas a&o&ted with rest&rants on private property &ywide, outside of the mckwalopment area, and more patticulrrrly deecrit$ as: , \ .’ : I.,
C~~deoutsideofthe’redevefcpiment~., ‘.% -‘. I’. “,,
Those persons wkhing to speak on thik&pkei$& am oordj& ly invited to attend the public hearing. C@$ee of ttiee#aff wiil be avi$ abkonorafferJune11.,199~)lkrthe~’oftheCa~.Cify ,: Clerk. If you have ani @Mlons refjmfl ISlIe Blaqkbum in t@City of C&i&ad (7&I) 438-1186, exysion 4471. ,,
& iege1633&“& 1Qgg ,, : *, ‘ .,
(form A)
TO: CITV CLERK’S OFFICE
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notide
ZCA 99-Ol/LCPA 99-01 - Incidental Outdoor Dining II
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the council naetlng Of First Available Hearing
Thank you.
April 28, 1999
Oate
City of Carlsbad
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, March 17, 1999, to consider 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 and more particularly described as:
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 March 11, 1999.
If you have any questions, please call Elaine Blackburn in the Planning Department at
(760) 438-l 161, extension 4471.
If you challenge the Zone Code Amendment and a 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 99-O 1 /LCPA 99-O 1
CASE NAME: INCIDENTIAL OUTDOOR DINING AREA II
PUBLISH: MARCH 4, 1999
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
2075 La Palmas Dr. l Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 l (760) 438-l 161 l FAX (760) 438-0894 @
.
LABELS - 5163
LCPA MAILING LIST (GOVERNMENT AGENCIES)
APPENDIX A (LIST IS REQUIRED BY 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 94103
BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION & HSG AGENCY
WILLIAM G. BRENNAN
DEPUTY SECRETARY AND SPECIAL COUNCIL
SUITE 2450
980 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DISTRICT 11 CALTFWNS TIM VASQUEZ, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
2829 SAN JUAN ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92138
SANDAG (SAN DIEGO COUNTY)
WELLS FARGO PLAZA
SUITE 800
401 B STREET
SANDIEGO CA 92101
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
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
ROOM 5504
1120 N STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
RESOURCES AGENCY RM 1311
14 16 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95812
- U. S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
SUITE 130
3310 EL CAMINO AVENUE
SACRAMENTO CA 95821
ENERGY RESOURCES, CONSERVATION
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
CHUCK NAJARIAN
1516 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
MARINE RESOURCES REGION, DR & G
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES SUPERVISOR
350 GOLDEN SHORE
LONG BEACH CA 90802
SOUTHERN REGION
JOHN WALSTROM, TECHNICAL SERVICES
8885 RIO SAN DIEGO DRIVE
SAND DIEGO CA 92 108
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
DWIGHT SANDERS
SUITE 1005
100 HOWE AVE
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
I I
/
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
/
I
I
I
/
,
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
SUITE 1100
1330 BROADWAY
OAKLAND CA 94612
DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
RONALD D REMPEL, CHIEF
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION
RM 1341
1416 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
.--
DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY
DOUG WICKIZER, ENVIROMENTAL COORD
RM 1516-2
1416 NINTH STREET
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION
AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
BILL TR4VIS
30 VAN NESS AVENUE
SANFRANCISCO CA 95814
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
PO BOX 100
SACARAMENTO CA 95801
-REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
: SUITE B
’ 9771 CLAIREMONT MESA BLVD
: SAN DIEGO CA 92124-1331
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
ATTN: GARY
RESOURCE CONSERVATIONIST
SUITE 102
2121-C SECOND STREET
DAVIS CA 95616
-
BARRY BRAYER, AWP-8
FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION
WESTERN REGION
PO BOX 92007
LOS ANGELES CA 90009
USDA - RURAL DEVLOPMENT
430 ST DEPT 4169
DAVIS CA 95616
PACIFIC REGIONAL MANAGER
NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC
ADMIN - OCRM, 55MC4
N/ORM - 3
1305 EAST-WEST HIGHWAY
SILVER SPRING MD 20910
COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
cm,
’ 722 JACKSON PLACE NORTH WEST
( WASHINGTON DC 2006
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
LILY ALYEA - SUITE 702 LOS ANGELES DISTRICT ENGINEER
333 MARKET STREET PO BOX 2711
SANFRANCISCO CA 94105-2197 ’ LOS ANGELES CA 90053
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
611 RYAN PLAZA DR STE 400
ARLINGTON TX 7601 l-4005
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
COMMANDANT, ELEVENTH NAVAL DISTRICT
DISTRICT CIVIL ENGINEER
SAN DIEGO CA 92 132
- U. S. BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT ’ DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
2135 BUTANO DRIVE CLIFFORD EMMERLING, DIRECTOR
SACRAMENTO CA 95825 SUITE 350
901 MARKET STREET
/ SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103
..--- -__-~. .~ ~--. - .- --.--. -- ~~
U. S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVE
LOWER COLORADO REGION DUNCAN LENT HOWARD, REGIONAL ADMIN
PO BOX 427 ; 450 GOLDEN GATE AVENUE
BOULDER CITY CO 89005 , SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102
SUPERINTENDENT
CHANNEL ISLANDS NATIONAL PARR
190 1 SPINNAKER DRIVE
SAN BUENAVENTURA CA 93001
I U. S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
1 MID-PACIFIC REGION
j ‘2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
RONALD M. JAEGER 2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
DOUGLAS WARNOCK, SUPERINTENDENT
REDWOOD NATIONAL PARR
DRAWERN
1111 2mSTREET
CRESCENT CITY CA 95531
CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
SUITE 200
3 111 CAMINO DEL RIO NORTH
SAN DIEGO CA 92108
H:Wh4INiLiBELS\LCP
INTERESTED PARTIES
UPDATED 3-99 >.
OLIVENHAIN M.W.D.
1966 OLIVENHAIN ROAD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CRAIG ADAMS
SIERRA CLUB
SAN DIEGO CHAPTER 382OFtAY
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
I
!
I
/
I
I
I
/
I
I !
I
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 ’ LOSANGELES CA 90069 L
MARY GRIGGS
STATE LANDS COMMISSSION
SUITE 100 SOUTH
100 HOWE AVE
SACRAMENTO CA 95825-8202
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
PLANNING 81 LAND USE DEPT
JOAN VOKAC - SUITE B-5
5201 RUFFIN ROAD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
ANTHONY BONS
25709 HILLCREST AVE
ESCONDIDO CA 92026
MR/MRS MICHAEL CARDOSA
6491 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICES
2730 LOKER AVE WEST
CARLSBAD CA 92008
TABATA FARMS
PO BOX 1338
CAR&BAD 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
ATTN: ART DANELL
COUNTY OF SD, ROOM 335
1600 PACIFIC HIGHWAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
LEE ANDERSON
Cl% PRESIDENT 5200 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92008
FLOYD ASHBY
416 LA COSTA AVE
ENCINITAS CA 92024
GEORGE BOLTON
6583 BLACKRAIL ROAD
CARLSBAD CA 92009
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
ZCA 99-Ol/LCPA 99-Ol- INCIDENTAL OUTDOOR DINING AREA II
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public
hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m., on Tuesday June 15, 1999, to consider a request for approval of a Negative Declaration,
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, and more particularly described as:
Citywide outside of the redevelopment area.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposed project are cordially invited to attend the public
hearing. Copies of the staffreport will be available on or after June 11, 1999, in the Office of the
Carlsbad City Clerk. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Elaine
Blackburn in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department at (760) 438-l 166, extension 4471.
If you challenge the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendment and/or a 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.
APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLISH: JUNE 4,1999