Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-07-20; City Council; 17713; Seashore on the SandCITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL TITLE: SEASHORE ON THE SAND CUP 02-30 Project Applications CT 02-26 CUP 02-30 CDP 02-52 DEPT. HD. CITY ATTY. my MGSS Ad mi n istra tive Reviewed by and Approvals Final at Planning Final at Council Commission To be reviewed - X X X RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council ADOPT Resolution No. 2004-237 , APPROVING Conditional Use Permit (CUP 02-30) as recommended for adoption and approval by the Planning Commission. ITEM EXPLANATION: On June 2, 2004, and June 16, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted public hearings for this project. Since the project is for the conversion of a hotel into timeshare units, the Planning Commission has made a recommendation to the City Council for its action. The review and approval of the Tentative Map and Coastal Development Permit is final at the Planning Commission level. Pursuant to Section 21.42.010(ix) of the CMC, CUP for timeshares shall be set for public hearing before the City Council subsequent to the Planning Commission’s decision. The subject site is also within the appeal jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission. The application is for the conversion of an existing apartment building, used as a hotel since 1986, into timeshare units. The subject building was built in 1969 as an apartment complex with nine on- site parking spaces. The building was later converted into a 12-unit hotel in 1986 and is still operating as a hotel. The applicant is now requesting approval to convert the subject building into 9 timeshare units by converting units on the lower level into a common recreation room and altering interior walls on upper levels. There are only minor changes proposed to the exterior of the building. Pursuant to Section 21.44.020 of the CMC, timeshare units shall provide 1.2 parking spaces per unit. However Section 21.42.010(1O)(A)(i)(l) of the CMC states that the City Council may reduce the required parking down to 1.0 parking space per unit. The applicant is requesting this reduced parking standard. The proposed project was presented to the Planning Commission as a public hearing item on June 2, 2004. Staff was recommending denial of the project. After hearing public testimony and based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Commission directed staff to prepare findings and conditions for the approval of the project and return to the Commission on June 16, 2004. At the second public hearing, conducted on June 16, 2004, the Planning Commission discussed the merits of the application, and voted 5-0 (Whitton and Dominguez Absent) to recommend approval of the project to the City Council. A full disclosure of the Planning Commission’s discussion is in the attached minutes. A complete description and staff analysis of the project is in the attached report to the Planning Commission. ... ... PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. 17 9 713 ENVIRONMENTAL: The proposed project has been reviewed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Planning Director has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15332, in-fill development projects. In making this determination, the Planning Director has found that the exceptions listed in Section 15300.2 of the state CEQA Guidelines do not apply to this project. FISCAL IMPACT: No fiscal impacts have been identified. EXHIBITS: 1. City Council Resolution No. XK”V+7 2. Location Map 3. 4. 5. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5632 Planning Commission Staff Reports, dated June 2 and June 16,2004 Draft Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated June 2 and June 16, 2004. DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Saima Qureshy, (760) 602-4619, squre@ci.carlsbad.ca.us 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-237 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE EXISTING HOTEL INTO 7 TIMESHARE UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 2805 OCEAN STREET WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1. CASE NAME: SEASHORE ON THE SAND PERMIT (CUP 02-30) TO ALLOW THE CONVERSION OF AN CASE NO.: CUP 02-30 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004, hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider a Conditional Use Permit (CUP 02-30); and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, on the 20th day of Julv , 2004, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Conditional Use Permit (CUP 02-30), and at the time received recommendations, objections, protests, comments of all persons interested in or opposed to CUP 02-30; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of Conditional Use Permit (CUP 02-30) is approved by the City Council with this amendment that the approval is for a maximum of 7 timeshare units and the applicant shall submit revised plans reflecting this change, subject to Planning Director’s approval and that the findings and conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5632, on file with the City Clerk and made a part hereof by reference, are the findings and conditions of the City Council, except as modified herein. 3. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, “Time Limits for Judicial Review” shall apply: “NOTICE TO APPLICANT” The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter I .16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the nineteenth day following the date 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 4 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA. 92008.” PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 20th day of Julv , 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard -2- EXHIBIT 2 SITE SEASHORE ON THE SAND CUP 02-30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EXHIBIT 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 5632 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ALLOW THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING HOTEL INTO 9 TIMESHARE UNITS ON PROPERTY GENERALLY LOCATED AT 2805 OCEAN STREET WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1. CASE NAME: SEASHORE ON THE SAND APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT CUP 02-30 TO CASE NO.: CUP 02-30 WHEREAS, Norine Sigafoose, “Owner/Developer,” has filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as Lots 47 and 48 and the northerly 10.00 feet of Lot 49, in Block “A” of the Hayes Land Company Addition to Carlsbad, Map No. 2, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to map thereof No. 1221, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 4,1909 (“the Property”); and WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Conditional Use Permit as shown on Exhibits “A” - “G” dated June 2, 2004, on file in the Planning Department SEASHORE ON THE SAND - CUP 02-30, as provided by Chapter 21.42 and 21.50 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 16th day of June 2004, 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 persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to the Conditional Use Permit. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 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 Commission 30, based on the following findings and subject to the following conditions: RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF SEASHORE ON THE SAND - CUP 02- Findings: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is located, in that the subject building is existing and there are minimal changes proposed to the exterior of the structure. The proposed conversion of hotel use to timeshares will not result in any physical or operational changes for the use. Furthermore the proposed change of use will be consistent with the R-3 zoning of the subject site. The existing hotel use is legal non-conforming because hotels are not permitted uses in the R-3 zone. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use, in that the proposed project is a request to change the use of an existing hotel into timeshare units. There are minimal changes proposed to the exterior of ,the building. The proposed project will reduce the number of units from 12 hotel rooms to 9 timeshare units. This reduced number of units will decrease demand on on-site parking spaces and intensity of use. That all the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained, in that the proposed project is a request to change the use of an existing building. There are minimal changes proposed to the exterior of the building. All the yards, setbacks and walls are existing. There were three variances granted with the subject building’s original approval in 1969 to reduce the front and two side yard setbacks. That the street system serving the proposed use is adequate to properly handle all traffic generated by the proposed use, in that the subject site is served by Ocean Street and the proposed change of use from a hotel into timeshares will not cause additional traffic to be generated. The Planning Commission finds that the timeshare project is located in reasonable proximity to an existing resort or public recreational area and therefore can financially and geographically function as a successful timeshare project and that the project will not be disruptive to existing or future uses in the surrounding neighborhood in that the proposed project is located adjacent to the beach and since there will be no substantial changes to the operation of the facility, there will be no impacts to existing and future land uses in the surrounding neighborhood. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is in conformance with the City’s General Plan in that the proposed change of use of an existing hotel into timeshares is consistent with the land use designation of Residential High Density. -2- 7 PC RES0 NO. 5632 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 7. The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 1 and all City public facility policies and ordinances. The project includes elements or has been conditioned to construct or provide funding to ensure that all facilities and improvements regarding: sewer collection and treatment; water; drainage; circulation; fire; schools; parks and other recreational facilities; libraries; government administrative facilities; and open space, related to the project will be installed to serve new development prior to or concurrent with need. 8. That the Planning Director has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment, and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15332, in-fill development projects. In making this determination, the Planning Director has found that the exceptions listed in Section 15300.2 of the state CEQA Guidelines do not apply to this project. 9. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed to mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the degree of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project. Conditions: Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to approval of a final map or building permit, whichever occurs first. 1. If any of the following conditions fail to occur; or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny or further,condition issuance of all future building permits; deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City’s approval of this Conditional Use Permit. 2. Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and modifications to the Conditional Use Permit documents, as necessary to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed development different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval. 3. The Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws and regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 4. If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project are challenged, this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section -3- 8 PC RES0 NO. 5632 1 ? 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 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 66020. If any such condition is determined to be invalid this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law. The Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorney’s fees incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City’s approval and issuance of this Conditional Use Permit, (b) City’s approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or non- discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator’s installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. This obligation survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues even if the City’s approval is not validated. The Developer shall submit to the Planning Department a reproducible 24” x 36” mylar copy of the Site Plan reflecting the conditions approved by the final decision making body. This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required as part of the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to that Plan prior to the issuance of building permits. Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing water and sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that adequate water service and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the time of the application for the building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and facilities will continue to be available until the time of occupancy. This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within 24 months from the date of project approval. This Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Director on a yearly basis to determine if all conditions of this permit have been met and that the use does not have a substantial negative effect on surrounding properties or the public health and welfare. If the Planning Director determines that the use has such substantial negative effects, the Planning Director shall recommend that the PIanning Commission, after providing the permittee the opportunity to be heard, add additional conditions to reduce or eliminate the substantial negative effects. This permit may be revoked at any time after a public hearing, if it is found that the use has a substantial detrimental effect on surrounding land uses and the public’s health and welfare, or the conditions imposed herein have not been met. Prior to the issuance of the building permit, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of Restriction to be filed in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction -4- 9 PC RES0 NO. 5632 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 of the Planning Director, notifying all interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a Conditional Use Permit by Resolution No. 5632 on the real property owned by the Developer. Said Notice of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file containing complete project details and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The Planning Director has the authority to execute and record an amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause by the Developer or successor in interest. 13. This approval is granted subject to the approval of CT 02-26 and CDP 02-52 and is subject to all conditions contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 5631 and 5633 for those other approval incorporated herein by reference. 14. Pursuant to section 21.42.010(10)(ii) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code the timeshare units in this project shall be converted to condominiums if they cannot be successfully marketed as a timeshare project. 15. The management and maintenance plan submitted by the Developer titled "Management Plan for Seashore on the Sand" attached to this resolution is approved and made a part of the permit for the project. En Pineering: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following conditions, upon the approval of this proposed tentative map, must be met prior to approval of a final map. General 16. Prior to recordation of a final map, Developer shall comply with the requirements of the City's anti-graffiti program for wall treatments if and when such a program is formally established by the City. 17. Developer shall provide to the City Engineer, an acceptable means, CC&Rs and/or other recorded document, for maintaining the private easements within the subdivision and all the private improvements: common sewer and water laterals, streets, sidewalks, street lights, and storm drain facilities located therein and to distribute the costs of such maintenance in an equitable manner among the owners of the properties within the subdivision. 18. There shall be one Final Map recorded for this project. FeedAereemen ts 19. Developer shall cause property owner to enter into a Neighborhood Improvement Agreement with the City for the future public improvement of Ocean Street the subdivision frontage for a half street width of 25 feet plus any necessary transitions. Public improvements shall include but are not limited to paving, base, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, medians, grading, undergrounding or relocation of utilities, sewer, water, PC RES0 NO. 5632 -5- lo 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 street lights, fire hydrants, and reclaimed water. 20. Developer shall cause Owner to give written consent to the City Engineer to the annexation of the area shown within the boundaries of the subdivision into the existing City of Carlsbad Street Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1 and/or to the formation or annexation into an additional Street Lighting and Landscaping District. Said written consent shall be on a form provided by the City Engineer. Dedications/Improvemen ts 21. Ocean Street shall be dedicated by Owner along the project frontage based on a center line to right-of-way width of 25 feet and in conformance with City of Carlsbad Standards. 22. Developer shall execute and record a City standard Subdivision Improvement Agreement to install and secure with appropriate security as provided by law, public improvements shown on the Tentative Map and the following improvements including, but not limited to paving, base, signing, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, medians, grading, undergrounding or relocation of utilities, sewer, water, retaining walls, and reclaimed water, to City Standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The improvements are: a) b) c) Removal and replacement of any damaged curb, gutter, sidewalk, or pavement along the project frontage. Relocation/undergrounding of the existing water appurtenances. Modification of the existing warped pavement section and step along and adjacent to the sidewalk on the northerly portion of the site. A list of the above shall be placed on an additional map sheet on the Final Map per the provisions of Sections 66434.2 of the Subdivision Map Act. Improvements listed above shall be constructed within 18 months of approval of the subdivision or development improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement. 23. Developer shall comply with the City's requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Developer shall provide improvements constructed pursuant to best management practices as referenced in the "California Storm Water Best Management Practices Handbook" to reduce surface pollutants to an acceptable level prior to discharge to sensitive areas. Plans for such improvements shall be submitted to and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. Said plans shall include but not be limited to notifying prospective owners and tenants of the following: A. All owners and tenants shall coordinate efforts to establish or work with established disposal programs to remove and properly dispose of toxic and hazardous waste products. B. Toxic chemicals or hydrocarbon compounds such as gasoline, motor oil, antifreeze, solvents, paints, paint thinners, wood preservatives, and other such fluids shall not be discharged into any street, public or private, or into storm drain or storm water conveyance systems. Use and disposal of pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, insecticides, fertilizers and other such chemical treatments shall meet PC RES0 NO. 5632 -6- // 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 Federal, State, County and City requirements as prescribed in their respective containers. C. Best Management Practices shall be used to eliminate or reduce surface pollutants when planning any changes to the landscaping and surface improvements. Code Reminders: 24. The tentative map shall expire twenty-four (24) months from the date this tentative map approval becomes final. 25. Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of the Zoning Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance, except as otherwise specifically provided herein. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 16th day of June 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson White, Commissioners Baker, Heineman, Montgomery and Segall NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioners Dominguez and Whitton ABSTAIN: None MELISSA WHITE, Chairperson CAIUSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: MICHAEL J. HOLZMILL%R Planning Director PC RES0 NO. 5632 -7- EXHIBIT 4 The City of Carlsbad Planning Department A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No. @ Application complete date: March 1, 2004 Project Planner: Saima Qureshy Project Engineer: P.C. AGENDA OF: June 2,2004 SUBJECT: CT 02-26/CUP 02-30/CDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND - Request for a Tentative Tract Map, Conditional Use Permit and a Coastal Development Permit to allow the conversion of an existing 12 unit hotel into 9 timeshare units on property generally located at 2805 Ocean Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 563 1 , 5632 and 5633 DENYING Carlsbad Tract CT 02-26 and Coastal Development Permit CDP 02-52 and RECOMMENDING DENIAL of Conditional Use Permit CUP 02-30, based on the findings contained therein. 11. INTRODUCTION The application is for the conversion of an existing apartment building, used as a hotel since 1986, into timeshare units. The subject building was built in 1969 as a 9-unit apartment complex with nine on-site parking spaces. The building was later converted into a 12-unit hotel in 1986 and is still operating as a hotel. The applicant now wants to convert the subject building into 9 timeshare units by converting units on the lower level into a common recreation room and altering interior walls on the upper levels. An elevator is proposed to be added to the project and a parking stall is proposed to be modified to be handicap accessible. There are no other changes proposed to the exterior of the building. Issues related to the project include insufficient on-site parking spaces and impacts on beach accessibility. Staff feels that the findings for approval cannot be made and therefore, is recommending denial of the project. The subject site is also within the appeal jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission. 111. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND Background: The subject site is currently developed as a four-level building, which was approved as an apartment complex in 1969. With that approval, variances were granted to reduce the front yard setback from 20 feet to 5 feet, the northerly side yard setback to 3 feet and the southerly side yard setback to 4 feet. There are nine on-site parking spaces located in garage structures. Five spaces are located on the street level and are accessible directly from the street, and 4 spaces are at the lower level, accessible by a ramp from the street to the lower level. The upper 5-space garage structure is connected to the main building through a walkway on the street level. The east elevation of the building, which is visible from Ocean Street, is a lo’ high garage building. The west elevation, which is visible from the beach, is comprised of four stories and is CT 02-26/CUP 02-30ICDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND June 2,2004 Existing Level I 3 studio units Page 2 After Conversion One bedroom unit, common recreation 40 feet in height. In 1986, the apartment building was converted into a hotel. The subject site is zoned R-3 and hotels were allowed uses in the R-3 zone in 1986. According to current R-3 zone standards, hotels are not permitted uses and therefore, the existing use is considered a legal, non- confoming use. Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Project Description: The applicant is proposing to convert the subject building into 9 timeshare units. The following table describes the conversion plan in detail: room (Total Units - 1) Two, 2 bedroom units; one, 1 bedroom Two, 2 bedroom units; one, 1 bedroom unit (Total 3 units) unit (Total units - 3) Two, 2 bedroom units; one, 1 bedroom Two, 2 bedroom units; one, 1 bedroom unit (Total 3 units) unit (Total units - 3) Two, 2 bedroom units; one, 1 bedroom Two, 3 bedroom units (Total units - 2) unit (Total 3 units) An elevator is proposed to be added to the project and a parking stall is proposed to be modified to be handicap accessible. There are no other changes proposed to the exterior of the building. The proposed project is subject to R-3 zoning standards, General Plan designation of RH, Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program, Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ), Coastal Resources Protection Overlay Zone and Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone. The subject site is also within the appeal jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission. Pursuant to Section 21.44.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC), timeshare units shall provide 1.2 parking spaces per unit. Therefore this project should provide 11 on-site parking spaces for 9 timeshare units. However, the applicant is requesting a reduction in parking from 1.2 to 1 .O parking spaces per unit. The CMC has a provision, which states that the City Council may reduce the required parking down to one parking space per unit. The applicant’s requested reduction to one space per unit would result in 9 required on-site parking spaces. Staff is not supportive of a parking reduction because of the following reasons: 1. The intent of requiring 1.2 parking spaces for timeshare units and also for hotel/motel units is to provide parking spaces not only for the guests but also for employees of the facility. There are no other parking spaces available on the subject site for employees to park. In addition, since the project has two- and three-bedroom units, which can accommodate up to 6 adults, there is an increased possibility that guests staying in the three bedroom units will arrive in more than one car. If the project is approved with one space per unit, there will be inadequate parking available for employees and for guests arriving in more than one car per unit. This in turn will force them to park on the street and thereby impact the availability of public on-street parking. 2. The subject site is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ), which has special parking requirements due to the shortage of on-street parking spaces. Proximity CT 02-26/CUP 02-30/CDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND June 2,2004 3. IV. to the beach is the main reason for the scarcity of on street parking, especially during the summer months when demand is exceptionally high. Staff is not supportive of a project which has less than the required parking spaces on-site and which will result in creating more parking demand on a limited amount of available public spaces on the nearby streets. The subject site is located within the appeal jurisdiction of the California Coastal Commission and the project can be appealed by the Coastal Commission if it is not consistent with the adopted Local Coastal Program. Conversion of a hotel building into timeshare units restricts the use of these units to only owners of timeshare units as compared to hotel units which are readily available to the general public. Public access to the beach area is also a major concern for the Coastal Commission and this project will result in restricting the access to only timeshare owners. Coastal Commission staff has indicated that timeshare units are not considered high priority uses because they restrict access to the general public. In addition since the project has less than the required amount of on-site parking, it will have a negative impact on beach accessibility by creating more demand on the current limited availability of on-street public parking. ANALYSIS The proposed project is subject to the following plans, ordinances and standards: A. B. C. D. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) Zone and Conditional Use Permit Regulations (CMC Chapter 2 1.42); Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC Chapters 2 1.82); Coastal Development regulations for the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (CMC Chapters 21.201, 21.203 and 21.204); and Growth Management Regulations (CMC Chapter 2 1.90). The recommendation for denial of this project was developed by analyzing the project’s consistency with the applicable regulations and policies. The reasons for recommending denial of the project are discussed in detail in the sections below. A. Multiple-Family Residential (R-3) Zoning and Conditional Use Permit Regulations The subject site is zoned R-3 - Multiple Family Residential. Approval of a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) is required to allow timeshares in this zone. The existing building was approved in 1969 with variances to reduce the front yard setback from 20’ to 5’, the northerly side yard setback to 3’ and the southerly side yard setback to 4’. The existing hotel is now considered a legal, non-conforming use because hotels are not permitted uses in the R-3 zone. The R-3 zone allowed hotels as permitted uses in 1986 when this building was converted. The existing hotel use does not meet current parking standards. Pursuant to Section 21.42.010 of the CMC, timeshare projects shall require a CUP. Uses subject to CUPS are declared to possess characteristics of such unique and special form as to make impracticable their being included automatically in any land use class. In granting a CUP, certain CT 02-26/CUP 02-30/CDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND June 2,2004 Page - 4 safeguards to protect the health, safety and general welfare of the public may be required as conditions of approval. In addition, CUPS may only be granted when the appropriate findings of fact can be made. Staff feels that the required findings to recommend approval of the project cannot be made. These findings and reasons for recommending denial are as follows: 1. That the requested use is necessary or desirable for the development of the community, is essentially in harmony with the various elements and objectives of the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is located. The subject building is existing and there are minimal changes proposed to the exterior of the structure. The change of use to timeshare will result in inadequate parking as required by the Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance implements the General Plan. 2. That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use. The proposed project is a change in use of an existing building. There are minimal changes proposed to the exterior of the building. The new use of timeshare units requires 11 parking spaces. However, the proposed project has only 9 existing onsite parking spaces. The subject site is not adequate in size to accommodate 2 additional parking spaces. Staff is not supportive of the project due to inadequate onsite parking. If the project is approved with 9 parking spaces for 9 timeshare units, there will be no parking for employees of the facility. In addition, since the project has two- and three-bedroom units, which can accommodate up to 6 adults, there is a high possibility that guests staying in the larger units will arrive in more than one car. This will cause more demand on the current limited availability of on-street public parking in the Beach Area Overlay Zone. 3. That all the yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained. The proposed project is a request to change the use of an existing building. There are minimal changes proposed to the exterior of the building. All the yards, setbacks and walls are existing. There' were three variances granted for the subject building to reduce the front and two side yard setbacks. The project is proposed with less than the required amount of parking, and reduced setbacks make it infeasible to provide for additional parking on the subject site. B. Beach Area Overlay Zone The intent and purpose of the BAOZ is to supplement the underlying zoning by providing additional regulations for development within designated beach areas to provide for adequate parking as needed by residents and visitors of the proposed projects. In addition to resident parking, residential projects are required to provide for visitor parking spaces on-site. Beach areas experience an exceptionally high demand for on-street public parking due to beach proximity. The intent of the BAOZ regulations is to maintain availability of on-street public CT 02-26/CUP 02-30/CDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND June 2,2004 Pa.ge 5 parking spaces and minimize parking scarcity by establishing rigorous onsite resident and visitor parking requirements. As proposed, the project is providing less than the required number of onsite parking spaces and is therefore not consistent with the intent of the BAOZ. If approved, the project will negatively impact beach access by increasing the demand on the limited number of available on-street public parking spaces in the vicinity of the project. C. Coastal Development Regulations The project site is located within the appeal area of the Coastal Zone and within the Mello I1 Segment of the Local Coastal Program. The site is also located within the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (Chapter 2 1.203) and the Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone (Chapter 21.204) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Conformance with public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act The conversion of a hotel into timeshare units is not consistent with Section 21.201.1 10 of the CMC which states that “No approval or conditional approval shall be given unless the Planning Commission finds that the development is consistent with the provisions of the local coastal program for the coastal zone and the development is in conformity with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the California Coastal Act.” Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act states, “developments providing public recreational opportunities are preferred” and “lower cost visitor and recreational facilities shall be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided.” The proposed conversion to timeshare units will restrict access to the units to only timeshare owners as compared to a hotel, which is easily accessible to the general public. This proposed restricted access to the timeshare units is therefore not consistent with the Coastal Act. Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone The subject site is located within the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone. However, since the site is developed and there is no native vegetation, additional submittals, standards or requirements do not apply. No changes are proposed to the exterior of the building which will impact adherence to the City’s Master Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) and Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program (JURMP) to avoid increased urban run off, pollutants and soil erosion. Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone The subject building is existing and the proposed change of use to timeshares will have no impacts on lateral beach access, geologic conditions, ocean views and grading. CT 02-26iCUP 02-30ICDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND June 2,2004 Page 6 D. Growth Management The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 1 in the Northwest quadrant of the City. The conversion of the hotel to a timeshare project will not result in increased public facilities demands; therefore, the proposal will not exceed perfomiance standards for public facilities. V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Planning Director has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State Secretary for Resources has found to be a statutory exemption from the requirement for the preparation of environmental documents pursuant to Section 15270 - Projects Which are Disapproved, of the state CEQA Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 5631 (CT) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5632 (CUP) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5633 (CDP) Location Map Background Data Sheet Disclosure Statement Reduced Exhibits Exhibits “A” - “G” dated June 2,2004 BACKGROUND DATA SHEET CASE NO: CT 02-26/CUP 02-30/CDP 02-52 CASE NAME: SEASHORE ON THE SAND A4PPLICANT: NORJNE SIGAFOOSE REQUEST AND LOCATION: Tentative Tract Map, Conditional Use Perniit and Coastal Development Permit to allow the conversion of an existing hotel into 9 timeshare units on property .generally located at 2805 Ocean Street, within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lots 47 and 48 and the northerly 10.00 feet of Lot 49, in Block “A” of the Hayes Land Company Addition to Carlsbad, Map No. 2, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to map thereof No. 122 1, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 4, 1909. APN: 203-235-04 Acres: 0.19 Proposed No. of Lots/Units: 9 airspace timeshare units GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING Land Use Designation: RH Density Allowed: 19 unitslacre Existing Zone: R-3 Surrounding Zoning, General Plan and Land Use: Density Proposed: N/A Proposed Zone: N/A Zoning Site R-3 North R-3 South R-3 East R-3 West Pacific Ocean General Plan Current Land Use RH Hotel RH Hotel RH RMH Pacific Ocean Pacific Ocean Carlsbad by the Sea Retirement Home Carlsbad by the Sea Retirement Home PUBLIC FACILITIES School District: Carlsbad Unified Water District: Carlsbad Sewer District: Carlsbad Equivalent Dwelling Units (Sewer Capacity): ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Negative Declaration, issued 0 Certified Environmental Impact Report, dated Other, Statutory Exempt pursuant to Section 15270 of CEOA guidelines - City of Carlsbad DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant’s statement or disclosure of certain ownershp mterests on all applications which w11 require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defmed as “Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club. fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit.” Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant’s agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of & persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a cornoration or uartnershiu, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO APPLICABLE (WA) IN THE SPACE BELOW If a publiclv-owned cornoration, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person IJ E- 5 1 14 FOO 5~ CorpRart - INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON- Title OW PEL Title 2. OWNER (Not the owner’s agent) Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (].e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a cornoration or uartnershb, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) M THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv- owned cornoration, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person SAME CorpRart - Title Title Address Address 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 - FAX (760) 602-8559 www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us @ 3. NON-PROFIT 0. ANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonmofit organizabon or a trust. hst the. names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit - organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profiflrust Non ProfivTrust Title Title Address Address 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff. Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? 0 Yes 4 No If yes, please indicate person(s): NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. ve information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 54ME Signature of applicantldate ~0QIb.s 5\4AFO&fz- Print or type name of owner Pnnt or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant 's&ent if applicable/date 1QOSEfq- c - LADWL6) Glp, LWLULI, QES-1Lu cm4, 'tJC Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 a e 5 E- gg - 1- i ~ 1 i j I I 5- 1 f -f .~ i I! I t ils /I -7 c -- ,- I 'i I SllVM a W 5 a X w c - :/ i I I -1 i P. I ! I I --- 'I L- , /. t--_ I r--- a i P E f g 2 - f I -I W c -I W n H 2 P I *: .. L- i? ai t "I --I c Y m 3 I c e a37 .. - , -. j -- The City of Carlsbad Planning Department A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION P.C. AGENDA OF: June 16,2004 Application complete date: March 1.2004 Project Planner: Saima Qureshy Project Engineer: John Maashoff SUBJECT: CT 02-26jCUP 02-30KDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND - Request for a Tentative Tract Map, Conditional Use Permit and a Coastal Development Permit to allow the conversion of an existing 12 unit hotel into 9 timeshare units on property generally located at 2805 Ocean Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 563 1, 5632 and 5633 APPROVING Carlsbad Tract CT 02-26 and Coastal Development Permit CDP 02-52 and RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of Conditional Use Permit CUP 02-30, based on the findings contained therein. 11. INTRODUCTION The proposed project was presented to the Planning Commission as a public hearing item on June 2,2004. Staff was recommending denial of the project. After hearing public testimony and based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Commission directed staff to prepare findings and conditions for the approval of the project and return to the Commission on June 16, 2004. Attached to this report are Resolutions of Approval for the project. Pursuant to Section 21.42.010(ix) of the CMC, this project will be set for public hearing before the City Council subsequent to Planning Commission’s decision. The decision of the City Council is final for approval or denial of the project and also for reducing the required resident parking to one parking space per unit. ATTACHMENTS: 1. 2. 3. 4. Management Plan Planning Commission Resolution No. 563 1 (CT) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5632 (CUP) Planning Commission Resolution No. 5633 (CDP) SQ:mh MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR SEASHORE ON THE SAND GENERAL DUTIES Management shall be the administration of the Vacation Ownership program, operation, maintenance, repair and restoration of the Project and any alterations and additions thereto shall be the responsibility of the Association. SPECIFIC DUTIES OF THE MANAGEMENT The management, maintenance and repair of the Project, the acquisition by purchase or lease, maintenance, repair, replacement of the Common Furnishings, the administration of the affairs of Owners, the use and occupancy of the Units and payment, as agent, of expenses and costs enumerated herein, shall be under the direction and control of the association. The Association shall have the duty to maintain, repair and replace Common Furnishings as needed, to administer the Vacation Ownership operation and to levy, collect and enforce the Assessments and Personal Charges. The Association shall have the exclusive possession of each unit during all Service Periods for the performance of maintenance and repairs on such Unit. The Association shall annually compile a register of the names and addresses of each of the Owners. The Association shall be authorized in its discretion and on behalf of the Owners to do any or all of the following: A. ReDair and Maintenance. Repair, maintain, repaint, furnish or refurnish the Project and all parts thereof, establish reserves for anticipated costs, including the costs of acquisition and replacement of Common Furnishings; acquire and pay for materials, supplies, fiuniture, furnishings, labor and services which is necessary for the maintenance and operation of the Project. B. Real Prouertv Taxes. Comply with the terms of the revenue and Taxation Code in requesting that the San Diego County Assessor’s Office issue separate real property tax bill to the Owners. The Association Board shall have the express authority to appear on behalf of the Association and its Members with respect to any tax matter before any taxing authority. C. Utilities. Obtain and pay the costs of electrical, telephone, gas , cable and any other utility services necessary for the Project. D. Rules and Kepulations. Adopt, amend, pubIish and enforce the RuIes and Regulations relating to the possession, use and enjoyment of the Project. E. professional services necessary or proper in the maintenance and operation of the Project and the enforcement of the Project Documents. Professional Services. Obtain and pay the cost of legal, accounting and other F. Insurance. Obtain, pay the cost of and at all times maintain in effect, insurance covering the entire Project against loss or damage by fire and other hazards customarily covered by fire insurance policies written with extended coverage and general comprehensive public liability insurance and by other insurance, including, but not limited to, Workers’ Compensation Insurance. G. Levv and Collection of Assessments. Levy, collect and enforce Assessments and Personal Charges in order to pay the expenses &the Vacation Ownemhip operation and the fee ofthe Manager and do all things necessary to enforce ach Owner’s obligations. L’Y 3O Y LADW!G DESiGN GR H. Financial Statements and Other Idormation. The following shall be regularly prepared and distributed to all Owners by the Board or the Manager: (I) A budget for each Fiscal year consisting of at least the following information shall be distributed not less than forty-five (45) days nor more than sixty (60) days prior to the beginning of the Fiscal Year. (a) Estimated revenue and expenses on an accrual basis; (b) The amount of the total cash reserves available; (c) An itemized estimate of the remaining life of and the methods of finding to defray repair, replacement or components of the Common Areas Common Furnishings and other facilities for which the Association is responsible; and calculation and establishment of reserves to defiay the cost of repair, replacement or additions to major components of the Common areas, furnishings and facilities for which the Association is responsible. (d) general statement setting forth the procedures used in the (2) A report consisting of the following shall be distributed within one hundred days after the close of the Fiscal Year; (a) A balance sheet as of the last day of the fiscal year; (b) An operating income statement for said fiscal year; (c) A statement of changes in financial position for said fiscal year; numbers of the Board; and (d) A list of names, mailing addresses and telephone (e) Any information required to be reported. I. Cleaning and Maid Service. Provide cleaning and maid service and maintenance and repairs at the check-out of each Owner or permitted user of a Unit and during service periods so the units are maintained in good order and repair. J. Provide Linen Service. Obtain and pay for laundry service for the linens including towels, bedding and other essential linens. K. Other Necessarv Acts. Do a11 other things or acts deemed by the Association to be necessary, desirable or appropriate for the operation and maintenance of the Project. Planning Commission Minutes June 2,2004 ExET75 5. CT 02-26/CUP 02-30ICDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND - Request for a Tentative Tract Map, Conditional Use Permit and a Coastal Development Permit to allow the conversion of an existing 12 unit hotel into 9 timeshare units on property generally located at 2805 Ocean Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. Mr. Neu introduced Item 5 and stated Associate Planner Saima Qureshy would make the staff presentation. Chairperson White opened the Public Hearing on Item 5. Ms. Qureshy stated the project is a request to allow the conversion of an existing 12 unit hotel into 9 timeshare units. The subject building was approved, along with 3 variances in 1969 as a 9-unit apartment complex. In 1986, the apartment building was converted into a 12-unit hotel. In 1986, the zoning for the subject site was R-3 which allowed hotels as a permitted use. The current R-3 zoning standards do not allow hotels as a permitted use; therefore the site is legal, non-conforming. Based on the Zoning Ordinance, timeshares are required to provide 1.2 parking spaceshnit, therefore the proposed timeshares are required to provide 11 parking spaces. The applicant is requesting a reduction in the parking allowance from 1.2 to 1 parking spaces per unit pursuant to the CUP section of the Zoning Ordinance. This reduction will require only nine parking spaces for the project. Staff is not supportive of this reduction and is recommending denial of the proposed project. Ms. Qureshy stated that the intent of the 1.2 parking spaces per unit requirement for timeshares in the Zoning Ordinance is to not only provide parking for the guests but also for employees of the facility. There are no other parking facilities available on the subject site for employees to park. Also since the project has some two and three bedroom units which can accommodate up to 6 adults, there is an increased possibility that guests staying in those units will arrive in more than one car. The subject site is also located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone which also has special parking requirements due to the shortage of on-street parking. Staff is not supportive of a project which has less than required parking which will result in creating an increased parking demand on a limited amount of available parking on nearby streets. The proposed conversion is also not consistent with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act because it will prohibit access to the units to only the timeshare owners as compared to a hotel which is easily accessible to the general public. Public access to the beach is a major concern of the Coastal Commission, and because the project is proposing less than the required parking, it will have a negative impact on beach accessibility by creating an increased demand on the current on-street parking. Ms. Qureshy concluded her presentation and stated she would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson White asked if the Commission had any questions of staff. Commissioner Baker inquired if the City still collects Transient Occupancy Tax on timeshare units. Ms. Qureshy stated the City does not. Commissioner Baker also asked if the applicant would have the opportunity to buy spaces in a City owned parking lot downtown. Ms. Qureshy stated she believed it is a possibility only in the Redevelopment Zone but because this project is not located in the Redevelopment Area, the option is not available to the applicant. Commissioner Segall asked if there is currently inadequate parking for the existing hotel on the site. Ms. Qureshy stated that the hotel has 12 units and only nine parking spaces so it has less than the required amount of spaces. Commissioner Segall asked what could be done to make the project be conforming to the current standards since it is now legal, non-conforming. Ms. Qureshy responded that this new application is for a discretionary permit and to approve a new use with less than required parking would be inconsistent with the Zoning Ordinance. Commissioner Segall further asked if there are any other timeshare units on Ocean Avenue or the general area. Ms. Qureshy stated she was not aware of any. Commissioner Heineman commented that the Carlsbad Inn was right down the street. Commissioner Segall commented that since there are other similar uses in the area, how did the Coastal Commission approve those and not approve this project. Ms. Qureshy stated that if the other projects 3a Planning Commission Minutes June 2,2004 Page 8 began as timeshares with adequate parking, it would most likely be approved by the Coastal Commission. However the Coastal Commission looks at the existing supply of hotel rooms right near the ocean and by converting these hotel rooms to timeshares, the hotel room inventory will decrease and will introduce a more restrictive use of timeshares. Commissioner Segall asked if the project would have to be approved by the Coastal Commission. Ms. Qureshy responded that the site is in the appealable area of the Coastal Zone, so if the City approves the project, the Coastal Commission could appeal it. She further explained the Coastal Commission issues. Assistant City Attorney Jane Mobaldi explained the City can collect the Transient Occupancy Tax on the timeshare units if they are rented. Commissioner Whitton asked how many employees will be working at this facility. Ms. Qureshy responded that she did not have the exact number but the way the Zoning Ordinance considers these projects for 1.2 parking spaces per unit is by taking into consideration that there will be employees at these facilities. Commissioner Whitton asked if the existing hotel has adequate parking. Ms. Qureshy stated that the hotels have the same parking requirement of 1.2 spaces per unit; however this existing hotel has less than the required amount of on-site parking available. Commissioner Heineman inquired about the Coastal Commission’s objection to timeshare units on the beach. Ms. Qureshy quoted a section of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. Mr. Neu stated that the Coastal Commission tends to make a distinction between a new project starting out as timeshare units versus a hotel unit which is being converted. He stated the emphasis seems to be on loosing units which are in the rental inventory. Commissioner Montgomery asked if the City could make findings to satisfy the Coastal Commission proposing that the owners of the timeshare units could rent out the units and thereby the units become rentals again similar to a hotel unit. Ms. Qureshy stated that it would be up to the discretion of the Commission if those arguments make a finding for approval. Commissioner Dominguez commented he feels that the Coastal Commission findings are so that access to the beach is not restricted to the general public. Commissioner Segall asked for clarification on the existing hotel. Ms. Qureshy stated the project is currently 12 units with 9 parking spaces, and the proposed use is 9 units with 9 parking spaces. Commissioner Baker asked if the five garages at street level and 4 garages down below are supposed to be used as parking. Ms. Qureshy stated yes. Commissioner Segall asked how many parking spaces would need to be proposed in order for the project to be approved. Ms. Qureshy responded that 11 parking spaces would be needed. Commissioner Dominguez asked if the project proposed 11 parking spaces, would the project still be legal, non-conforming use. Ms. Qureshy responded that the new proposed project would become conforming as a timeshare with 11 parking spaces. Commissioner Segall inquired if the Commission approved the project with nine parking spaces, would it then be a conforming use. Mr. Neu responded that it would become conforming because the use is allowed through the Conditional Use Permit in that zone; however, there would still be the issue of the Coastal Development Permit. If the Commission found the project to be consistent with the Coastal Act and issued the Coastal Permit, then it would be up the Coastal Commission as to whether they appealed the decision or not. Commissioner Segall stated that based on the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the Commission can approve the project for two less parking spaces than the required amount. Mr. Neu stated that under the Conditional Use Permit section of the Carlsbad Municipal Code it allows a project to go as low as one space per unit if it was found to be adequate; however, staff analysis of the project stated that given the size of the proposed units and the current shortage of parking in the area, that would not be appropriate. 33 Planning Commission Minutes June 2,2004 Page 9 Commissioner Whitton reiterated that the applicant did request to reduce the number of parking spaces from 11 to nine, and if the project is approved as proposed, then use would then become a legal, conforming use. He then stated that the only thing to deal with is the convoluted argument of the Coastal Commission. Mr. Neu pointed out that through the granting of a Coastal Permit, the Planning Commission, although they may not like the policy, are in the position of granting the permit and implementing the City’s Local Coastal Program and the Coastal Act. Chairperson White asked if the applicant wanted to make a presentation. Bob Ladwig, from Ladwig Design, 703 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300, Carlsbad, made a presentation on behalf of the applicant. He read a letter which he handed out to the Planning Commission and made a part of the public record. He stated he feels there is an opportunity for the City to approve this project and bring it up to conditions which are currently in the City codes. Mr. Ladwig concluded his presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions. Commissioner Whitton inquired about the addition of a handicap parking space and if that would bring the total number of available parking spaces to 10. Mr. Ladwig stated with the handicap parking space, the total number of parking spaces is 9. Commissioner Dominguez noted that the dates the Parking Study was completed were January 3th and 7th and inquired if that timeframe was really a representative period of time for that area or when the peak demand for parking on Ocean Street is really at its critical stage. Mr. Ladwig responded that it was representative of what happens in the summers; even though it was during the holiday season, the hotels were full and the weather was really nice. Mr. Ladwig stated that there is a high turnover of parking spaces at the beach because people don’t stay at the beach all day long in Carlsbad. Commissioner Dominguez asked if the study would have been more representative had it been conducted during the peak summer months. Mr. Ladwig stated that the traffic was as busy during the holidays as it is during the summer. Commissioner Baker inquired about the loss of the Transient Occupancy Tax to the City. She commented that in the letter from Mr. Ladwig he stated he expects to sell out all the timeshares so then it would be a loss to the City. Mr. Ladwig responded that even though the timeshares will be sold, most of the units would be rented out which then will be subject to the Transient Occupancy Tax. Commissioner Baker stated that if that is the case, then the property will continue to function in many ways as it currently does. Mr. Ladwig stated the only change would be the form of the use from hotel to timeshare. Commissioner Baker inquired as to the reason why the owner is requesting this change. Mr. Ladwig stated the owner has her reasons and he did not ask her what those reasons are. Commissioner Baker inquired as to why the garages are not currently being used for parking and she questioned if the garages would be returned to parking. Mr. Ladwig stated the garages would be used for parking. Commissioner Segall asked about the eight parking spaces with one space for handicapped parking. He stated that if the 8 spaces were taken, and no one qualified to use the handicap space, where would the person park. Mr. Ladwig stated that most people renting the timeshares would use public transportation. He also stated that the one employee will work part-time and takes the bus. Chairperson White asked how many adults normally stay in a timeshare situation with three bedrooms and if any market surveys have been done. Norine Sigafoose, the applicant, explained the occupancy of the units and the parking situation. She also stated that currently two garages are used as storage, two garages are used as parking on the lower level and two more are used for parking above. Commissioner Segall asked if there are any other timeshares on Ocean Avenue that the applicant is aware of. Ms. Sigafoose stated there are not. Commissioner Whitton asked again for clarification on the number of parking spaces. Mr. Ladwig stated there will be a total of 9 parking spaces including a handicap space. Chairperson White opened Public Testimony. Planning Commission Minutes June 2,2004 Page 10 Chairperson White asked if there were any one in the audience who wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, she closed Public Testimony. Chairperson White asked if any of the Commissioners had any final questions of staff. DISCUSSION Commissioner Whitton commented he would like to see the property converted to the timeshare. Commissioner Heineman stated he favored the conversion and feels it would be good for the community. Commissioner Dominguez gave his support of staffs recommendation of denying the project. Commissioner Baker commented that she doesn’t see the conversion compounding the parking problem because it has been a problem for some time. She stated she is more concerned about the potential loss to the City of revenue from the Transient Occupancy Tax. Commissioner Montgomery commented that he supports the conversion. Commissioner Segall also gave his support of the project. Chairperson White stated her support of the project and doesn’t see the parking situation as getting worse. She doesn’t feel strongly about the Coastal Act and feels the property owners have the right to make the most of their property. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Whitton, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission direct staff to return with findings and conditions of approval of Carlsbad Tract CT 02-26, Conditional Use Permit CUP 02-30 and Coastal Development Permit CDP 02-52. White, Baker, Heineman, Montgomery, Segall and Whitton VOTE: 6 -1 AYES: NOES: Dominguez 35 Planning Commission Minutes June 16,2004 DRAFT Page2 1. CUP 99-30(A) - CANNON COURT - Request for an amendment to CUP 99-30 to allow alcohol sales at the Westmart gas stationlmini-mart within the Cannon Court project located on the northwest corner of Cannon Road and Interstate 5 at 4990 Avenida Encinas, in the C-T-Q zone, the CommerciaINisitor Serving Overlay Zone, and Local Facilities Management Zone 3. 2. CT 02-26/CUP 02-30/CDP 02-52 - SEASHORE ON THE SAND - Request for a Tentative Tract Map, Conditional Use Permit and a Coastal Development Permit to allow the conversion of an existing 12 unit hotel into 9 timeshare units on property generally located at 2805 Ocean Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. 4. CUP 94-03x2 - HOLY CROSS EPISCOPAL CHURCH - Request for a five year extension of CUP 94-03x1 to allow the continued operation of a church located in the Palomar Airport Business Park at 6066 Corte Del Cedro in Local Facilities Management Zone 5. 5. CDP 03-43 - DONAHUE RESIDENCE - Request for approval of a Coastal Development Permit to allow the construction of a new single-family residence within the City's Coastal Zone located along the east side of Surfside Lane south of Island Way within the La Costa Downs subdivision (Specific Plan 201) within Local Facilities Management Zone 22. 6. CUP 04-10 - PALOMAR AIRPORT BUSINESS PARK - Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow the operation of a private school, Vitality College of Healing Arts, in a 1,417 square foot suite in an existing 54,160 square foot building, located at 6353 El Camino Real within Local Facilities Management Zone 5. 7. PUD 02-11(B) - VILLAGES OF LA COSTA GREENS NEIGHBORHOOD 1.09 ARCHITECTURE - Request for a determination that the project is within the scope of the previously certified Villages of La Costa Program EIR and that the Program EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of CEQA; and a recommendation of approval for a Planned Unit Development Amendment for building floor plans, elevations and plotting for the development of 75 single-family detached homes within the Villages of La Costa Greens Neighborhood 1.09 generally located south of future Poinsettia Lane and east of future Alicante Road in Local Facilities Management Zone IO. Mr. Neu stated that agenda Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 are normally heard in a public hearing context, however, these projects are minor and routine in nature with no outstanding issues and Staff recommends approval. He recommended that the public hearing be opened and closed, and that the Commission proceed with a vote as consent Items including the errata sheets, if any. If the Commission or someone from the public wishes to pull an Item, Staff would be available to respond to questions. Chairperson White asked if there was any who wished to pull Items 1, 2,4, 5, 6 and 7 or if anyone wished to speak on those Items. Commissioner Montgomery asked that the errata sheets for Items 1 and 2 be read. Mr. Neu explained the errata sheets for those items. Commissioner Segall asked why CUP 99-30(A) (Item 1) needed to be approved by Council. Mr. Neu explained that a special condition had been placed on the project by City Council during the project's first approval. He also stated the applicant has submitted a letter requesting the item be withdrawn. Mr. Neu further explained that once the Planning Commission approves the denial of the project, the item would then be withdrawn. MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Heineman, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission approve Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 with errata sheets. White, Baker, Montgomery, Heineman, and Segall VOTE: 5-0 AYES: NOES: None 36 Planning Commission Minutes June 16,2004 Page 3 MOTION ACT I ON : Motion by Commissioner Heineman, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission approve Items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 with errata sheets. White, Baker, Montgomery, Heineman, and Segall VOTE: 5-0 AYES: NOES: None 37 From: Saima Qureshy To: Patchett, Ray Date: 7/13/04 9: 1 1 AM Subject: Parking for Seashore on the Sand The subject site is located within Beach Area Overlay Zone and parking requirements are as follows: 1.5 spacedunit for resident parking (apartments) + 1 space/2 units for visitor parking (apartments and condominiums) So if the 9 units were proposed to be converted into condominiums, it will require a total of 23parking spaces (2 spaces per unit +4.5 visitor spaces). For apartments parking requirement will be - =spaces (1.5 space/unit for one bdrm. units, 2 spaceshnit for 2 and 3 bedrm units + 4.5 visitor parking spaces) cc: Holzmiller, Michael P July 15,2004 TO: Ray Patchett, City Manager FROM: Planning Department RE: CUP 02-30 - Seashore on the Sand The following is the information on all the timeshare projects in the city: 1. Pacific Palisades: 161 timeshares, 90 hotels units, and restaurants. Parking for timeshares was calculated using 1.2 spacedunit ratio. However, a parking reduction for the overall project was granted based on shared use of parking for various uses on-site. A parking analysis was prepared and concluded that various uses should not be evaluated entirely separate since guests staying in hotel and timeshare units will also be using restaurants. 2. Seapoint: 3. Aviara: 4. Carlsbad Inn: 78 timeshares. Parking for timeshares was calculated using 1.2 spaces/unit ratio. There was no reduction granted. The project has 5 spaces in addition to the required 94 spaces. 240 timeshare units, 489 hotel rooms, sports center, and restaurants. Parking for timeshares was calculated using 1.5 spaces/unit because each unit had a lock-off feature which allowed it to be separated into two, distinct units. Then, a parking reduction for the overall project was granted based on shared use of parking for various uses on-site. A parking analysis was prepared and concluded that various uses should not be evaluated separately. 132 timeshare units, 66 hotel rooms, retail uses and a restaurant. Parking for timeshares was calculated using a standard of 1.0 spacehit based on shared use of parking for the various uses on-site. 5. Tamarack Beach Resort: 54 timeshare units, 27 hotel rooms, and restaurant. Parking for timeshares was calculated using a standard of 1.0 spacehnit based on shared use of parking for the various uses on-site. I Re: Seashore on the Sand July 15,2004 Page 2 Four timeshare projects described above, which were granted reduced parking standards are large scale projects, developed with hotel rooms, restaurants and retail uses in addition to the timeshare component. Seapoint is the only project which is similar to the proposed project since it is developed only with timeshares. Parking reduction granted at other locations was justified by showing that people staying in timeshares were also using other on-site uses like restaurants and conference facilities. Two of the projects approved with parking reductions were also conditioned to conduct yearly reviews to ascertain if reduced parking is adequate. Planning Director could require any mitigation measures necessary to eliminate any parking problems, if identified in the yearly review. SAIMA QURESHY, AICP C: Michael Holzmiller Don Neu Ladwiq Design Group, Inc. SEASHORE ON THE SAND Questions raised at the City Council Meeting of July 13,2004, and Comments 0 Parking The applicant is requesting a reduction in the parking as allowed by City Code from 1.2 spaces per unit down to 1 space per unit. There currently are 12 units available for rent as a hotel. After the conversion to timeshares there will be a 25 percent reduction in the number of units down to nine. In addition, there was a slight reconfiguration onsite to add a handicapped space, which in reality is two spaces, so we end up with eight regular spaces and one handicapped space or the required one space per unit. In the ordinance that allows for the Council to reduce the required parking to one space per unit there is also a requirement that any reduction in parking shall be supported by finding that the reduction is necessary for the development of the project and will not adversely affect the neighborhood. The finding that can be made to satisfy the Code is that there is the 25 percent reduction in units. Also, a parking study was done that shows there is no negative impact on the surrounding area. In addition, no one has submitted a letter or protested the project at the public hearing. So a conclusion could be drawn that the reduction in spaces is necessary for the development in that it is an existing project to be reduced from 12 units to 9 units with nine parking spaces and that the project will not adversely affect the neighborhood because of the effective increase in on-site parking spaces available. 0 Precedent Setting As pointed out by the City Attorney on July 13, the nature of a Conditional Use Permit is that each project needs to be reviewed and stand on it’s individual merits and without setting precedence. Mr. Ball also pointed out that the law can be changed so that conditions apply in the future. 0 Handicapped Access The project will provide an elevator hom street level to the beach level. We are not aware of any other project along the beach that has this. Handicapped people will have total access to the beach. 703 Palomar Airport Road + Suite 300 Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-31 84 FRX (760) 438-01 73 July 19,2004 Page 2 0 Seven UNts versus Nine Units A suggestion was made to reduce the units from nine to seven. We feel this would attract multiple families using the large units coming in separate cars. Some of the units would need to be four and five bedroom units and it would be unlikely that a couple would use such a large unit. Because the Code requires one space per unit and it is not based on the number of bedrooms, it would be very unlikely that the Code requirement would satisfy the actual need. 0 Ladwig’s Response to Mayor’s Question Mayor Lewis asked Bob Ladwig if he could support other timeshare conversions along the beach. Ladwig responded no, that it would depend on the circumstance of each individual project. After further consideration I would consider supporting other conversions with the understanding that as a minimum that the existing units be reduced by 25 percent, similar to Seashore on the Sand. 703 Palomar Airport Road Suite 300 Carlsbad, California 92009 (760) 438-31 82 FW (760) 438-01 73 From: Isabelle Paulsen To: legals@nctimes.com Date: 6/29/04 2:09PM Subject: Public Hearing Notice - Seashore on the Sand Jane: Please let me know if you received this e-mail and attachment. Please place the attached public hearing and map in the Friday, July 2, 2004, newspaper. This will be a simple legal ad with City seal and border Thank you. Isabelle Paulsen, CMC Deputy Clerk City of Carlsbad City Clerk/Records Management ipaul@ci.carlsbad.ca.us cc: Saima Qureshy; Val Dinsmore NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m. on Tuesday, July 13, 2004, to consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow the conversion of an existing 12-unit hotel into 9 timeshare units on property generally located at 2805 Ocean Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 1 and more particularly described as: Lots 47 and 48 and the northerly 10.00 feet of Lot 49, in Block “A of the Hayes Land Company Addition to Carlsbad, Map No. 2, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to map thereof No. 1221, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 4, 1909. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after July 2, 2004. If you have any questions, please call Saima Qureshy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-461 9. If you challenge the Conditional Use Permit 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, Attn: City Clerk, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: CUP 02-30 CASE NAME: Seashore on the Sand PUBLISH: July 2, 2004 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCl L SITE SEASHORE ON THE SAND CUP 02-30 CARLSBAD UNlF SCHOOL DlST 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CITY OF SAN MARCOS 1 CIVIC CENTER DR CARLSBAD CA 92009 SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949 CITY OF OCEANSIDE 300 NORTH COAST HWY OCEANSIDE CA 92054 VISTA CA 92085 CITY OF VISTA PO BOX 1988 CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME 4949 VIEWRIDGE AVE STE 100 SAN DIEGO CA 92123 9174 SKY PARK CT REGIONAL WATER QUALITY SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340 LAFCO 1600 PACIFIC HWY SAN DIEGO CA 92101 AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DlST 9150 CHESAPEAKE DR SAN DIEGO CA 92123 U.S. FISH &WILDLIFE 6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD CARLSBAD CA 92009 7575 METROPOLITAN DR CA COASTAL COMMISSION STE 103 SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402 NOR1 N E SI GAFOOS E 2805 OCEAN ST CARLSBAD CA 92008 BOB LADWIG LADWIG DESIGN GROUP 703 PALOMAR AIRPORT RD STE 300 CARLSBAD CA 92009 CITY OF CARLSBAD COMMUNITY SERVICES PUBLIC WORKS/ENGlNEERlNG CITY OF CARLSBAD DEPT- PROJECT ENGINEER JOHN MAASHOFF CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT PLANNER SAIMA QURESHY CITY OF ENClNlTAS 505 S VULCAN AVE ENClNlTAS CA 92024 SD COUNTY PLANNING STE B 5201 RUFFIN RD SANDIEGO CA 92123 SANDAG STE 800 401 B STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92101 I. P. U .A. SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND URBAN STUDIES SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505 ATTN TED ANASIS SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY PO BOX 82776 SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776 CITY OF CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT Laser 5160@ Nancy F Johnson 806 N Foothill Rd Beverly Hills Ca 902 10 M Harris 2729 Ocean St Carlsbad Ca 92008 M & KPatton 28 W Yale Loop Irvine Ca 92604 William C Mann 2701 Ocean St Carlsbad Ca 92008 Frank & Janet Abbott 1952 Forest View Ave Burlingame Ca 940 10 Tr Benedict 8357 Turtle Creek Cir Las Vegas Nv 89 1 13 Tr Klosterman 1565 Hillcrest Ave Glendale Ca 9 1202 Fred & Barbara Havens 2139 Archdale St Riverside Ca 92506 Lori Emslie 2683 Ocean St Carlsbad Ca 92008 J Kunkel PO Box 26048 Oklahoma City Ok 73 126 Parish Of St Michaels-By-The-Sea POBox 127 Carlsbad Ca 920 18 Gofat L L C 160 Tamarack Ave Carlsbad Ca 92008 Tr Bell 215 E Ball Rd Anaheim Ca 92805 Front Porch Communities & Serv 2835 N Naomi St 300 Burbank Ca 91 504 Tr Gamer 25775 Toluca Dr San Bemardino Ca 92404 Dinitto Properties Inc 264 Carlsbad Villagedr Carlsbad Ca 92008 Vista Ca 92081 Blue Barry J+Mary T ConsSO% 426 223 1 La Mirada Dr Karen Kelly 3 1887 Colby Ln Pauma Valley Ca 9208 1 Wesley Man 2995 Ocean St Carlsbad Ca 92008 Harold C & Eva Mcmillan 1525 Heather Ln Riverside Ca 92504 Weinberger 422 S San Marino Ave Pasadena Ca 91 107 Thomas & Janet Gunckel 1 1242 La Vereda Dr Santa Ana Ca 92705 Tr Harrison 2442 Tamara Ln San Marcos Ca 92069 Mary W Jernegan 2955 Ocean St 5 Carlsbad Ca 92008 Donald F Powell PO Box 1300 Riverside Ca 92502 William & Darla Boren 75 1 1 Adobe Cliffs Cir Las Vegas Nv 89129 Tr Mazzetti 2254 Grace St Riverside Ca 92504 Jeffrey & Nanette Carlson 3027 N Broadway Escondido Ca 92026 John J & Bonnie Bouma 800 E Circle Rd Phoenix Az 85020 Tr Littrell 13639 Rostrata Rd Poway Ca 92064 Jessie F Minor PO Box 490 San Jacinto Ca 92581 Tobo Investments 2785 Roosevelt St Carlsbad Ca 92008 0 Nick Tr Powell 2227 Ruddy Duck Ct Cardiff By The Sea Ca 92007 PO Box 1300 Riverside Ca 92502 John & Julie Barr PO Box 50 Decatur I1 62525 P & Alice Scheerer 75 19 N 3Rd St Phoenix Az 85020 Darcy Dutton 2520 Raeburn Dr Riverside Ca 92506 Gary L & Patricia Mcmillan 45 125 Sandia Creek Dr Temecula Ca 92590 W & Tonia Skousen 2333 N Country Club Dr Mesa Az 85201 MesaAz 85205 Leon H & Sylvia Ricks 6057 E University Dr Tr Moser 12566 Tithing Hill Dr Riverton Ut 84065 Albert D & Donna Jacobson 11 E Linger Ln Phoenix Az 85020 Seaslope Estates Owners Assn(Cor PO Box 1300 Riverside Ca 92502 Tr Chaisson 605 Edgebrook Dr Las Vegas Nv 89145 Tr Murphy 2901 Ocean St 3 Carlsbad Ca 92008 Tr Vigil 2901 Ocean St 4 Carlsbad Ca 92008 Kimball Bernard Bell Partners 2400 E Arizona Biltmore Cir 1400 PO Box 151 Phoenix Az 85016 Anaheim Ca 928 15 Norine Sigafoose 3978 Syme Dr Carlsbad Ca 92008 Carlsbad Beach Partners L P 1201 Elm St Dallas Tx 75270 Marie Sidun Scott J Bartel Wailes 621 Las Flores DrSan Marcos Ca 92069 92008 92008 2689 Garfield StCarlsbad Ca 2729 Ocean StCarlsbad Ca Tr Mcgrath 2685 Garfield StCarlsbad Ca 92008 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO p.m. on Tuesday, [DATE], to consider a Conditional Use Permit to allow the conversion of an existing 12-unit hotel into 9 timeshare units on property generally located at 2805 Ocean Street in Local Facilities Management Zone 1 and more particularly described as: Lots 47 and 48 and the northerly 10.00 feet of Lot 49, in Block “A” of the Hayes Land Company Addition to Carlsbad, Map No. 2, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to map thereof No. 1221, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, November 4, 1909. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after [DATE]. If you have any questions, please call Saima Qureshy in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4619. If you challenge the Conditional Use Permit 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: CUP 02-30 CASE NAME: Seashore on the Sand PUBLISH: [DATE] CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL SITE SEASHORE ON THE SAND CUP 02-30 Seashore on the SandSeashore on the SandCT 02-26/CUP 02-30/CDP 02-52 Location MapLocation MapC A R L S B A D B LV D GRAND AVEG A R F IE L D S T O C E A N S T CHRISTIANSEN WAYCARLSBAD VILLAGE DRP A C IF IC O C E A N SITE BackgroundBackground•Approved as 9 unit apartment building •Variances ™Front yard setback –5’™Northerly side yard setback –3’™Southerly side yard setback –4’•Converted into a 12 unit hotel •Hotel is legal non-conforming use Proposed ProjectProposed Project•Convert existing hotel into 9 timeshare units•Parking requirement for timeshares per the CMC –1.2 spaces/unit (11 spaces for the project)•Requested reduction –1.0 space/unit (9 spaces for the project) RecommendationRecommendation•Planning Commission Recommends Approval:™Timeshares are conditionally permitted use in R-3 zone.™New use will not result in any physical or operational changes.™No. of units will be reduced to 9 from existing 12 hotel units. City Council Approve CUP 02-30 –Seashore on the Sand Parking RequirementParking Requirement•Timeshares™1.2 spaces/unit –11 spaces required for 9 units•Apartments/Condominiums™1.5 spaces/unit for 1 bedrm. Units, ™2 spaces/unit for 2, 3 bedrm. Units™1 space/2 units for visitors™Site Density will allow max. 3 units™Total parking requirement –8 parking spaces Seashore on the SandSeashore on the SandCT 02-26/CUP 02-30/CDP 02-52 Proposed ProjectProposed Project•Convert existing hotel into 9 timeshare units•Parking requirement for timeshares per the CMC –1.2 spaces/unit (11 spaces for the project)•Requested reduction –1.0 space/unit (9 spaces for the project) Parking Reduction for Parking Reduction for TimesharesTimeshares•Pacific Palisades ™Parking for timeshares –1.2 spaces/unit™Overall parking reduction was granted•Seapoint™Parking for timeshares –1.2 spaces/unit™No parking reduction was granted•Aviara™Parking for timeshares –1.5 spaces/unit™Overall parking reduction was granted Parking Reduction for Parking Reduction for TimesharesTimeshares•Carlsbad Inn™Parking for timeshares –1.0 space/unit™Parking reduction was granted•Tamarack Beach Resort™Parking for timeshares –1.0 space/unit™Parking reduction was granted Parking Reduction for Parking Reduction for TimesharesTimesharesProjects with parking reductions were large scale resort with other uses on-site.Seapointis developed with only timeshares and parking was based on 1.2 spaces/unit PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp 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 Proof of Publication of North County Times Formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times-Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudicated newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the City of Oceanside and the City of Escondido, Court Decree number 171349, for the County of San Diego, that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpariel), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: a,mq I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at SAN MARCOS, California - This =7\ Day of July, 2004 P tam Signature NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising . ..