The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-02-20; City Council; 18907; Planned development regulation amendmentsCITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL AB# 18.907 MTG. 02/20/2007 DEPT. Pin PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS T/^ A AC AO/I /"*O A AC A7ZCA oo-oz/LCPA OD-O/ DEPT. HEAD \$7/<M CITY ATTY. <^ CITY MGR. Wp RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council INTRODUCE Ordinance No. NS-834 APPROVING amendments to the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance; and ADOPT Resolution No. 2007-036 ADOPTING a Negative Declaration, based upon the findings contained therein. ITEM EXPLANATION: Project Items NEGATIVE DECLARATION ZCA 05-02 LCPA 05-07 Planning Commission RA RA RA City Council X X X Coastal Commission N/A ** • RA = Recommended adoption/approval X = Final City decision-making authority • = Requires Coastal Commission approval ** = Will not become effective until Coastal Commission approves LCPA 05-07 This proposal involves a City-initiated Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to: (1) amend standards of the Planned Development, Parking, and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum and Growth Management Control Point densities of the General Plan residential land use designations; and 2) amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. On October 18, 2006 and December 6, 2006, public hearings were held by the Planning Commission to consider the proposed amendments. At the October 18th Planning Commission hearing, two members of the development community (Mike Howes and Jamie Starck) spoke in support of the proposed amendments; and Scott Molloy, representing the Building Industry Association (BIA), provided the Planning Commission with a letter that requested thirteen additional changes to the proposed amendments. The Planning Commission voted to continue the item to the December 6th hearing, and directed staff to meet with Scott Molloy to discuss the BIA's recommendations. The Planning Commission also directed staff to meet with the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce to solicit their input. Staff gave a presentation to the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce on November 2, 2006; and in a letter dated November 22, 2006, the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce expressed their support of the proposed amendments. FOR CITY CLERKS USE ONL Y. COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED DENIED CONTINUED D WITHDRAWN D AMENDED D CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN RETURNED TO STAFF OTHER - SEE MINUTES D D D D Page 2 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 Staff met with the BIA on two separate occasions (on October 24th with Scott Molloy, and on November 29th with the BIA North County Legislative Committee). As a result of staff's discussions with Scott Molloy, the majority of the BIA's recommendations (specified in their letter to the Planning Commission on October 18th) were resolved (either through clarification or by staff recommending modifications to the proposed amendments to address the BIA's comments). In a letter dated November 9, 2006, the BIA indicated their support of the proposed amendments and specified their four remaining recommended changes (the proposed amendments address two out of the four remaining BIA recommendations). On December 6, 2006, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed ZCA and LCPA. Staff's analysis and a detailed description of the proposed amendments are contained in the Staff Reports to the Planning Commission dated October 18, 2006 and December 6, 2006 (Exhibit 4). Staff recommends that any development application, which is deemed complete prior to the effective date of the proposed ordinance, may be processed pursuant to the standards in effect prior to the approval of the proposed amendments. The Ordinance (Exhibit 1) has been modified to include this provision. FISCAL IMPACT: The only fiscal impact is the staff time required to process this amendment through the Coastal Commission. These costs are covered under the existing budget. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: The Planning Commission has determined that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the environment, and recommends adoption of a Negative Declaration. The Negative Declaration is attached to City Council Resolution No. 2007-036 . EXHIBITS: 1. City Council Ordinance No. Kis-a:u 2. City Council Resolution No. 2007-036 3. Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6140, 6141, and 6142 4. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated December 6, 2006, and October 18, 2006 5. Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated October 18, 2006, and Excerpts of Planning Commission Minutes, dated December 6, 2006. DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Chris DeCerbo 760-602-4611 cdece@ci.carlsbad.ca.us. Gary Barberio 760-602-4606 abarb@ci.carlsbad.ca.us. or Jennifer Jesser 760-602-4637 iiess@ci.carlsbad.ca.us 1 ORDINANCE NO. NS-834 2 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A ZONE CODE 3 AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE STANDARDS IN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 21.45 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS), 4 CHAPTER 21.44 (PARKING), AND CHAPTER 21.82 (BEACH AREA OVERLAY ZONE) TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT 5 OF HIGH QUALITY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS CONSISTENT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY POLICIES OF THE 6 GENERAL PLAN, AND TO CLARIFY AMBIGUITIES AND CORRECT INCONSISTENCIES. 7 CASE NAME: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS 8 CASE NO.: ZCA 05-02 / LCPA 05-07 9 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows: 10 SECTION I: That Chapter 21.44 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 11 Chapter 21.44 12 PARKING 13 21.44.010 Required off-street parking. 14 21.44.020 Off-street parking spaces required. 21.44.030 Parking requirements for uses not specified. 15 21.44.040 Parking provisions may be waived by planning commission. 21.44.050 General requirements. 16 21.44.060 Off-street parking-Residential zones. 21.44.070 Comprehensive planned facilities. 17 21.44.080 Joint use of off-street parking facilities. 21.44.090 Common parking facilities. 18 21.44.100 Parking area plan. 19 21.44.010 Required off-street parking. A. Off-street parking, designed in accordance with the requirements of this chapter, shall be provided for: 21 1. All newly constructed buildings; 2. Additions to existing buildings, except for: 22 a. Additions or alterations to an existing one-family dwelling when the addition or alteration results in less than 300 square feet of cumulative additional floor space (over the 23 amount of the original dwelling structure); 3. Any change of use within an existing building. 24 B. All required parking shall be made permanently available and be permanently maintained for parking purposes. 25 C. When calculating the required number of parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the required number of parking spaces shall always be rounded up 2/: to the nearest whole number. 27 21.44.020 Off-street parking spaces required. A. The number of off-street parking spaces required for the uses or structures 2g designated in this section shall be no less than as set forth in Table A, below. 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 B. In the case of multiple uses in a building or on a lot, the total requirements for off- street parking facilities shall be the sum of the requirements for the various uses computed separately. Off-street parking facilities for one use shall not be considered as providing required parking facilities for any other use except as specified in Section 21.44.080 for joint use. TABLE A NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED USE Residential Uses Commercial, Industrial, and Other Non- Residential Uses One-family dwellings Two-family dwellings (apartments only), for condominium projects see "planned developments" Multiple-family dwellings (apartments only), for condominium projects see "planned developments" Second dwelling units Planned Developments Fraternities Mobile Home Parks Residential Care Facilities Rooming House Housing for senior citizens Time-share projects Bed and Breakfast Uses Bowling Alleys Delicatessen Driving Ranges Financial Institutions and Professional Offices NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES Two spaces per unit, provided as either: • a two-car garage (minimum interior 20 feet x 20 feet); or • two separate one-car garages (minimum interior 12 feet x 20 feet each) Same as required for one-family dwellings \/ioi*«K ^-ur,,. Same as required for multiple-familyVisitor park,ng dwe|,ing visjor parking. Studio and one- 1 .5 spaces/unit, one of which must be bedroom units covered Units with two or 2 spaces/unit, one of which must be more bedrooms covered Projects with 10 A .30 space per units or fewer each unit. Visitor oarkina Pr°Jects with 11 A .25 space perVisitor parking unjtsormore each unit. Visitor parking may be covered or uncovered. 1 space (covered or uncovered), in addition to the parking required for the primary use (single, one-family dwelling). The additional parking space may be provided through tandem parking (provided that the one-family dwelling garage is accessed by a driveway with a minimum depth of 20 feet), or within the front yard setback. See Chapter 21 .45. 1 .25 spaces for each sleeping room 2 spaces per unit, plus 1 visitor parking space for every 4 units 2 spaces, plus 1 space/three beds 1 space for each sleeping room 1 .5 covered spaces per unit, plus 1 covered space for an onsite manager's unit (when provided), and 1 visitor parking space per every five units, subject to approval of a site development plan. 1 .2 spaces per unit 2 spaces, one of which must be covered for the owner's unit, plus 1 space for each guest room. 6 per alley 1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area 1 space/tee plus required parking for accessory uses Medical Office Financial Institutions Other office uses 1 space/200 square feet of gross floor area 1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area 1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area -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 TABLE A, CONTINUED NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED USE Commercial, Industrial, and Other Non- Residential Uses, cont. Financial Institutions and Professional Offices, cont. Furniture and Appliance Sales Golf Courses Gyms and Health Spas Hospitals Hotels and Motels Industrial building ("spec" - no specific uses identified) Libraries Library Substations Manufacturing Mortuaries Motor Vehicle Uses Museums Professional Care Facilities Public Assembly Recreational Vehicle Storage Areas Research and Development (R&D) Restaurants Retail Uses Schools Theaters Warehouse NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES ^X^£SX~ XSSE&'Xr**within 300 feet of its boundary of 9ross floor area 1 space/600 square feet of gross floor area 6 spaces/hole plus required parking for accessory uses. 1 space/200 square feet of gross floor area 3 spaces per bed, or 1/200 square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater. 1 .2 spaces per unit 1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area1 1 space/200 square feet of gross floor area 1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area 1 space/400 square feet of gross floor area, plus 1 space for each vehicle used in conjunction with the use 1 space/50 square feet of assembly area Sales 1 space/400 square feet of gross floor area 4 spaces for every work bay (up through three work Repair bays), plus 2 spaces per bay in excess of three bays. Workbays do not count as parking spaces. 1 space/500 square feet of gross floor area .45 parking spaces per every bed 1 space/5 seats, or 1 space/100 square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater 1 space for every 10,000 square feet of storage area, with a minimum of 3 spaces. 1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area Bio industrial R&D - 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area Less than 4,000 square feet in size 4,000 square feet or greater Individual Shopping Center Preschools/ Nurseries Elementary Schools High Schools Colleges, Vocational Schools 1 space/100 square feet of gross floor area 40 spaces plus 1 space/50 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 4,000 square feet. 1 space/300 square feet of gross floor area. 1 space/200 square feet of gross floor area 2 1 space/employee plus 1 space for each 10 students, with an adequate loading and unloading area 1 space/employee, with an adequate loading and unloading area 1 space/employee plus 1 space for each 10 students, with an adequate loading and unloading area 1 space/employee plus 1 space for each 3 students, with an adequate loading and unloading area 1 space/5 seats 1 space/1 ,000 square feet of gross floor area, plus 1 space for each vehicle used in conjunction with the use -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 1 Projects proposing a "spec" industrial building may provide parking at manufacturing or warehouse standards, provided a deed restriction is recorded on the property indicating that these uses on the property will be retained and no other type of use creating a need for additional parking will be permitted, unless more parking area is provided to meet city parking standards. 2 Uses permitted in the underlying zone may be allowed in under-parked shopping centers without the need to provide additional parking, provided there is no expansion of floor area (this does not apply to conditionally permitted uses). 21.44.030 Parking requirements for uses not specified. A. Where the parking requirements for a use are not specifically defined herein, the parking requirements for such use shall be determined by the planning commission, and such determination shall be based upon the requirements for the most comparable use specified in this chapter. 21.44.040 Parking provisions may be waived by planning commission. A. The planning commission may, by resolution, waive or modify the provisions as set forth in this title establishing required parking areas for uses such as electrical power generating plants, electrical transformer stations, utility or corporation storage yards or other uses of a similar or like nature requiring a very limited number of persons. 21.44.050 General requirements. A. The following general requirements shall apply to all parking spaces and areas: TABLE B PARKING SPACES AND AREAS Subject Parking space size Compact parking Minimum width of aisles that provide access to parking spaces Requirement Standard parking space Parallel parking space Compact parking space Nonresidential zones Residential zones All zones 30 and 45 degree parking 60 degree parking 90 degree parking Minimum area of 170 square feet Minimum width of 8.5 feet Maximum overhang of 2.5 feet, provided the overhang does not encroach into any required landscape setback. Minimum length of 24 feet, exclusive of driveway/drive- aisle entrances and aprons Minimum length of 20 feet if located immediately adjacent to a driveway/drive-aisle apron Minimum width of 7 feet Minimum width of 8 feet Minimum length of 15 feet No overhang permitted Up to 25% of the total required parking spaces may be compact spaces. Up to 45% of the required visitor parking spaces may be compact spaces. Compact car spaces shall be located in separate parking aisles from standard sized spaces. Aisles for compact car spaces shall be clearly marked with permanent pole signs denoting "Compact Cars Only". Compact car spaces shall be located in close proximity to the facility they are intended serve, so as to encourage their maximum usage. One-way traffic 14 feet wide Two-way traffic 24 feet wide One-way traffic 1 8 feet wide Two-way traffic 24 feet wide 24 feet wide 20 feet - where no vehicles pull into or back-out into a drive-aisle from a parking space. -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 TABLE B, CONTINUED PARKING SPACES AND AREAS Subject Minimum width of aisles that provide access to parking spaces, cont. Circulation Location of required parking Required landscaping of parking areas Development and maintenance of public or private parking areas with a capacity for 5 or more vehicles Requirement Additional width may be required for vehicle/emergency vehicle maneuvering area. Circulation within a parking area must be such that a car entering the parking area need not enter a street to reach another aisle and that a car need not enter a street backwards. This provision shall not apply to off-street parking required for one- family and two-family dwelling units. For one-family, two- family, and multiple- family dwellings For other residential uses or care facilities (e.g., housing for senior citizens, hospitals, residential care facilities, etc.) For uses other than those specified above For parking areas having a capacity of five or more vehicles (except parking provided for one- family and two-family dwellings) Surfacing Border Barricades, Screening, and Landscaping See Section 21 .44.060. Not more than 150 feet walking distance from the nearest point of the parking facility to the nearest point of the building that the parking facility is required to serve. Not more than 300 feet walking distance from the nearest point of the parking facility to the nearest point of the building that the parking facility is required to serve. For purposes of required landscaping, the words "parking area" shall include all blacktop or paved areas, including access ways and areas. At least 3% of the parking area shall be planted and maintained with trees listed on the city's official street tree list, or approved shrubs. Said trees or shrubs shall be: • Contained in planting areas with a minimum dimension of 4 feet and bounded by a concrete or masonry curb of a minimum of 6 inches in height; • Located throughout the off-street parking areas in order to obtain the maximum amount of dispersion. All landscaped areas shall be served by a water irrigation system and be supplied with bubblers or sprinklers. All plans for such landscaped areas shall be approved by the planning director prior to the construction and placement thereof. Off-street parking areas shall be paved or otherwise surfaced and maintained so as to eliminate dust or mud, and shall be so graded and drained as to dispose of all surface water. In no case shall such drainage be allowed across sidewalks or driveways. Every parking area that is not separated by a fence from any street or alley property line upon which it abuts, shall be provided with a suitable concrete curb or timber barrier not less than 6 inches in height, and located not less than 2 feet from such street or alley property lines, and such curb or barrier shall be securely installed and maintained; provided no such curb or barrier shall be required across any driveway or entrance to such parking area. -5-7 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 TABLE B, CONTINUED PARKING SPACES AND AREAS Subject Development and maintenance of public or private parking areas with a capacity for 5 or more vehicles, cont. Parking areas for commercial or office/professional uses in R-3, R-P and R-T zones Requirement Border Barricades, Screening, and Landscaping, cont. Entrances and Exits Every parking area abutting property located in a residential zone shall be separated from such property by a solid wall, view-obscuring fence or compact evergreen hedge 6 feet in height measured from the grade of the finished surface of such parking lot closest to the contiguous residentially zoned property; provided, that along the required front yard, the fence, wall or hedge shall not exceed 42 inches in height. No such wall, fence or hedge need be provided where the elevation of that portion of the parking area immediately adjacent to a residential zone is 6 feet or more below the elevation of such residentially zoned property along the common property line. Any lights provided to illuminate any public parking area, semi-public parking area or used car sales area permitted by this chapter shall be so arranged as to reflect the light away from any premises upon which a dwelling unit is located. The location and design of all entrances and exits shall be subject to the approval of the planning director or other designated person, provided no entrance or exit, other than on or from an alley, shall be closer than 5 feet to any lot located in a residential zone. No parking lot to be used as an accessory to a commercial or office/professional establishment shall be established until reviewed by the planning commission and its location approved. Such approval may be conditioned upon the commission's requiring the planting and/or maintenance of trees, shrubs or other landscaping within and along the borders of such parking area. The parking lot shall be no farther than 50 feet when measured from it's closest boundary to the commercial or office/professional establishment to which it is accessory. Such parking lot shall be used solely for the parking of private passenger vehicles. 21.44.060 Off-street parking-Residential zones. A. In all residential zones the following parking regulations shall apply: 1. Garages, parking stalls, carports and RV parking spaces (excluding those in approved RV parking lots) shall be for the exclusive use of the residents only and shall not be separately sold or rented to nonresidents of the property. 2. Required parking spaces for dwelling units shall be located subject to the following: TABLE C LOCATION OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Parking Required For: One-family, Two-family, and Multiple-family dwellings Location Standards For Required Parking Spaces All dwelling types Required parking spaces shall be located on the same lot or building site as the buildings they are required to serve. Required parking shall not be located within the front yard setback. Required uncovered parking spaces may be located within the side and/or rear yard setback, provided that a 6 foot-high masonry wall (or some other solid material approved by the decision-making authority) is built along the property line adjacent to the setback area. -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 TABLE C, CONTINUED LOCATION OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Parking Required For: One-family, Two-family, and Multiple-family dwellings, cont. Location Standards For Required Parking Spaces Multiple- family dwellings Visitor parking for two-family and multiple- family dwellings Second dwelling units Existing substandard frontage lots with a width of less than 50 feet Subterranean parking Required parking spaces shall be located no more than 150 feet as measured in a logical walking path from the entrance to the unit it could be considered to serve. Same as parking required for primary residential use, with the following exception: • Required visitor parking need not be located within a garage. • Required visitor parking spaces shall be not more than 300 feet walking distance to the unit the parking space is required to serve. • For projects with 10 or fewer units (outside the Beach Area Overlay Zone), all required visitor parking may be located within driveways (located in front of a unit's garage), provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more (measured from the front property line, back of sidewalk, or edge of drive-aisle, whichever is closest to the structure). Same as parking required for primary residential use, with the following exceptions: • May be located in the front yard setback; and • May be located as a tandem space on a driveway in front of the primary residence's garage (provided the garage is set back a minimum of 20 feet from the property line Tandem parking within the front yard setback shall be permitted, provided: • There is a minimum of one parking space per dwelling unit located within the required setback lines; and • The front yard building setback is no less than 20 feet (in the R-W zone, the front yard setback shall be no less than 10 feet to a second or third building floor). A zero foot setback for subterranean parking shall be permitted, provided that within the setback area(s) all of the "subterranean parking structure" is completely underground and the setbacks are fully landscaped, except for driveways necessary to provide access. 3. Garages in residential zones shall be constructed according to the following standards: TABLE D RESIDENTIAL GARAGE STANDARDS Residential Use Garage Standard Garages for one-family The two required parking spaces per unit shall be provided within either: and two-family • A two-car garage with a minimum interior dimension of 20 feet by 20 feet; or dwellings , jwo one-car garages with interior dimensions of 12 feet by 20 feet each. Garages for mu family dwelling provided for rec parking) One-car garage Two-car garage (both spaces for same unit) Itiple- |S(if U'red l< u- ,Multiple one-car garages in one structure -7- Minimum interior dimensions of 12 feet by 20 feet. Minimum interior dimensions of 20 feet by 20 feet. Each separate, one-car garage shall have interior dimensions of 12 feet by 20 feet, exclusive of supporting columns. As a minimum, each space shall be separated from the adjacent garage, floor to ceiling, by a permanent stud partition with 1/2-inch gypsum board on one side, where no additional fire protection is required. 9 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 TABLE D, CONTINUED RESIDENTIAL GARAGE STANDARDS Residential Use Garage Standard Garages for multiple- Enc,osed family dwellings (if E™°shem( provided for required "' "" parking), cont. pa ' Each parking space shall maintain a standard stall . . size of 8.5 feet by 20 feet, exclusive of supporting jltlole ooen ^\umns or posts. ria'sDaces" ' A backup distance of 24 feet shall be maintained in addition to a minimum 5 feet turning bump-out located at the end of any stall series. 4. The parking of vehicles in residential zones shall be subject to the following regulations: TABLE E WHERE VEHICLES CAN BE PARKED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Type Of Vehicle Passenger vehicles, and Light-duty commercial vehicles used as a principal means of transportation by an occupant of the dwelling Recreational vehicles, boats, and trailers Where Vehicles Can Be Parked One-family, two-family, and multiple- family dwellings One-family dwellings on individual lots (in addition to parking spaces provided as required for the dwelling) One-family dwellings on individual lots Garage Covered or uncovered parking spaces provided as required for the dwelling unit In the required front yard on a paved driveway or parking area that: 1 . Does not exceed 30% of the required front yard area; or 2. Is comprised of 24 feet of width extended from the property line to the rear of the required front yard, whichever is greater. A paved area between the required front yard and the actual front of the building, as long as it is an extension and does not exceed the width of the area described above. Any other area of the lot provided that they are screened from view from the public right-of-way. For corner lots, the provisions of this subsection shall apply to the required street side yard; however, in no case, shall the provisions of this section allow parking in both the required front yard and the required street side yard. In an enclosed structure observing all required setbacks Open parking in the side yard or the rear yard Open parking in the required front yard if the parking area does not exceed the maximum paved area permitted for passenger vehicles, and the planning director determines, after giving the same notice as provided for administrative variances in Section 21 .51 .040 of this code, that access to the side or rear yard cannot be provided. In making this determination, the planning director shall consider: 1 . Whether parking in, or access to, the side or rear yard would require structural alteration to the existing residence, or would require the removal of significant or unique landscaping. A fence shall not be deemed to prevent access to the side or rear yard; 2. Whether parking in or access to the side or rear yard would require extensive grading; 3. Whether, because of the configuration of the lot, existing landscaping, the location of the structures on the lot, and the size of the recreational vehicle, parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would interfere with visibility to or from any street; 4. Whether allowing parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would interfere with traffic on the street or sidewalk, or would encroach into the street and utility right-of-way. -8- ,/£> 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 ini \~/ If1 12 13 14 15 16 17 1 R1 0 19 20 21 22 23 A J24 O f25 /-%-r26 27 28 TABLE E, CONTINUED WHERE VEHICLES CAN BE PARKED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Type Of Vehicle Recreational vehicles, boats, and trailers, cont. Inoperable Vehicles Heavy-Duty Commercial Vehicles Where Vehicles Can Be Parked One-f am ily dwellings on individual lots, cont. One-family, two-family, & multiple- family dwellings One-family, two-family, & multiple- family dwellings Any person objecting to a decision made pursuant this subsection may request in writing within ten days of the determination by the planning director, an administrative hearing with the planning director. The planning director shall apply the criteria of this section in making his determination. The decision of the director shall be final unless the director's decision is appealed to the planning commission. The effective date of the planning director's decision and method of appeal of such decision shall be governed by Section 21 .54.140 of this code. Note: A corner lot is deemed to have reasonable access to the rear yard. Notwithstanding the above, during the construction of a permanent one-family dwelling on a lot, the owner of the lot may live in a recreational vehicle upon said lot during construction of said dwelling for a period not to exceed 6 months. The provisions listed in this section are not intended to supersede more restrictive homeowner provisions contained in approved conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs). If the provisions of any such CC&Rs are less restrictive than the ordinance codified in this section, then the provisions contained herein shall apply. Storage or parking of inoperable, wrecked, dismantled or abandoned vehicles shall be regulated by Chapter 10.52 of this code, with the following exception: • For one-family dwellings on individual lots, not more than two vehicles in any inoperable, wrecked or dismantled condition may be parked in the side yard or rear yard while said vehicles are being repaired or restored by the owner of the property, provided the vehicles are visually screened from the public right-of-way. No heavy-duty commercial vehicles as defined by Section 10.40.075 of this code, except for trailers as permitted by the provision for "recreational vehicles, boats, and trailers" above, shall be parked on any residential lot, except while loading or unloading property; or when such vehicle is parked in connection with, and in aide of, the performance of a service to the property on which the vehicle is parked. 21 .44.070 Comprehensive planned facilities. A. Areas may be exempted from the parking requirements as otherwise set up in this chapter, provided: 1. Such area shall be accurately defined by the planning commission after processing in the same manner required for an amendment to the zoning title; 2. No such district may be established and exempted from the provisions of Section 21.44.020 unless 60% or more of all record lots comprising such proposed district are zoned to uses first permitted in a commercial (C) or industrial (M) zone; 3. Such exemptions shall apply only to uses first permitted in the commercial (C) or industrial (M) zones; 4. Before such defined district shall be exempt as provided in this section, active proceeding under any applicable legislative authority shall be instituted to assure that the exempted area shall be provided with comprehensive parking facilities which will reasonably serve the entire district. (Ord. 9804 § 4 (part), 1986) 21 .44.080 Joint use of off-street parking facilities. -9- ,. 1 A. The planning commission may, upon application by the owner or lessee of any property, authorize the joint use of off-street parking facilities by the following uses or activities: 2 1. Up to 50% of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a use considered to be primarily a daytime use may be provided by the parking facilities of a use considered to be 3 primarily a nighttime use; 2. Up to 50% of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a use considered 4 to be primarily a nighttime use may be provided by the parking facilities of a use considered to be primarily a daytime use; 5 3. Up to 100% of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a church or for an auditorium incidental to a public or parochial school may be supplied by parking facilities of a 6 use considered to be primarily a daytime use; 4. Up to 50% of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a church may be 7 jointly utilized by an on-site, accessory, child day care center provided there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the church and child day care center; 8 5. The following uses are typical daytime uses: banks, business offices, retail stores, personal service shops, clothing or shoe repair or service shops, manufacturing or wholesale buildings and similar uses; 6. The following uses are typical of nighttime and/or Sunday uses: auditoriums 10 incidental to a public or parochial school, churches, dance halls, theaters and bars. B. The planning commission may authorize the joint use of off-street parking facilities by the uses or activities specified above, subject to the following conditions: 1. The buildings or uses associated with the joint use of a parking facility shall be 12 located within 150 feet of such parking facility; 2. The application shall show that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the buildings or uses for which the joint use of a parking facility is proposed; 3. Parties involved in the joint use of a parking facility shall provide evidence of 14 agreement for such joint use by a proper legal instrument approved by the city attorney as to form and content. Such instrument, when approved as conforming to the provisions of this title, 15 shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder and copies thereof filed with the planning director.16 21.44.090 Common parking facilities. 17 A. Common parking facilities may be provided in lieu of the individual requirements contained herein, but such facilities shall be approved by the decision-making authority as to size, shape and relationship to business sites to be served, provided the total of such off-street parking spaces, when used together, shall not be less than the sum of the various uses computed separately. n B. When any such common facility is to occupy a site of 5,000 square feet or more, then the parking requirements as specified herein for each of two or more participating buildings or uses may be reduced not more than 15%, subject to approval by the decision-making authority. 22 21.44.100 Parking area plan. 23 A. The site plan submitted with a building permit application for the building to which a parking area is accessory shall clearly indicate the proposed development, including 24 location, size, shape, design, curb cuts, lighting, landscaping and other features and appurtenances of the proposed parking area. 25 26 SECTION II: That Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended to read as follows: 27 28 -10- 1 Chapter 21.45 2 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 3 21.45.010 Intent and purpose. 21.45.020 Applicability. 4 21.45.030 Definitions. 21.45.040 Permitted zones and uses. 5 21.45.050 Application and permit. 21.45.060 General development standards. 6 21.45.070 Development standards for one-family dwellings and twin-homes on small lots. 21.45.080 Development standards for condominium projects. 7 21.45.090 Residential additions and accessory uses. 21.45.100 Amendments to permits. 8 21.45.110 Conversion of existing buildings to planned developments. 21.45.120 Expiration, extension and revisions. 9 21.45.130 Proposed common ownership land or improvements. 21.45.140 Maintenance. 10 21.45.150 Failure to maintain. 21.45.160 Model homes. 11 21.45.170 Restriction on reapplication for planned development permit. 12 21.45.010 Intent and purpose. A. The purpose of the planned development ordinance is to: 13 1. Recognize the need for a diversity of housing and product types; 2. Provide a method for clustered property development that recognizes that the impacts of environmentally and topographically constrained land preclude the full development of a site as a standard single-family subdivision; 3. Establish a process to approve the following: a. One-family dwellings and twin-homes on individual lots of less than 7,500 square 16 feet in size or as otherwise allowed by the underlying zone; b. Condominium projects consisting of two-family and multiple-family dwellings, as 1' well as one-family dwellings developed as two or more detached dwellings on one lot; c. Condominium conversions; and d. Private streets; 4. Encourage and allow more creative and imaginative design by including relief from compliance with standard residential zoning regulations. To offset this flexibility in 2 development standards, planned developments are required to incorporate amenities and features not normally required of standard residential developments. 21 21.45.020 Applicability. 22 A. A planned development permit is required for the development of one-family dwellings or twin-homes on lots of less than 7,500 square feet or as otherwise allowed by the 23 underlying zone, attached or detached condominiums, condominium conversions, and private streets. 24 B. These regulations do not apply to attached residential units proposed for inclusion as part of a commercial development project. C. Any application for a planned development permit that was deemed complete prior to the effective date of the ordinance reenacting this chapter, shall not be subject to the amended provisions of this chapter but shall be processed and approved or disapproved pursuant to the ordinance superseded by the ordinance codified in this chapter. 27 D. If there is a conflict between the regulations of this chapter and any regulations approved as part of the city's certified local coastal programs, a redevelopment plan, master 28 13 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 plan or specific plan, the regulations of the local coastal program, redevelopment plan, master plan or specific plan shall prevail. E. A planned development permit shall apply to residential projects only, as specified in 'Table A Permitted Residential Uses" of this chapter. F. A planned development permit shall be required for the development of a private street within a residential development that is not otherwise subject to the requirements of this chapter. Such residential development shall not be subject to any development standard of this chapter, except the private street standards. 21.45.030 Definitions. A. Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter, they shall have the meaning established by this section: 1. "Condominium project" means a common interest development defined by Section 1351 of the California Civil Code, and which consists of two or more attached or detached dwelling units on one lot. 2. "Driveway" means an improved surface on private property intended for exclusive vehicular access from a public/private street or drive-aisle to open/enclosed parking for a single residential unit (attached or detached). 3. "Drive-aisle" means an improved surface on private property intended for shared vehicular access (serving two or more residential units, attached or detached) from a public/private street to a driveway(s) or open/enclosed parking. 4. "Net pad area" means the building pad of a lot excluding all natural or manufactured slopes greater than 3 feet in height except intervening manufactured slopes between split-level pads on a single lot. 5. "Planned development" means a form of development usually characterized by a unified site design for a number of housing units, clustering buildings and providing common open space, recreation and streets. 6. 'Twin-home" means two dwellings attached by a common wall where each dwelling is on a separate lot that allows for separate ownership. 21.45.040 Permitted zones and uses. A. Table A, Permitted Residential Uses, specifies the types of residential uses, and the zones where such uses are permitted, subject to the approval of a planned development permit. The uses specified in Table A are in addition to any principal use, accessory use, transitional use or conditional use permitted in the underlying zone. TABLE A PERMITTED RESIDENTIAL USES Legend: P = Permitted (#) Number within parenthesis = Permitted only in certain circumstances. X = Not permitted Zone R-1 R-2 R-3 RD-M R-W R-P Residential Use One-Family Dwelling or Twin-Home on Small Lots (one unit per lot) (1)or(4) P P P X (5) Condominium Project One-family dwellings - (3) or (4) Two-family dwellings - (1) or (4) Multiple-family dwellings - (4) One-family or two-family dwellings - P Multiple-family dwellings - (2) or (4) P P P (6) -12- 1 TABLE A, CONTINUED PERMITTED RESIDENTIAL USES 2 3 4 5 6 7 Legend: P = Permitted (#) Number within parenthesis = Permitted only in certain circumstances. X = Not permitted Zone RMHP P-C V-R Accessory Uses Residential Use One-Family Dwelling or Twin-Home on Small Lots (one unit per lot) P (7) (8) (9) Condominium Project P (7) (8) (9) (1) Permitted when the project site is contiguous to a higher intensity land use designation or zone, or an existing project of comparable or higher density. (2) Permitted when the proposed project site is contiguous to a lot or lots zone R-3, R-T, 9 R-P, C-1, C-2, C-M or M, but in no case shall the project site consist of more than one lot nor be more than ninety feet in width, whichever is less. 10 (3) Permitted when developed as two or more detached units on one lot. (4) Permitted when the project site contains sensitive biological resources as identified in the 11 Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. In the case of a condominium project, attached or detached units may be permitted when the site contains sensitive biological resources. (5) Permitted when the R-P zone implements the RMH land use designation. (6) Permitted when the R-P zone implements the RMH or RH land use designations. (7) Permitted uses shall be consistent with the master plan. (8) Refer to the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Master Plan for permitted uses. (9) Refer to Table F for permitted accessory uses. 14 21.45.050 Application and permit. A. Application. 1. The application for a planned development permit shall be made in writing on the 16 form provided by the planning department, and shall be accompanied by the required fee in an amount specified by city council resolution. 17 2. The application shall include plans (i.e. site plan, building elevations, floor plans, landscape plans, etc.) as required by the city's submittal requirements, which demonstrate ° compliance with all development standards and design requirements contained in this chapter. a. A planned development permit application for a small-lot subdivision (intended to be developed with one dwelling per lot) may be approved without architecture and plotting; in 2n which case, approval of a major planned development permit amendment will be required at a later date to authorize the proposed structures and their placement. b. A planned development permit application for a condominium project shall require approval of architecture and plotting concurrent with the approval of the condominium 22 subdivision. 3. The application for a planned development permit shall state the proposed method of land division (i.e., small lots, or air-space condominiums). B. Processing Procedures. 24 1. Table B, Processing Procedures, identifies required procedures for Minor (four or fewer dwelling units) and Major (five or more dwelling units) Planned Development permits. 25" 26 27 28 -13- 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 TABLE B PROCESSING PROCEDURES Topic Minor Planned Development Permit Major Planned Development Permit Decision-Making Body or Official Planning Commission (PC) Up to 50 DU Planning Director City Council (upon PC recommendation) More than 50 DU Map Required Minor Subdivision Map (See Title 20. Chapter 20.24) Major Subdivision Map (See Title 20, Chapter 20.12) Required Findings See Section 21.45.050(C)See Section 21.45.050(C) Public Notice Required See Title 20, Chapter 20.24. Section 20.24.115 Chapter 21.54, Section 21.54.060(1) Public Hearing Required No Yes Appeals See Chapter 21.54, Section 21.54.140 See Chapter 21.54, Section 21.54.150 C. Required Findings. 1. The planning director, planning commission or city council shall approve or conditionally approve a planned development permit only if the following findings are made: a. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan, and complies with all applicable provisions of this chapter, and all other applicable provisions of this code. b. The proposed project will not be detrimental to existing uses, or to uses specifically permitted in the area in which the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroundings, or traffic. c. The project will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare; d. The project's design, including architecture, streets, and site layout: i. Contributes to the community's overall aesthetic quality; ii. Includes the use of harmonious materials and colors, and the appropriate use of landscaping; and iii. Achieves continuity among all elements of the project. D. Modifications to Development Standards. 1. The decision-making body with the authority to approve a planned development permit may approve a modification to the development standards specified in this chapter if all of the following findings are made in writing: a. The proposed planned development designed with the modified development standard(s) is consistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter; and b. The proposed modification(s) will result in the preservation of natural habitat as required by the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP); and c. The amount of natural habitat preservation required by the HMP could not be achieved by strict adherence to the development standards of this chapter; and d. The proposed modification(s) will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare; and e. If the project is located within the coastal zone, the modification is consistent with all Local Coastal Program policies and standards for the protection of coastal resources. 2. Any application for a planned development permit that involves a request for a modification to the development standards of this chapter shall include documentation that clearly demonstrates the modification is necessary to implement the natural habitat preservation requirements of the HMP. 3. The decision-making body with the authority to approve a planned development permit may modify the plan, or impose such conditions or requirements that are more restrictive than the development standards specified in this chapter, the underlying zone or elsewhere in this code, as deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, or to insure conformity with the general plan and other adopted policies, goals or objectives of the city. -14- // 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 •1 £•15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23A*«J OA/*+ 75A.J OAZo /^«27 28 21 .45.060 General development standards. A. All planned developments shall comply with the general development standards specified in Table C below. Specific standards applicable to one-family dwellings and twin- homes on small-lots can be found in Table D; and standards applicable to condominium projects can be found in Table E. B. In addition to the provisions of this chapter, a planned development project shall be subject to the development standards of the project site's underlying zone. C. If there is a conflict between the development standards of this chapter and the development standards applicable to the project site's underlying zone, the standards of this chapter shall prevail. Exception: the development standards specified in the city's local coastal program, a redevelopment plan, master plan or specific plan shall prevail if such standards conflict with the standards of this chapter. D. When approved, a planned development permit shall become a part of the zoning regulations applicable to the subject property. TABLE C GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. n 1\j* i C.2 C.3 C.4 SUBJECT Dpn^itvL'd Iwlly A v+nrif+lArterial Cotha/^l^cOwLUdvlxo Permitted Intrusions into Setbacks/ Building Separation Streets DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Per the underlying General Plan designation. When two or more general plan land use designations exist within a planned development, the density may be transferred from one general plan designation to another with a general plan amendment. All dwelling units adjacent to any arterial road shown on the Circulation Element of the General Plan shall maintain the following minimum setbacks from the right-of- way: Prime Arterial 50 Feet Major Arterial 40 Feet Secondary Arterial 30 Feet Carlsbad Boulevard 20 Feet Half (50%) of the required arterial setback area located closest to the arterial shall be fully landscaped to enhance the streetscene and buffer homes from traffic on adjacent arterials, and: • Shall contain a minimum of one 24" box tree for every 30 lineal feet of street frontage; and • Shall be commonly owned and maintained Project perimeter walls greater than 42 inches in height shall not be located in the required landscaped portion of the arterial setback, except noise attenuation walls that: • Are required by a noise study, and • Due to topography, are necessary to be placed within the required landscaped portion of the arterial setback. Permitted intrusions into required building setbacks shall be the same as specified in Section 21.46.120 of this code. The same intrusions specified in Section 21.46.120 shall be permitted into required building separation. Minimum right-of-way width 56 feet Minimum curb-to-curb width 34 feet Prlvate SSSSSST"**1 ",oe,,inc,u*gcu,b Minimum sidewalk width 5 *"" <sf a5* 6 inches lrom property line) Public Minimum right-of-way width 60 feet n 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 TABLE C, CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. C.4, cont. C.5 C.6 C.7 SUBJECT Streets, cont. Drive-aisles Number of Visitor Parking Spaces Required (1) Location of Visitor Parking DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Public, cont. Street Trees within parkways 3 or fewer dwelling units 4 or more dwelling units All projects Minimum curb-to-curb width 34 feetssrssir"*" "to***-*.* Minima Side»alk width •£££? ' "*" "™ One-family A minimum of one street tree (24-inch box) dwellings and twin per lot is required to be planted in the homes on small-lots parkway along all streets. Condominium Street trees shall be spaced no further apart projects than 30 feet on center within the parkway. Tree species should be selected to create a unified image for the street, provide an effective canopy, avoid sidewalk damage and minimize water consumption. Minimum 12 feet wide when the drive-aisle is not required for emergency vehicle access, as determined by the Fire Chief. If the drive-aisle is required for emergency vehicle access, it shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Minimum 20 feet wide. No parking shall be permitted within the minimum required width of a drive-aisle. A minimum 24-foot vehicle back-up/maneuvering area shall be provided in front of garages, carports or uncovered parking spaces (this may include driveway area, drive-aisles, and streets). Additional width may be required for vehicle/emergency vehicle maneuvering area. Parkways and/or sidewalks may be required. No more than 24 dwelling units shall be located along a single-entry drive-aisle. All drive-aisles shall be enhanced with decorative pavement. Projects with 10 units or fewer A .30 space per each unit. Projects 1 1 units or more A .25 space per each unit. When calculating the required number of visitor parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the required number of visitor parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. On Private/ Public Streets As parallel parking along public/private street(s) (minimum 34-feet wide curb-to-curb), as follows: • Along both sides of any private/public street(s) located within the project boundary. • Along the abutting side and portion of any existing public/private street(s) that is contiguous to the project boundary. In parking bays along driveways, drive-aisles, or public/private streets within the project boundary. When visitor parking is provided as on-street parallel parking, not less than 24 lineal feet per space, exclusive of driveway/drive-aisle entrances and aprons, shall be provided for each parking space, except where parallel parking spaces are located immediately adjacent to driveway/drive-aisle aprons, then 20 lineal feet may be provided. Within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, on-street parking shall not count toward meeting the visitor parking requirement. /$ 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 TABLE C, CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. C.7, cont. C.8 C.9 SUBJECT Location of Visitor Parking, cont. Screening of Parking Areas Community Recreational Space <1) DEVELOPMENT STANDARD On Drive-aisles On a Driveway Compact Parking Distance from unit Visitor parking must be provided in parking bays that are located outside the required minimum drive-aisle width. Outside the Beach Area Overlay Zone Within the Beach Area Overlay Zone All projects One required visitor parking space may be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 40 feet or more. For projects with 10 or fewer units, all required visitor parking may be located within driveways (located in front of a unit's garage), provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more. One required visitor parking space may be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 40 feet or more. In addition to the provisions above to locate visitor parking in a driveway, if the streets within and/or adjacent to the project allow for on-street parking on both sides of the street, then visitor parking may be located in a driveway, subject to the following: • All required visitor parking may be located within driveways (located in front of a unit's garage), provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more. • If less than 100% of the driveways in a project have a depth of 20 feet or more, then a .25 visitor parking space will be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 20 feet or more (calculations resulting in a fractional parking space credit shall always be rounded down to the nearest whole number). The minimum driveway depth required for visitor parking (20 feet or 40 feet) applies to driveways for front or side- loaded garages, and is measured from the property line, back of sidewalk, or from the edge of the drive-aisle, whichever is closest to the structure. For projects of more than 25 units, up to 25% of visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (8 feet by 15 feet). No overhang is permitted into any required setback area or over sidewalks less than 6 feet wide. For all projects within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, up to 55% of the visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (8 feet by 15 feet). Visitor parking spaces must be located no more than 300 feet as measured in a logical walking path from the entrance of the unit it could be considered to serve. Open parking areas should be screened from adjacent residences and public rights- of-way by either a view-obscuring wall, landscaped berm, or landscaping, except parking located within a driveway. Community recreational space shall be provided for all projects of 1 1 or more dwelling units, as follows: Minimum community Proiect tKSa ,™ general 2°° «•— *• p- - recreational Project IS within RH general plan _ space required designation n 50 square Teet per unit y? 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 TABLE C, CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. C.9, cont. C.10 C.11 SUBJECT Community Recreational Space (1>, cont. Lighting Utilities DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Projects with 1 1 to 25 dwelling units Projects with 26 or more dwelling units Projects with 50 or more dwelling units Projects with 50 or more dwelling units, cont All projects (with 1 1 or more dwelling units) Recreation Area Parking Community recreational space shall be provided as either (or both) passive or active recreation facilities. Community recreational space shall be provided as both passive and active recreational facilities with a minimum of 75% of the area allocated for active facilities. Community recreational space shall be provided as both passive and active recreational facilities for a variety of age groups (a minimum of 75% of the area allocated for active facilities). For projects consisting of one-family dwellings or twin homes on small-lots, at least 25% of the community recreation space must be provided as pocket parks. • Pocket park lots must have a minimum width of 50 feet and be located at strategic locations such as street intersections (especially T-intersections") and where open space vistas may be achieved. Community recreational space shall be located and designed so as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the units it is intended to serve. Credit for indoor recreation facilities shall not exceed 25% of the required community recreation area. Required community recreation areas shall not be located in any required front yard and may not include any streets, drive-aisles, driveways, parking areas, storage areas, slopes of 5% or greater, or walkways (except those walkways that are clearly integral to the design of the recreation area). In addition to required resident and visitor parking, recreation area parking shall be provided, as follows: 1 space for each 15 residential units, or fraction thereof, for units located more than 1 ,000 feet from a community recreation area. The location of recreation area parking shall be subject to the same location requirements as for visitor parking, except that required recreation area parking shall not be located within a driveway(s). Examples of recreation facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: Active Passive Swimming pool area Children's playground equipment Spa Courts (tennis, racquetball, volleyball, basketball) Recreation rooms or buildings Horseshoe pits Pitch and putt Grassy play areas with a slope of less than 5% (minimum area of 5,000 square feet and a minimum dimension of 50 feet) Any other facility deemed by the planning director to satisfy the intent of providing active recreational facilities. Benches Barbecues Community gardens Grassy play areas with a slope of less than 5%. Lighting adequate for pedestrian and vehicular safety shall be provided. Separate utility systems shall be provided for each unit. ^ 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 TABLE C, CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. C.12 C.13 SUBJECT Recreational Vehicle (RV) Storage (1) Storage Space DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Required for projects with 100 or more units, or a master or specific plan with 100 or more planned development units. Exception: RV storage is not required for projects located within the RMH or RH land use designations. 20 square feet per unit, not to include area required for driveways and approaches. Developments located within master plans or residential specific plans may have this requirement met by the common RV storage area provided by the master plan or residential specific plan. RV storage areas shall be designed to accommodate recreational vehicles of various sizes (i.e. motorhomes, campers, boats, personal watercraft, etc.). The storage of recreational vehicles shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and on any public or private streets or any other area visible to the public. A provision containing this restriction shall be included in the covenants, conditions and restrictions for the project. All RV storage areas shall be screened from adjacent residences and public rights-of-way by a view-obscuring wall and landscaping. 480 cubic feet of separate storage space per unit. If all storage for each unit is located in one area, the space may be reduced to 392 cubic feet. Required storage space shall be separately enclosed for each unit and be conveniently accessible to the outdoors. Required storage space may be designed as an enlargement of a covered parking structure provided it does not extend into the area of the required parking stall, and does not impede the ability to utilize the parking stall (for vehicle parking). A garage (12'x20' one-car, 20'x20' two-car, or larger) satisfies the required storage space per unit. This requirement is in addition to closets and other indoor storage areas. (1) This standard does not apply to housing for senior citizens (see Chapter 21 .84 of this code). 21 .45.070 Development standards for one-family dwellings and twin-homes on small lots. A. In addition to the general development standards found in Table C, planned developments that include one-family dwellings or twin-homes on small lots shall comply with the following development standards found in Table D, One-Family Dwellings and Twin-Homes on Small Lots. TABLE D ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Ref. No. D.1 D.2 D.3 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD N ' htf h d Must comP'y with citv council Policy 66, Principles for the Development of Livable Policy Neighborhoods. Architectural Must comply with city council Policy 44, Neighborhood Architectural Design Requirements Guidelines. <dw!iingsy 5'000 scluare feet (°ne dwellir|9 Per lot) Twin-homes 3,750 square feet (one dwelling per lot) Minimum Lot 3,500 square feet (one-family or twin-home - one dwelling per lot) Area when either: Exception 1 . The project site contains sensitive biological resources as identified in the Carlsbad habitat management plan; or 2. The site has a general plan designation of RMH and unique circumstances such as one of the following exists: -19- Si 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 TABLE D, CONTINUED ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Ref. No. D.3, cont. D.4 D.5 D.6 D.7 D.8 D.9 SUBJECT Minimum Lot Area, cont. Maximum Lot Coverage Minimum Lot Width <n Minimum Street/Drive- Aisle Frontage Minimum Setback from a Private or Public Street<2)(3> Minimum Setback from a Drive- Aisle151 Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Exception, cont. 1 story homes 2 story homes a. The project is for lower income or senior citizen housing; b. The site is located west of Interstate 5; c. The dwelling units are designed with alley-loaded garages; or d. The site is either located contiguous to a Circulation Element roadway or within 1200 feet of a commuter rail/transit center, commercial center or employment center. 60% of the net pad area 45% of the net pad area for all lots in a project, if the minimum lot area in the project is 5,000 square feet or greater. 50% of the net pad area for all lots in a project, if the minimum lot area in the project is less than 5,000 square feet. Porches with no livable space above the porch, and porte-cocheres no more than 20 feet in width and 6 feet in depth are exempt from lot coverage requirements. sa»s±=- ^==~na One-family dwellings on lots less than «"£ <?? <££££?, '* J^T'f,0" a 5,000 square fee, ^VoSrved s»«S°aisW° * Twin-homes 35 feet Lots located on the curved portion of sharply curved streets/drive-aisles or cul-de- sacs: 25 feet. Residential structure Direct entry garage Residential structure Garage One-family dwellings Twin-homes 10 feet 20 feet 5 feet, fully landscaped (walkways providing access to dwelling entryways may be located within required landscaped area) 3 feet Garages facing directly onto a drive-aisle shall be equipped with an automatic garage door opener. Option 1 Option 2 Each interior side yard setback shall be a Residential minimum of 10% of the lot width; provided that structure each side yard setback is not less than 5 feet, and need not exceed 10 feet. Located on the front half of the lot Located on the rear Garage half of the lot Same as required for residence. Need not exceed 5 feet Any second story living space above a garage shall observe the same interior side yard setback required for the residence. R««!iriontiai One intenor side yard setback may be reduced struct to ° feet (zero lot line); Provided tne other side and Garaae ^ard setback is a mir|inrium of 20% of the lotwidth, and need not exceed 20 feet. One side yard - 0 feet (the side yard where the dwellings on each lot are attached). The other side yard setback shall be a minimum of 20% of the lot width, and need not exceed 20 feet. -20- "(CS ex1 <W 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 TABLE D, CONTINUED ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Ref. No. D.10 D.11 D.12 D.13 D.14 D.15 SUBJECT Minimum Rear Yard Setback (where the rear property line does not front on a street or drive-aisle) Maximum Building Height Private Recreational Space Resident Parking Garages for 3 or more cars- in-a-row Driveways DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Residential 20% of lot width, provided the rear yard setback is not less than structure 10 feet, and need not exceed 20 feet. 5 feet from rear property line Garage (located on therear half of the Any second story living space above a garage shall observe the lot\ same rear yard setback required for "residence", above. Same as required by the underlying zone, and not to exceed two stories (5) Minimum total area per unit Minimum dimension of recreational space 400 square feet (may consist of more than one recreational space) 15 feet Required private recreational space shall be located at ground level and designed so as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the dwelling it is intended to serve, and shall not have a slope gradient greater than 5%. Required private recreational space shall not be located within front yard setback areas, and may not include any driveways, parking areas, storage areas, or walkways (except those walkways that are clearly integral to the design of the recreation area). Open or lattice-top patio covers may be located within the required private recreation space (provided the patio cover complies with all applicable standards, including the required setbacks specified in Section 21 .45.090). Attached solid patio covers and second story decks/balconies may project into a required private recreational space, subject to the following: • The depth of the projection shall not exceed 6 feet (measured from the wall of the dwelling that is contiguous to the patio/deck/balcony). • The length of the projection shall not be limited, except as required by any setback or lot coverage standards. • The patio cover/deck/balcony shall comply with all applicable standards, including the required setbacks specified in Section 21 .45.090. 2 spaces per a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or unit, providedas either:(6) 2 seParate one-car garages (minimum 12 feet x 20 feet each) No more than 20% of the total project units may include garages with doors for 3 or more cars-in-a-row that directly face the street, including garages constructed as 3 one-car garages located adjacent to each other, or constructed as a two-car garage separated from a one-car garage with all garage doors directly parallel to the street. Garages that are recessed 20 feet or more back from the forward-most plane of the house shall not be subject to the 20% 3-car garage limitation stated above. Garages with doors for 3 or more cars in-a-row shall not be permitted on lots less than 5,000 square feet in area. Driveways for side-loaded garages must be enhanced with decorative pavement to improve appearance. (1) Lot width is measured 20' behind the front property line. (2) See Table C in Section 21 .45.060 for required setbacks from an arterial street.(3> Building setbacks shall be measured from one of the following (whichever is closest to the building): a) property line; or b) the outside edge of the required street right-of-way width. -21- 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) (5) (6) (7) Building setbacks shall be measured from one of the following (whichever is closest to the building): a) property line; b) the outside edge of the required drive-aisle width; c) the back of sidewalk; or d) the nearest side of a parking bay located contiguous to a drive-aisle (excluding parking located in a driveway in front of a unit's garage).. If a project is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, building height shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 21.82 of this code. The required resident parking within the R-W zone shall be 2 spaces/unit, 1 of which must be covered. Any uncovered required parking space in the R-W zone may be located within a required front yard setback and may be tandem. Garage location standards do not apply to projects where all garages are alley loaded. 21.45.080 Development standards for condominium projects. A. In addition to the general development standards found in Table C, condominium projects shall comply with the following development standards listed in Table E, Condominium Projects. TABLE E CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. E.1 .2 E.3 E.4 E.5 SUBJECT Livable Neighborhood Policy Architectural Requirements Coverage Maximum Building Height Minimum Building Setbacks DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Must comply with city council Policy 66, Principles for the Development of Livable Neighborhoods. One-family and two-family dwellings Multiple-family dwellings Multiple-family dwellings, cont. Must comply with city council Policy 44, Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines There shall be at least three separate building planes on all building elevations. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include, but not be limited to, building walls, windows, and roofs. All building elevations shall incorporate a minimum of four complimentary design elements, including but not limited to: • A variety of roof planes; • Windows and doors recessed a minimum of 2 inches; • Decorative window or door frames; • Exposed roof rafter tails; • Dormers; • Columns; • Arched elements; • Varied window shapes; • Exterior wood elements; • Accent materials such as brick, stone, shingles, wood, or siding; • Knee braces; and • Towers. 60% of total project net developable acreage. Same as required by the underlying zone, and not to exceed three stories m Projects within the RH general plan designation'1' From a private or public street(2)(3) 40 feet, if roof pitch is 3:12 or greater 35 feet, if roof pitch is less than 3:12 Building height shall not exceed three stories Residential structure 10 feet Direct entry garage 20 feet -22- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11j. J. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 T->23 o /i24 25 26 27 28 TABLE E,CONTINUED CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. E.5, cont. E.6 E.7 SUBJECT Minimum Building Setbacks, cont. Minimum Building Separation Resident Parking (6) DEVELOPMENT STANDARD From a drive- aisle(4) structure (all l^^J^S'^S^^ SpGCifi6Q DGlOW) . . , . • \rGQUirGd I3ndsc3p©d 3r@3) ResJdentia & 3 floors a garage Garage From the perimeter propeit lines of the project site (not adjacent to a public/private street) .. u tl ur . 0 feet when projecting over the frontQlrGCTIV 3DOVG *OT 3 Q3r3C|G • q fpptO Iccl . Garages facing directly onto a drive- aisle shall be equipped with an automatic garage door opener. / The building setback from an interior side or rear perimeter property line shall be the same as required by the underlying zone for an interior side or rear yard setback. 10 feet All dwelling types One-family and two-family dwellings Multiple-family dwellings If a project is located within the RH general plan designation, resident parking shall be provided as specified below, and may also be provided as follows: • 25% of the units in the project may include a tandem two-car garage (minimum 12 feet x 40 feet). • Calculations for this provision resulting in a fractional unit may be rounded up to the next whole number. 2 spaces per unit, provided as either: • a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or • 2 separate one-car garages (minimum 12 feet x 20 feet each) • In the R-W Zone, the 2 required parking spaces may be provided as 1 covered space and 1 uncovered space (5> Studio and one- bedroom units Units with two or more bedrooms 1 .5 spaces per unit, 1 of which must be covered (5) When calculating the required number of parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the required number of parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 2 spaces per unit, provided as either: • a one-car garage (1 2 feet x 20 feet) and 1 covered or uncovered space; or (5) • a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or • 2 separate one-car garages (minimum 12 feet x 20 feet each) • In the R-W Zone and the Beach Area Overlay Zone, the 2 required parking spaces may be provided as 1 covered space and 1 uncovered space (5) -23- 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 TABLE E, CONTINUED CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. E.7, cont. E.8 SUBJECT Resident Parking (6), cont. Private Recreational Space DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Multiple-family dwellings, cont. One-family and two-family dwellings Multiple-family dwellings Required parking may be provided within an enclosed parking garage with multiple, open parking spaces, subject to the following: • Each parking space shall maintain a standard stall size of 8.5 feet by 20 feet, exclusive of supporting columns; and • A backup distance of 24 feet shall be maintained in addition to a minimum 5 feet turning bump-out located at the end of any stall series. Required resident parking spaces shall be located no more than 150 feet as measured in a logical walking path from the entrance of the units it could be considered to serve. Mini™ «- — P- «-» 1^££S£Z£» Minimum dimension of 1_f t recreational space e Required private recreational space shall be located at ground level and designed so as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the dwelling it is intended to serve, and shall not have a slope gradient greater than 5%. Required private recreational space shall be located adjacent to the unit the area is intended to serve. Required private recreational space shall not be located within any required front yard setback area, and may not include any driveways, parking areas, storage areas, or common walkways. Open or lattice-top patio covers may be located within the required private recreation space (provided the patio cover complies with all applicable standards, including the required setbacks). Attached solid patio covers and second story decks/balconies may project into a required private recreational space, subject to the following: • The depth of the projection shall not exceed 6 feet (measured from the wall of the dwelling that is contiguous to the patio/deck/balcony). • The length of the projection shall not be limited, except as required by any setback or lot coverage standards. • The patio cover/deck/balcony shall comply with all applicable standards, including the required setbacks specified in Section 2 1.45.090. Minimum total area per unit ori „ . . (patio, porch, or balcony) 60 sc1uare feet Minimum dimension of patio, fi . porch or balcony ee Required private recreational space shall be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the dwelling it is intended to serve. Projects within the RH general plan designation may opt to provide an additional 75 square feet of community recreation space per unit (subject to the standards specified in Table C of this Chapter), in lieu of providing the per unit private recreational space specified above. -24- 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 d) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) If a project is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, building height shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 21.82 of this code. See Table C in Section 21.45.060 for required setbacks from an arterial street. Building setbacks shall be measured from the outside edge of the required street right-of-way width, whichever is closest to the building. Building setbacks shall be measured from one of the following (whichever is closest to the building): a) the outside edge of the required drive-aisle width; b) the back of sidewalk; or c) the nearest side of a parking bay located contiguous to a drive-aisle (excluding parking located in a driveway in front of a unit's garage). Any uncovered required parking space in the R-W zone may be located within a required front yard setback and may be tandem. This standard does not apply to housing for senior citizens (see Chapter 21.84 of this code). 21.45.090 Residential additions and accessory uses. A. General. 1. Additions and accessory uses shall be subject to all applicable development standards of this chapter, unless otherwise specified in this section. 2. Enlargement of buildings that are legally non-conforming by reason of inadequate setbacks is permitted, provided that such enlargement does not increase the floor space more than 40% of that existing prior to such enlargement, and that the new addition complies with the setbacks and lot coverage requirements of this chapter. B. One-family dwellings and twin-homes on small lots. 1. Table F lists the provisions for residential additions and accessory uses to one- family dwellings and twin-homes on small lots. 2. The additions and accessory uses listed in Table F shall be subject to the approval/issuance of a building permit. TABLE F RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS AND ACCESSORY USES TO ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Addition/Accessory Use Attached/detached patio covers (2) Pool, spa Non-habitable detached accessory buildings/ structures (e.g., garages, workshops, decks over 30 inches in height) (1)(2)(!S) Habitable detached accessory buildings (i.e. guest houses and second dwelling units) (2'(3)(4> Additions to dwelling (attached) Minimum Front Yard Setback 10 feet to posts (2-foot overhang permitted) 20 feet 20 feet Minimum Side and Rear Yard Setbacks 5 feet to posts (2-foot overhang permitted) 5 feet -pool 2 feet - spa 5 feet Same setbacks as required for the primary dwelling Same setbacks as required for the dwelling Notes: (1> Maximum building height is 1 story and 14 feet with a 3:12 roof pitch or 10 feet with less than a 3:12 roof pitch. (2) (3) (4) Minimum 10-foot separation required between a habitable building and any other detached accessory building/structure. Must be architecturally compatible with the existing structure. Second dwelling units are subject to Section 21.10.030. C. Condominium projects. 1. Additions and accessory uses to condominium projects shall be subject to Section 21.45.100 (amendments to permits). -25- 1 21.45.100 Amendments to permits. A. Amendments to a permit may be initiated by the property owner or an authorized 2 agent, or by motion of the city council. B. Minor Amendment. 3 1. A project revision may be considered and approved as a minor amendment only if all of the following findings are made: 4 a. The proposed revision does not increase the density (i.e., the addition of units); b. The proposed revision does not decrease the density by more than 10%, and 5 provided the density is not decreased below the minimum density of the underlying residential land use designation of the General Plan; 6 c. The proposed revision does not change the boundary of the subject property; d. The proposed revision does not involve the addition of a new land use not shown 7 on the original permit (e.g., adding a commercial use to a residential project, replacing single- family units with attached residential units, vice versa for each example, etc); 8 e. The proposed revision does not rearrange the major land uses within the development (e.g., it does not exchange the locations of single-family units with attached units); 9 f. The proposed revision does not create changes of greater than 10%, provided that compliance will be maintained with the applicable development standards of this code as 10 follows: 1. Per individual lot or structure basis: Building floor area, coverage or height (except that height reductions of more than 10% are permitted); ii. On an aggregate project basis: Parking, open space, recreation or landscaping 12 areas; g. The proposed revision is architecturally compatible with existing structures within the development. 2. Application Process. I4 a. The application for a minor amendment shall be made in writing on the form provided by the planning department and shall be accompanied by the required fee. b. The application shall include amended exhibits, graphics, statements or other information as may be required to explain and justify the request;16 3. Notice. a. If the planning director considers the amendment minor in nature the planning 17 director shall give written notice by mail or personal delivery to all property owners within 100 feet of the subject property, as shown on the latest equalized assessment role, at least 15 days18 prior to a decision on an application; 4. Effective date of order. a. The effective date of the planning director's decision and method for appeal of such decision shall be governed by Section 21.54.140 of this code; C. Major Amendment. 1. Any other revision to a project that does not meet the criteria for a minor amendment, as described in subsection "B.1" of this section, shall be considered a major 22 amendment. 2. An application for a major amendment of a planned development permit shall be 23 processed, heard and determined in the same manner as an application for a planned development permit. 24 3. When necessary, the amendment shall be accompanied by an amendment to the corresponding parcel map or tentative map. 25 21.45.110 Conversion of existing buildings to planned developments. A. Applicability. 1. Any application for the conversion of existing buildings to a planned development 27 (e.g., converting apartments to condominiums) shall be subject to all provisions of this chapter. B. Building Plans and Gas/Electric Plan. 28 a? 1 1. An application for conversion of an existing structure to a planned development shall include building plans indicating how the building relates to present building and zoning 2 regulations and where modifications will be required. 2. Also, the application shall include a letter from San Diego Gas and Electric 3 explaining that the plans to connect the gas and electric system to separate systems are acceptable. 4 C. Conversions within the Coastal Zone. 1. The conversion of existing residential units within the Coastal Zone that are 5 occupied by persons or families of low or moderate income shall be subject to the requirements of Section 65590 of the California Government Code. 6 D. Notice to Tenants and Findings. 1. Each prospective and existing tenant of the proposed condominium project shall 7 be given written notice of the proposed conversion in accordance with Sections 66452.8 and 66452.9 of the California Government Code (Subdivision Map Act); and 8 2. In addition to all other required findings for a subdivision, the city council shall make all of the findings set forth in Section 66427.1 of the California Government Code 9 (Subdivision Map Act). 10 21.45.120 Expiration, extension and revisions. A. The expiration, extension or revision of a planned development of four or less 11 lots or units shall be governed by the provision of Section 20.24.160, 20.24.180 and 20.24.080 of this code. 12 B. The expiration, extension or revision of a planned development of five or more lots or units shall be governed by the provisions of Sections 20.12.100, 20.12.110 and 13 20.12.120 of this code. 21.45.130 Proposed common ownership land or improvements. A. Where a planned development contains any land or improvement proposed to be 15 held in common ownership, the applicant shall submit a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) with the final map. Such declaration shall set forth provisions for maintenance of all common areas, payment of taxes and all other privileges and responsibilities of the common ownership. 17 B. The CC&Rs shall include provisions: 1. For maintenance of all common areas, payment of taxes and all other privileges 18 and responsibilities of the common ownership. 2. Prohibiting the homeowners' association from quitclaiming land in an association easement for ownership to private property owners thus allowing the homeowners to privatize a -_ common area for his own use. C. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed by and subject to approval of the planning director. 22 21.45.140 Maintenance. A. All private streets, walkways, parking areas, landscaped areas, storage areas, 23 screening sewers, drainage facilities, utilities, open space, recreation facilities and other improvements not dedicated to public use shall be maintained by the property owners. 24 Provisions acceptable to the planning director shall be made for the preservation and maintenance of all such improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. 25 21.45.150 Failure to maintain. A. Public Nuisance. 1. All commonly-owned lots, improvements and facilities shall be preserved and 27 maintained in a safe condition and in a state of good repair. 28 -27- 1 2. Any failure to so maintain is unlawful and a public nuisance if it endangers the health, safety and general welfare of the public and is a detriment to the surrounding 2 community. B. Removal of Public Nuisance. 3 1. In addition to any other remedy provided by law for the abatement, removal and enjoinment of such public nuisance, the community development director or public works 4 director may, after giving notice, cause the necessary work of maintenance or repair to be done. 2. The costs thereof shall be assessed against the owner or owners of the project. 5 C. Notice of Maintenance Required. 1. The notice shall be in writing and mailed to: 6 a. All persons whose names appear on the last equalized assessment roll as owners of real property within the project at the address shown on the assessment roll; and 7 b. Any person known to be responsible for the maintenance or repair of the common areas and facilities of the project under an indenture or agreement. 8 2. At least one copy of such notice shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the premises. 9 3. The notice shall particularly specify: a. The work required to be done; and 10 b. That the work must be commenced within 30 days after receipt of such notice, and diligently and without interruption prosecuted to completion; and 11 c. If upon the expiration of the 30 day period, the work is not commenced and being performed with diligence, the city shall cause such work to be done; in which case, the cost and expense of such work, including incidental expenses incurred by the city, will be assessed against the property or against each separate lot and become a lien upon such property. D. Upon completion of such work, the community development director or public works director shall file a written report with the city council setting forth the fact that the work has been completed and the cost thereof, together with a legal description of the property against which the cost is to be assessed. 1. Written notice shall be provided to all persons specified in subsection C.1 of this section of the hour and place that the city council will pass upon the written report and will hear 16 any protests against the assessments shall be provided. Such notice shall also set forth the amount of the proposed assessment. 17 a. Upon the date and hour set for the hearing, the city council shall hear and consider the report and any protests before proceeding to confirm, modify or reject the ° assessments. E. A list of assessment as finally confirmed by the city council shall be sent to the city treasurer for collection. 20 1. If any assessment is not paid within ten days after its confirmation by the city council, the city clerk shall cause to be filed in the office of the county recorder a notice of lien, in a form approved by the city attorney. a. From and after the date of recordation of such notice of lien, the amount of the 22 unpaid assessment shall be a lien on the property against which the assessment is made, and such assessment shall bear interest at the maximum rate allowed by law until paid in full. b. The lien shall continue until the amount of the assessment and all interest thereon has been paid. 24 c. The lien shall have priority according to law. 25 21.45.160 Model homes. A. Except for model homes, building permits for construction within the proposed planned development shall not be issued until a final subdivision map has been recorded for the project. 27 28 -' o *30 1 B. A maximum of six model home units may be constructed prior to recordation of the final map, provided that adequate provision acceptable to the planning director and city 2 attorney are made guaranteeing removal of such complex if the final map is not recorded. 3 21.45.170 Restriction on reapplication for planned development permit. A. The restrictions on the reapplication for a planned development permit are 4 specified in Section 21.54.130 of this code. 5 SECTION III: That Chapter 21.82 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended to 6 read as follows: 7 Chapter 21.82 8 BEACH AREA OVERLAY (BAO) ZONE 9 21.82.010 Intent and purpose. 21.82.020 Application. 10 21.82.030 Permitted uses. 21.82.040 Site development plan required. 11 21.82.050 Building height. 21.82.060 Parking. 12 21.82.070 Dwelling units per lot. 21.82.080 Approved projects.13 21.82.010 Intent and purpose. 14 A. The intent and purpose of the beach area overlay (BAO) zone is to supplement the underlying residential zoning by providing additional regulations for development within 15 designated beach areas to: 1. Ensure that development will be compatible with surrounding developments, both 16 existing and proposed, in the beach area; 2. Provide for adequate parking as needed by residential projects; 17 3. Ensure that adequate public facilities will exist to serve the beach area; 4. Protect the unique mix of residential development and aesthetic quality of the 18 area. 19 21.82.020 Application. A. The beach area overlay zone shall apply to any residentially zoned property 2U within the area bounded by the AT&SF Railroad right-of-way to the east, the Pacific Ocean to - the west, Buena Vista Lagoon to the north and Agua Hedionda Lagoon to the south. 22 21.82.030 Permitted uses. A. In the beach area overlay zone, any principal use, accessory use, transitional 23 use or conditional use permitted in the underlying zone is permitted subject to the same conditions and restrictions applicable in such underlying zone and to all of the requirements of 24 this chapter. 25 21.82.040 Site development plan required. A. No building permit or other entitlement shall be issued for any use in the beach 26 area overlay zone unless there is a valid site development plan approved for the property processed pursuant to Section 21.06 (Q-Overlay Zone) of this code. When a development 27 requires a conditional use permit or is processed pursuant to Chapter 21.45 of this code, a site development plan is not required unless the planned development is for four or less units in 28 •29- 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 which case a site development plan shall be processed. Further, a site development plan is not required for the construction, reconstruction, alteration or enlargement of a single-family residential dwelling on a residentially zoned lot. 21.82.050 Building height. A. No newly constructed, reconstructed, altered or enlarged residential structure within the beach area overlay zone shall exceed thirty feet and two stories if a minimum 3/12 roof pitch is provided or twenty-four feet and two stories if less than a 3/12 roof pitch is provided. Building height shall be measured as defined in Section 21.04.065 of this title. Underground parking areas and basements shall not be considered a story. In the case of underground parking as defined in Section 21.04.370 of this title, or basements as defined in Section 21.04.045 of this title, building height shall be measured from the existing grade. 21.82.060 Parking. A. With the exception of the parking standards specified in this section, the parking standards specified in Chapter 21.44 shall apply. B. The parking standards specified in Chapter 21.45 shall apply to planned developments within the BAO zone. C. Visitor Parking. 1. Visitor parking shall be provided for all residential development, as follows: TABLE A NUMBER OF VISITOR PARKING SPACES REQUIRED Number of Units Projects with 1 0 dwelling units or less Projects with 1 1 units or more Amount of Visitor Parking A .30 space per each unit or fraction thereof. A .25 space per each unit or fraction thereof. 2. When calculating the required number of parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the required number of parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 3. Required visitor parking may be provided within driveways, subject to the following: a. One required visitor parking space may be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 40 feet or more. b. If all streets within and/or adjacent to the project allow for on-street parking on both sides of the street, then visitor parking may be located in a driveway, subject to the following: i. All required visitor parking may be located within driveways, provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more. ii. If less than 100% of the driveways in a project have a depth of 20 feet or more, then a .25 visitor parking space will be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 20 feet or more (calculations resulting in a fractional parking space credit shall always be rounded down to the nearest whole number). iv. The minimum 20-foot driveway depth required for visitor parking applies to driveways for front or side-loaded garages, and is measured from the property line, back of sidewalk, or from the edge of street pavement, whichever is closest to the structure. 4. Up to 55% of the visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (eight feet by fifteen feet); 5. No credit will be given for on-street parking to satisfy any of the parking requirements above. 21.82.070 Approved projects. -30- 1 A. This chapter shall not apply to projects having received final discretionary approval, pursuant to Titles 20 and 21 both, from the City of Carlsbad prior to June 26, 1985. If 2 projects exempted above have not commenced construction and made substantial progress towards completion by June 26, 1987, then this chapter shall apply to those projects at that 3 time. 4 SECTION IV: That any development application, which is subject to standards of 5 this ordinance and is deemed complete prior to the effective date of this ordinance, may be processed pursuant to the standards (Municipal Code Chapters 21.44, 21.45, and 21.82) in 6 effect prior to the effective date of this ordinance. 7 EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective no sooner than thirty 8 days after its adoption but not until approved by the California Coastal Commission, and the City 9 Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at least once in 10 a publication of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within fifteen days after its adoption. 12 13 14 15 16 '" 17 '" 18 '" 19 '" 20 '" 21 >" 22 "' 23 '" 24 '" 25 26 27 >» 28 -31- 1 INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the City Council of the 2 City of Carlsbad on the 20tb day of February 2007, and thereafter. 3 PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of 4 Carlsbad on the day of 2007, by the 5 following vote, to wit: 6 AYES: 7 NOES: 8 ABSENT: 9 ABSTAIN: 10 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY 12 13 RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney 14 15 CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor16 17 ATTEST: 18 19 LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk 20 (SEAL) 21 " 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-036 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A NEGATIVE 3 DECLARATION FOR A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT, AND APPROVING SAID 4 LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE STANDARDS IN MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 21.45 5 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS), CHAPTER 21.44 (PARKING), AND CHAPTER 21.82 (BEACH AREA OVERLAY ZONE) TO 6 FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH QUALITY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS CONSISTENT WITH THE 7 RESIDENTIAL DENSITY POLICIES OF THE GENERAL PLAN, AND TO CLARIFY AMBIGUITIES AND CORRECT 8 INCONSISTENCIES. CASE NAME: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION 9 AMENDMENTS CASE NO.: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-0710 The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does hereby resolve as follows: 12 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on October 18, 2006 and December 6, 13 2006, hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to consider the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendment (ZCA 05-02) and Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 05-07) to amend the standards in the Planned Development, Parking, and Beach Area Overlay Zone chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality 17' residential projects consistent with the residential density policies of the general plan, and to 1 8 clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies.. 1Q WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission 20 Resolutions No. 6140, and 6142 recommending to the City Council that the Negative 21 Declaration be adopted, and LCPA 05-07 be approved; and 22 WHEREAS, the City Council did on the 20tb day of February 23 2007 hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider the Negative 24 Declaration and Local Coastal Program Amendment, and; 25 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors 27 relating to the Negative Declaration and Local Coastal Program Amendment; 28 " 1 NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does 2 hereby resolve as follows: 3 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 4 2. That the findings of the Planning Commission in Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6140 and 6142 constitute the findings of the City Council in this matter. 5 3. That the Negative Declaration is adopted as shown in Planning 6 Commission Resolution No. 6140 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference. 7 4. That the amendment to the Local Coastal Program (LCPA 05-07), is approved as shown in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6142, on file with the City Clerk and ncorporated herein by reference. 10 5. That the approval of LCPA 05-07 shall not become effective until it is approved by the California Coastal Commission and the California Coastal Commission's 11 approval becomes effective. 12 /// 13 /// 14 /// 15 /// 16 /// 17 /// 18 /// 19 /// 20 /// 21 /// 22 /// 23 /// 24 /// 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 -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 PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 20th day of February, 2007, by the following vote: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Kulchin, Hall NOES: None ABSENT: Council Members Packard, Sigafoose LORRAI(OP$iiW<QOD, City Clerk ' EXHIBIT 3 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6140 2 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING 4 ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR A ZONE 5 CODE AMENDMENT AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM 6 AMENDMENT TO (1) AMEND STANDARDS OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PARKING AND BEACH AREA 7 OVERLAY ZONE CHAPTERS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE 8 TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH QUALITY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS CONSISTENT WITH THE MINIMUM DENSITY AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT 10 CONTROL POINT OF THE UNDERLYING GENERAL PLAN 11 LAND USE DESIGNATION, AND (2) AMEND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO CLARIFY 12 AMBIGUITIES AND CORRECT INCONSISTENCIES. 13 CASE NAME: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION 14 AMENDMENTS CASE NO.: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-0715 16 WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, "Applicant," has filed a verified application 17 with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as Citywide ("the Property"); and 1 o 19 WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration was prepared in conjunction with said 20 * Arequest; and 21 22 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 18th day of October, 2006, and the 6th day of December, 2006, hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to 24 25 consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all testimony 27 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. B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission hereby RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Negative Declaration, 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 "ND," according to Exhibits "NOI" dated April 13,2006, and "PIP dated April 3, 2006, attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the following findings: Findings; 1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find: a. it has reviewed, analyzed, and considered the Negative Declaration for PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS - ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07, analyzing the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and any comments thereon prior to RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and b. the Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and c. it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning .Commission of the City of Carlsbad; and d. based on the EIA Part II and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence the project will have a significant effect on the environment. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 6th day of December, 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES:Chairperson Montgomery, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez, Heineman, Segall, and Whitton NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa MARTELL B. MONTGOMERYThairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION DONNEU Assistant Planning Director PCRESONO. 6140 -2- City of Carlsbad Planning Department CASE NAME: CASE NO: PROJECT LOCATION: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION Planned Development Regulation Amendments ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 Citvwide PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment consists of amending standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum residential densities of each General Plan land use designation. The motivations for this amendment are as follows: Consistent with recently adopted State law, the Land Use Element of the General Plan was amended in 2005 to include a new policy requiring all residential projects to achieve the minimum density of the underlying General Plan land use designation. Toward that end, the City undertook a comprehensive assessment of the applicable residential development standards of the Zoning Ordinance for the purpose of identifying those standards which could be amended in order for residential projects to achieve the minimum density of each General Plan residential land use designation while still ensuring the achievement of high quality residential project design. The last time the Planned Development (PD) Ordinance was comprehensively amended was in 2001. This proposed Zone Code Amendment addresses those development and design standards of the PD Ordinance, which after 5 years of implementation, were determined by staff to require further refinement due to ambiguities. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the project described above 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, the initial study (EIA Part 2) did not identify any potentially significant impacts on the environment. Therefore, a Negative Declaration will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission and City Council. A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the proposed Negative Declaration are on file in the Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Department within 30 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission and City Council. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please call Chris DeCerbo in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4611. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD PUBLISH DATE April 13. 2006 through May 14. 2006 April 13.2006 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - INITIAL STUDY (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT) CASE NO: ZCA Q5-02/LCPA 05-07 DATE: April 3.2006 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City of Carlsbad - 1635 Faraday Avenue. Carlsbad. CA 92008 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Chris DeCerbo. Principal Planner - (760) 602- 4611 4. PROJECT LOCATION: Not site-specific 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: Same as Lead Agency, above 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: N/A - not site-specific 7. ZONING: N/A - not site-specific 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): ): California Coastal Commission (Local Coastal Program Amendment) 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: The proposed Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment consists of amending standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45). Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum residential densities of each General Plan land use designation. The motivations for this amendment are as follows: i. Consistent with recently adopted State law, the Land Use Element of the General Plan was amended in 2005 to include a new policy requiring all residential projects to achieve the minimum density of the underlying General Plan land use designation. Toward that end; the City undertook a comprehensive assessment of the applicable residential development standards of the Zoning Ordinance for the purpose of identifying those standards which could be amended in order for residential projects to achieve the minimum density of each General Plan residential land use designation while still ensuring the achievement of high quality residential project design. Rev. 02/22/06 47 ii. The last time the Planned Development (PD) Ordinance was comprehensively amended was in 2001. This proposed Zone Code Amendment addresses those development and design standards of the PD Ordinance, which after 5 years of implementation, were determined by staff to require further refinement due to ambiguities. The project applies to regulations that are applicable to properties citywide. There is no specific project site with a specific environmental setting or surrounding land uses. Rev. 02/22/06 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. I I Aesthetics r ] Agricultural Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources I | Geology/Soils Hazards/Hazardous Materials Hydrology/Water Quality Land Use and Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Mandatory Findings of Significance I I Transportation/Circulation I I Utilities & Service Systems Rev. 02/22/06 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 MITIGATED 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 "potentially significant impact(s)" on the environment, but at least one potentially significant impact 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. A Negative Declaration 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 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required. Planner Signature Date Planning Director's Signature Date Rev. 02/22/06 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) 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 significantly adverse, 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 significantly adverse. • Based on an "EIA-Initial Study", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the environment, but all potentially significant adverse 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. • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant adverse 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 adverse effect on the environment. • If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse 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. Rev. 02/22/06 • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse 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 adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; or (4) through the EIA-Initial Study 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 after each related set of questions. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined significant. Rev. 02/22/06 AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new "source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D D No Impact - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum residential densities of each General Plan land use designation does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that could: a) adversely effect a scenic vista; b) substantially damage scenic resources; c) degrade the visual character of any site; or d) create substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site- specific basis. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES - (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Mode 1-1997 prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would the project: a) Convert Prune Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact Rev. 02/22/06 c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? No Impact - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that could: a) result in the conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use; b) conflict with any existing zoning for agricultural uses or a Williamson Act contract; or c) result in changes to the existing city environment that would cause the conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. III. AIR QUALITY - (Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations.) Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is hi non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D n Rev. 02/22/06 No Impact (a) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that could conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional air quality plan. All properties within the city are located in the San Diego Air Basin, which is a federal and state non-attainment area for ozone (O3), and a state non-attainment area for particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PMi0). The periodic violations of national Ambient Ah- Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Ah- Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). A plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state- mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non-attainment areas having serious ozone problems and used to create the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through 10th in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996. The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each city's and the County's general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact. Section 15125(B) of the State of California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient ah- quality standards. The California Aii Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms with the RAQS, which include the following: • Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? • Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? The project area (citywide) is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. As previously mentioned, the proposed amendments involve text amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, and do not include a proposal for physical development of any property. Furthermore, the project does not propose any change that would conflict with or obstruct implementation of an air quality plan. Future development projects that are subject to the amended standards will be reviewed for consistency with the growth assumptions of the City's General Plan and the RAQS. Therefore, the project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan. Rev. 02/22/06 ,* I I No Impact (b) - The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is at Camp Pendleton. Data available for this monitoring site from 2000 through December 2004, indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (a total of 10 days during the 5-year period). No other violations of any air quality standards have been recorded during the 5-year time period. The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not involve physical development of any site nor any changes to air quality planning/standards. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis No Impact (c) - The air basin is currently in a state non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine particulates. The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that could result in a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (d) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in exposing sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (e) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in an activity that could create objectionable odors. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D 10 Rev. 02/22/06 D D c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact (a, b, c & d) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in an adverse effect on any sensitive habitat or species, or interference with any native or migratory wildlife corridor or native wildlife nursery site. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis No Impact (e & f) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in a conflict with local policies and ordinances that protect biological resources or the provisions of any habitat conservation plan. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site- specific basis. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi- cance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique pale ontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated D D D Less Than Significant No Impact Impact n m Rev. 02/22/06 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact (a, b, c & d) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in a disturbance of any human remains or an adverse impact to any historical, archeological, or paleontological resource. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site- specific basis, and will be subject to the City's Cultural Resource Guidelines. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D n EI n 12 Rev. 02/22/06 No Impact (a) - There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zones within the City of Carlsbad and there is no other evidence of active of potentially active faults within the City. However, there are several active faults throughout Southern California, and these potential earthquakes could affect Carlsbad. Landslides are also a potential threat in parts of the City. All development proposals in Carlsbad are subject to requirements such as the Uniform Building Code earthquake construction standards and soil remediation that when necessary ensure potential adverse effects are not significant. The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would expose people or structures to potential adverse effects from a known earthquake fault, ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure or landslides. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (b) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in substantial soil erosion on any site. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA and the City's Engineering standards on a site-specific basis. No Impact (c, d & e) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in impacts to unstable or expansive soil conditions. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA and the City's engineering standards on a site-specific basis. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or environment? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact n n 13 Rev. 02/22/06 n n n e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? No Impact (a, b, c & d) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in hazards associated with exposure to hazardous materials. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (e & 0 ~ Thg amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in exposing people to hazards associated with an airport. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (g & h) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would interfere with the implementation of an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan, or result in exposing people to risk from wildland fires. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 14 Rev. 02/22/06 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Impacts to groundwater quality? (See Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? h) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (See Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) k) Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. (See Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) Potentially Significant Impact D Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D D n D 15 Rev. 02/22/06 1) Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into receiving surface waters or other alteration of receiving surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? (See Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) m) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following construction? (See Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) n) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303 (d) list? D D D (See Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) o) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater I I receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? (See Discussion of Environmental Evaluation) No Impact (a, b, c, d, e & f ) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would conflict with any water quality standards, impact groundwater supplies/quality, alter any drainage pattern, impact the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, or result in the degradation of water quality. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (g, h, i, j & k) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in placing housing or any structures within a 100- year flood hazard area, or expose people or structures to flooding or inundation by seiche, tsunami or mudflow. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (1, m, n & o ) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in increased erosion or pollutant discharges into any surface waters, a change to receiving water quality, or an exceedance of receiving water quality objectives. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. 16 Rev. 02/22/06 51* IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact IXI No Impact (a) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in the division of an established community. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (b) — The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (c) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the proj ect: Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) b) 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? Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? D D 17 Rev. 02/22/06 57o No Impact (a & b) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in the loss of availability of a mineral resource. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. XL NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D n n n No Impact (a, b, c & d) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in exposing people to excessive noise levels or groundbourne vibrations, or increase noise levels. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (e & 1) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in exposing people to excessive noise levels associated with an airport. In addition, the Comprehensive Land Use Plan for McClellan-Palomar Airport, will ensure that future residential development will not be exposed to excessive noise levels generated by the airport. Also, any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. 18 Rev. 02/22/06 Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D D El XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact (a, b, & c) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and therefore will not directly induce any growth. In addition, any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. Potentially Significant Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, a need for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? ii) Police protection? iii) Schools? iv) Parks? v) Other public facilities? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact D 19 Rev. 02/22/06 No Impact (a) — The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in adverse impacts to the maintenance of acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any public service (fire & police protection, schools, parks and other public facilities). Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. Less Than Significant No Impact Impact XIV. RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact (a & b) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site. As part of the City's Growth Management Program, a performance standard for parks was adopted. Any future residential development subject to the amended regulations will be required to comply with the performance standards of the Growth Management Program, which will ensure that future residential development will not adversely impact any park facilities. Also, any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact 20 Rev. 02/22/06 c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in insufficient parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turn- outs, bicycle racks)? n n Dn 21 Rev. 02/22/06 No Impact (a) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site. A performance standard for traffic is part of the City's Growth Management Program. Future development that is subject to the amended standards will be required to comply with this performance standard, which ensures future development will not exceed the traffic load and capacity of the city's street system. In addition, future development will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (b) - SANDAG acting as the County Congestion Management Agency has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The Existing and Buildout average daily traffic (ADT) and Existing LOS on these designated roads and highways in Carlsbad is: Existing ADT* LOS Buildout ADT* Rancho Santa Fe Road 17-35 "A-D" 35-56 El Camino Real 27-49 "A-C" 33-62 Palomar Airport Road 10-57 "A-D" 30-73 SR78 124-142 "F" 156-180 1-5 199-216 "D" 260-272 *The numbers are in thousands of daily trips. The Congestion Management Program's (CMP) acceptable Level of Service (LOS) standard is "E", or LOS "F" if that was the LOS in the 1990 base year (e.g., SR 78 in Carlsbad was LOS "F" in 1990). Accordingly, all designated roads and highways are currently operating at or better than the acceptable standard LOS. Note that the buildout ADT projections are based on the full implementation of the region's general and community plans. Achievement of the CMP acceptable Level of Service (LOS) "E" standard assumes implementation of the adopted CMP strategies. Based on the design capacity(ies) of the designated roads and highways and implementation of the CMP strategies, they will function at acceptable level(s) of service in the short-term and at buildout. This project proposes no physical development of a property. Further, it does not propose to change or add a standard that would affect levels of service as established by the CMP. Any future residential development subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA and the CMP on a site-specific basis. No Impact (c) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in a change in air traffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks associated with air traffic patterns. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (d) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would cause a future project to increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible use. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (e, f & g) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would result in inadequate emergency access or parking capacity nor affect any regulation that would conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation. Any future development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. 22 Rev. 02/22/06 XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact D n EI 23 Rev. 02/22/06 No Impact (a) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would cause future development to exceed any wastewater treatment requirements. Any fiiture development proposal that is subject to the amended standards will be subject to the requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and further environmental review pursuant to CEQA, on a site-specific basis. No Impact (b, c, d & e) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would increase the need for, or conflict with the current growth projections for water facilities, wastewater treatment or drainage facilities. All public facilities, including water facilities, wastewater treatment facilities and drainage facilities, have been planned and designed to accommodate the growth projections for the City at build-out. Any future residential development subject to the amended standards will be subject to the City's Growth Management Program, and further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (f & g) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would conflict with any regulations related to solid waste, or impact the ability to accommodate solid waste disposal needs within the city. Any future residential development subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. Less Than Significant No Impact Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated 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? ("Cumula- tively 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? n n 24 Rev. 02/22/06 No Impact (a) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would 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. Any future residential development subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (b) - San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projects regional growth for the greater San Diego area, and local general plan land use policies are incorporated into SANDAG projections. Based upon those projections, region-wide standards, including storm water quality control, air quality standards, habitat conservation, congestion management standards, etc, are established to reduce the cumulative impacts of development in the region. All of the City's development standards and regulations are consistent with the region- wide standards. The City's standards and regulations, including grading standards, water quality and drainage standards, traffic standards, habitat and cultural resource protection regulations, and public facility standards, ensure that development within the City will not result in a significant cumulatively considerable impact. There are two regional issues that development within the City of Carlsbad has the potential to have a cumulatively considerable impact on. Those issues are air quality and regional circulation. Development of future residential projects subject to the amended standards may represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. However, emissions associated with a future residential development would be minimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with a residential development, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not a residential development is implemented. With regard to circulation, the County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The CMA has determined, based on the City's growth projections in the General Plan, that these designated roadways will function at acceptable levels of service in the short-term and at build-out. The proposed amendments will not affect any policies or standards that would conflict with City or region-wide standards. Also, the proposed amendments do not include a proposal for physical development of any site; therefore, the project will not result in an individually or cumulatively considerable environmental impact. Any future residential development subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. No Impact (c) - The amendment to standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance does not include a proposal for physical development of any site, and does not propose or affect any regulation that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Any future residential development subject to the amended standards will be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA on a site-specific basis. XVIII. 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)(D). 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. 25 Rev. 02/22/06 c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. 26 Rev. 02/22/06 EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad Planning Department located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01). City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March 1994. 2. Carlsbad General Plan. September 6, 1994. 3. Carlsbad Municipal Code. Title 21. Zoning 4. Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Zones 5. City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analysis and Mapping Study. November 1992. 27 Rev. 02/22/06 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION 320 WEST 4™ STREET, SUITE 500 LOS ANGELES. CA 90013 May 24, 2006 Chris DeCerbo City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr. DeCerbo: Re: SCH# 2006041086; Planned Development Regulation Amendment As the state agency responsible for rail safety within California, we recommend that any future development projects planned adjacent to or near the North County Transit District right-of-way be planned with the safety of the rail corridor in mind. New developments may increase traffic volumes not only on streets and at intersections, but also at at-grade highway-rail crossings. This includes considering pedestrian circulation patterns/destinations with respect to railroad right-of- way. Safety factors to consider include, but are not limited to, the planning for grade separations for major thoroughfares, improvements to existing at-grade highway-rail crossings due to increase in traffic volumes and appropriate fencing to limit the access of trespassers onto the railroad right-of- way. The above-mentioned safety improvements should be considered when approval is sought for the new development. Working with Commission staff early in the conceptual design phase will help improve the safety to motorists and pedestrians in the City. Please advise us on the status of the project. If you have any questions in this matter, please contact me at (213) 576-7078 or at rxm@cpuc.ca.gov. Rosa Utilities Engineer Rail Crossings Engineering Section Consumer Protection & Safety Division C: Richard Walker, NCTD City of Carlsbad Planning Department June 23, 2006 Rosa Munoz, PE Public Utilities Commission 320 West 4th Street, Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90013 RE: SCH# 2006041086: Negative Declaration for Planned Development Regulation Amendments; ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 Dear Ms. Munoz: In response to your comment letter of May 24, 2006, on the above referenced draft Negative Declaration, please consider the following comment: The "project" consists of text-only amendments to the standards of the Planned Development (21.45), Parking (21.44), and Beach Area Overlay Zone (21.82) Chapters of the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance. The "project" applies to standards that are applicable to properties citywide and there is no specific project site or development proposal included as a part of this "project". As the "project" consists of text-only amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance, no new development would be authorized by the approval of the amendments and any future new development proposal utilizing the new development standards would be subject to further environmental review pursuant to CEQA and further project review pursuant to the Carlsbad Municipal Code on a site- specific basis. The specific issues raised in your letter, including traffic volumes and safety factors, would be appropriately analyzed at the time approval is sought for a site- specific development proposal. Should you have any questions regarding this response to your comment letter on the draft Negative Declaration for the Planned Development Regulation Amendments, please do not hesitate to contact me at (760) 602-4606. Sincerely, GARY T. BARBERIO Principal Planner GTB:bd 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6141 2 3 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING 4 APPROVAL OF A ZONE CODE AMENDMENT TO 5 (1) AMEND STANDARDS OF THE PLANNED 6 DEVELOPMENT, PARKING AND BEACH AREA OVERLAY ZONE CHAPTERS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO 7 FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH QUALITY 8 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS CONSISTENT WITH THE MINIMUM DENSITY AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT CONTROL POINT OF THE UNDERLYING GENERAL PLAN 10 LAND USE DESIGNATION, AND (2) AMEND THE 11 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE TO CLARIFY AMBIGUITIES AND CORRECT INCONSISTENCIES. 12 CASE NAME: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION 13 AMENDMENTS 14 CASE NO.: ZCA 05-02 15 WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 21.52.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal 16 Code, the City of Carlsbad has prepared an amendment to Title 21 of the Municipal Code 18 relating to standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44), and 19 2Q Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance; and 21 WHEREAS, the proposed amendment is set forth in the draft City Council 22 Ordinance, Exhibit "X," dated December 6, 2006, and attached hereto PLANNED 24 DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS - ZCA 05-02; and 25 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 18th day of October 2006, and26 27 the 6th day of December, 2006, hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to 28 consider said request; and WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Zone Code Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission as follows: A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 2 B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning 3 Commission hereby RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS - ZCA 05-02, based on the following findings: 5 /- Findings: The proposed Zone Code Amendment, ZCA 05-02, is consistent with the General Plan in 8 that it provides the development standards flexibility necessary to (a) accommodate Q • higher-density clustered development projects that result from density transfers where the property owner is preserving open space consistent with the City's 10 Habitat Management Plan, (b) achieve minimum General Plan densities, (c) achieve I the City's Growth Management Control Point densities, and (d) enable the achievement of the City's RHNA for lower- and moderate-income housing. 13 2. The proposed Zone Code Amendment, ZCA 05-02, reflects sound principles of good planning in that it (a) ensures internal consistency with the procedures and standards of the rest of the existing Zoning Ordinance that is not proposed for amendment, 5 and (b) implements the policies and programs of the General Plan. 16 17 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, held on the 6th day of December, 2006, by the 19 following vote, to wit: 21 AYES: Chairperson Montgomery, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez, 22 Heineman, Segall, and Whitton 23 NOES: 24 25 ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa 26 27 28 MARTELL B. MONTGOMERH^hairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION DON NEU Assistant Planning Director PCRESONO. 6141 -2- 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6142 2 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE 3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE IMPLEMENTING 4 ORDINANCE OF THE CARLSBAD LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (TITLE 21 - ZONING) TO (1) AMEND STANDARDS OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, 6 PARKING AND BEACH AREA OVERLAY ZONE CHAPTERS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO FACILITATE THE 7 DEVELOPMENT OF HIGH QUALITY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS CONSISTENT WITH THE MINIMUM DENSITY 8 AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT CONTROL POINT OF THE o UNDERLYING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION, AND (2) AMEND THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 10 ORDINANCE TO CLARIFY AMBIGUITIES AND CORRECT INCONSISTENCIES. 11 CASE NAME: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS 12 CASE NO: LCPA 05-07 13 WHEREAS, California State law requires that the Local Coastal Program, 14 General Plan, and Zoning designations for properties in the Coastal Zone be in conformance; and jg WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad, "Applicant," has filed a verified application 17 for an amendment to the Local Coastal Program implementing ordinance; and 18 WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Local Coastal 19 Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit "X" dated December 6, 2006, attached to Planning 20 Commission Resolution No. 6141 and incorporated herein by reference, as provided in Public 21 Resources Code Section 30574 and Article 15 of Subchapter 8, Chapter 2, Division 5.5 of 22 „ Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations of the California Coastal Commission 24 Administrative Regulations; and 25 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on the 18th day of October, 2006, 9fiZD and the 6th day of December, 2006, hold duly noticed public hearings as prescribed by law to 27 consider said request; and 28 WHEREAS, at said public hearings, upon hearing and considering all testimony 2 and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors 3 relating to the Local Coastal Program Amendment; and 4 WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six-week public review period 5 for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program. 7 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning o Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows: 9 A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct. 10 B) At the end of the State-mandated six-week review period, starting on June 9, 2006, and ending on July 22, 2006, staff shall present to the City Council a summary of the comments received. 13 C) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 14 REGULATION AMENDMENTS - LCPA 05-07, based on the following findings, and subject to the following conditions: Findings; 17 1. That the proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment meets the requirements of, and is in conformity with, the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and all applicable policies 18 of the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program, in that no development or construction is proposed with this amendment and all future residential development projects located in the coastal zone that are processed pursuant to these revised standards would be subject to discretionary review and a Coastal Development Permit to ensure consistency with Local Coastal Program policies. 21 2. That the proposed amendment to the implementing ordinances of the Carlsbad Local 22 Coastal Program is required to bring it into consistency with the City's Zoning Ordinance. 23 24 25 26 27 28 PCRESONO. 6142 -2- *? 1 2 3 4 5J 6 1 8 9 10 11 1?i ^ 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting to Commission of the City of Carlsbad, held on the 6th day of December, 2006, by vote, to wit: AYES: Chairperson Montgomery, Commissioners Baker, Heineman, Segall, and Whitton NOES: ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa ABSTAIN: .* /t-TS^"y*8 *^*f ^)» MARTELL B. MONTGOMER£^hairperson CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION ATTEST: ^2oy\ X €6f DON NEU Assistant Planning Director PCRESONO. 6142 -3- the Planning the following Dominguez, 7V The City of Carlsbad Planning Department EXHIBIT 4 A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No. P.C. AGENDA OF: December 6, 2006 Application complete date: N/A Project Planner: Gary Barberio, Chris DeCerbo, and Jennifer Jesser Project Engineer: N/A SUBJECT: ZCA 05-Q2/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS - A request for a recommendation to adopt a Negative Declaration, and recommendation of approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to: (1) amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation, and; (2) amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. I.RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 6140 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION of a Negative Declaration and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6141 and 6142 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of ZCA 05- 02 and LCPA 05-07 based on the findings contained therein. II.BACKGROUND This project was considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing on October 18, 2006. After discussion of the project, the Commission voted to continue the item to the December 6, 2006 hearing. At the October 18, 2006 hearing, the Planning Commission directed staff to meet with Scott Molloy from the Building Industry Association (BIA) to address questions and concerns expressed by the BIA. The Planning Commission also directed staff to present the proposed amendments to the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce. Since the October 18th Planning Commission hearing, staff met with Scott Molloy from the BIA on October 24, 2006 and discussed the BIA's comments on the proposed amendments. On November 2, 2006, staff gave a presentation to the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce (Carlsbad Business Environment Committee) to explain the proposed amendments and solicit the Chamber's input. ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS December 6, 2006 Page 2 IV. ANALYSIS A. SUMMARY. As a result of the discussions with the BIA, the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce, and further analysis of the Planned Development standards, staff has modified the proposed amendments. The modifications are described below (for a more detailed description of the modifications, see Attachment 6 of this report): TABLE A SUMMARY OF MODIFICATIONS 1 Clarify the Civil Code Section number that defines "condominium project". (See row 7 of the Modified Analysis table - Attachment 6). Modify the arterial setback requirements. (See rows 19a, 19b, and 20 of the Modified Analysis table - Attachment 6). , No longer require community recreation space to be "centrally" located. (See row 41 of the Modified Analysis table - Attachment 6). Modify the RV storage requirements. (See rows 45a and 45b of the Modified Analysis table - Attachment 6). Delete the requirements to locate garages behind the front house facade. (See row 71 of the Modified Analysis table - Attachment 6). Note: this modification was previously proposed and described on the Errata Sheet, dated October 18, 2006, which was distributed to the Planning Commission at the October 18, 2006 Planning Commission hearing. This report replaces the Errata Sheet. , Modify the minimum street setback for multiple-family condominium projects. (See row 78 of the Modified Analysis table - Attachment 6). 7 Modify the private recreation space standard for multiple-family condominium projects. (See row 91 of the Modified Analysis table - Attachment 6). B. COMMENTS FROM CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. As mentioned above, staff met with the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce on November 2, 2006. The Chamber submitted a letter (Attachment 4) to the Planning Commission dated November 22, 2006, which states that the Chamber supports the proposed amendments. C. COMMENTS FROM BIA. During staffs meeting with Scott Molloy on October 24, 2006, Mr. Molloy and staff discussed the BIA's comments on the proposed amendments that were outlined in the BIA's letter to the Planning Commission, dated October 18, 2006. Staff was able to resolve the majority of the BIA's concerns. After the October 24th meeting, the BIA submitted a revised letter (Attachment 5), dated November 9, 2006, outlining their remaining concerns, which are summarized below: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS December 6, 2006 Page 3 TABLE B SUMMARY OF BIA'S COMMENTS (from their letter dated November 9, 2006) BIA's Comments Staff Response Eliminate the RV storage requirement for all projects with the exception of Master Planned communities. Staff is recommending that RV storage only be required for projects of 100 units or more, and that RV storage not be required within the RMH and RH land use designations (see rows 45a and 45b of Attachment 6). While staff is not recommending that the requirement be eliminated completely, the proposed RV storage requirement would be limited to projects that have more land area to accommodate units and additional amenities (like RV storage). Eliminate the recreation area parking requirement. Staff does not agree that this standard should be eliminated. Staff has not experienced any problems in implementing this standard and achieving required densities. The current PD standard for recreation area parking is 1 parking space for every 15 units located more than 1000 feet from a community recreation area. This standard applies primarily to larger projects (due to the 1000 foot distance criteria), and results in few additional parking spaces, which can be located as on- street parking. Considering the minimal number of spaces this standard would require of a project, and other proposed modifications to parking standards (i.e. reduction and flexibility in locating required visitor parking), the recreation area parking requirement will not impact a projects ability to achieve required densities. Permit the use of tandem parking for all multi- family projects subject to conditions that prevent the spaces from being used for uses other than parking (such as storage). As part of the October 18, 2006, Planning Commission staff report, staff is recommending that tandem garages be permitted in multiple-family projects within the RH land use, provided only 25% of the units in the project have tandem garages. To achieve required densities, staff does not agree that more than 25% of the units need to be allowed to have tandem garages, or that tandem garages need to be allowed within any designation other than RH (highest density land use designation). Staff is recommending other modifications to parking standards that will help to alleviate the existing constraints that parking standards have on achieving densities. For multi-family projects, reduce the proposed minimum setback from public and private streets from 15 feet to 12 feet. After further analysis of the minimum street setback required for multiple-family dwellings, staff is recommending that the existing standard be changed from an average of 15 feet to a minimum of 10 feet. See row 78 of Attachment 6 for further analysis. ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS December 6, 2006 Page 4 All of the proposed changes described in this report are reflected in the Draft Ordinance (attached to Planning Commission Resolution No. 6141). In addition, the strike-out and underline version of the amendments has been modified to reflect the most recent changes. The attached modified analysis table (Attachment 6) lists only those standards that have been modified since the October 18, 2006 Planning Commission hearing. For a complete description and analysis of all proposed amendments (except those discussed in this report), see the October 18, 2006 Staff Report to the Planning Commission. Note: the Errata Sheet, dated October 18, 2006, has been incorporated into this report and is no longer necessary. ATTACHMENTS; 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6140 (Neg. Dec.) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6141 (ZCA) 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6142 (LCPA) 4. Letter from the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce, dated November 22, 2006 5. Letter from the BIA, dated November 9, 2006 6. Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA 03-02) Modified Analysis 7. Exhibit "Yl" - "Y3" - Strike-out and underline version of the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments 8. Report to the Planning Commission, dated October 18, 2006, with Attachment 4 CARLSBAD V^> CHAMBER OF COMMERCE November 22, 2006 Marty Montgomery, Chairman Carlsbad Planning Commission 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 Re: Planned Development Ordinance Amendments Dear Chairman Montgomery, On behalf of the Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce and its over 1,600 members, I am writing you to express our support of the proposed Planned Development (PD) Ordinance amendments. On November 2, Mr. Gary Barberio and Mr. Chris DeCerbo of the City of Carlsbad Planned Department presented the proposed changes to the PD ordinance to our Carlsbad Business Environment Committee (CBEC), which handles economic development issues for the Chamber. Several of our CBEC members had the opportunity to reviewed the proposed changes before the November 2 meeting and, discussed the proposed changes with city staff and provided input. Based on the presentation and discussion amongst CBEC members, the Chamber is supportive of the amendments as proposed by city staff. The planning departments staffs effort to simplify the ordinance has not, in our opinion, reduced the quality we all expect in Carlsbad. Again, we offer our support and urge you to adopt the amendments as proposed staff. Sincerely, Ted Owen President & CEO 9201 Spectrum Center Blvd., Suite 110 San Diego, CA 9212 3-1407 P 858.450.1221 F 858.552.1445 www.biasandiego.org PRESIDENT Horace Hogan II Brehm Communities VICE PRESIDENT Scott Brusseau Newport National Corp. TREASURER / SECRETARY Paul Barnes Shea Homes November 9,2006 Mr. Gary T. Barberio Principal Planner City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Amendments to Planned Development, Parking & Beach Overlay Zone Regulations Dear Gary, Chris and Jennifer: IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT Thank you for meeting with me on October 24th to discuss the r f _, BIA comments and recommendations on the update of city'sScot Sandstrom r J Richmond American Homes of California Planned Development Regulations. We support the city's efforts to update their regulations and we commend the city for CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER their proactive approach as the city transitions to more infill and Paul A. Tryon multi-family development. AFFILIATES California Building Industry Association National Association of Home Builders National Association of Industrial and Office Properties At our meeting we reached resolution on many of our recommendations. Following are a few remaining recommendations where we request further consideration. Parking The biggest constraint multifamily and infill development faces is parking. To that end, we encourage a more balanced approach to parking regulations that places more emphasis on housing and less on cars. We believe the proposed amendments have taken a significant step in that direction and we support the proposed amendments to the visitor and resident parking requirements. We offer three considerations for further reducing the burden that parking requirements place on projects: > Eliminate the RV Storage Parking Requirement for all projects with exception of Master Planned Communities. RV storage is a luxury amenity that benefits very few residents yet all of the residents are required to finance the maintenance of the parking area (through HOA dues). The RV storage area also conflicts with the harmony of the project's architectural design and layout. BUILDING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY > Eliminate the Recreation Area Parking requirement for projects under 100 units. > Permit the use of tandem parking for all multifamily projects subject to conditions that prevent the spaces from being used for uses other than parking (such as storage). Setbacks Another significant constraint to infill development is setbacks. We recognize the concerns with using average setbacks. In situations where the city is proposing to use minimum setbacks in lieu of averages, we recommend a minimum setback that is less than the old average. To that end, we recommend reducing the proposed minimum setback from public and private streets from 15 feet to 12 feet. Thank you for this opportunity to provide recommendations on the draft Planned Development regulations. We look forward to the implementation of these regulations as the city transitions into its next phase of growth. Very truly yours, Scott C. Public Pddic.y'Advocate CD "cCD E o WO0 iE c~ CD ^cfo co I- 0)CD. .a CD ™CD -^ E| .1 ^.(/) CDW Eo O ^O) CD C ^'c ~cCO oo CM 0 1*.o ino a.o e^ »%O CO ENT (ZCD ANAHI Q O O UJZoN CD .22S-g »tCD S co8*heo(/)si•Mj/j O C O) E ~•a cc co co -a 2 e gQ. CD *" ®l S£-5| CD i"</5 E «2 co w T <u"§>8i(5 "a CDx: w "^o '55 § -P. "co TD" E >> _>.(/) Si c 1^ro •- ^j Hi O "" w=5 S a,>H (0 D) CD •- m K .£ "O Modified Rows from Table Andments to Planned Development (PD) Chaptero E Discussion/Analysis4-* CO E•oc 0) E 0> 0Q.O£ _c Consistent with the proposal discussed in row 1, above. Also, the Civil Code sections referred too •5i2(*i E 'c. o £^O_o "o 0 'E i+_ CD CD *^'"O O the definition (sections 1350 - 1376) are beinq chanqed to specifically refer to the Civil Codesection that defines "condominium project" (section 1351).o> o ^-ic O i— o Ou 5 cf* o '> 'E> 3J2 01 QJ ._ •T-» == W > m ~O •0 CD — "o c -2— "CD— T3 (0 o £ T3 ^tn •£!O CJCD CO CO CC - CO The PD regulations currently prohibit dwellings and accessory structures from being locatedwithin reguired arterial setbacks. 50% of the setback (closest to the street) is required to belandscaped and commonly owned/maintained. This has resulted in situations where half of Ucre arterial setback (the half not reguired to be landscaped) is located within the boundaries of aresidential lot, and is often a homeowner's backyard. In such situations, a homeowner isrestricted from constructing any accessory structures within their backyard. This is not onlyundesirable situation for the homeowner; it is also difficult for the City to regulate (as manyb. CUI accessory structures do not require any permit or approval from the City).1 <A£^3 "o3 4-«(A £o<A(A<1>UUre '^(Aa> £ Q)oco 0Z 0re•Qo(A is 0 re •oo>k. '3o £o> c JC+JZ a ^3reuo The primary purpose of the arterial setback (which is qreater than standard setbacks) is to buj^5 homes from traffic noise and enhance the street scene. Allowing accessory structures within•o o « ou £ — "O ^^ £u •—-re 35 o 4-> OO fc- .2 c Q) ..£. ^ ^re $ O — : £ •- ° t2= re *•* Q) XI £ 2 Q IAo> oU (A <5 — ^0)Qre (A cre ^™ >• "5 reo> T- m arterial setback will not increase noise impacts to dwellings. Accessory structures locatedwithin a homeowner's backyard would be shielded from view by walls along propertyboundaries, and would not degrade the streetscene. Allowing accessory structures within th<arterial setback will allow homeowner's to construct accessory structures in their yards, as ispermitted on other PD residential lots not located adjacent to an arterial.> ^i C Implementing the current standard has been difficult due to restrictions on locating accessonstructures within the arterial setback (as discussed above). Also, the reguirement for an"average" of 50% of the setback to be landscaped is difficult to calculate and implement.Staff originally proposed to require 100% of the arterial setback to be landscaped and commo0>owned/maintained. However, after further analysis and discussions with Scott Mollov from thBIA, staff determined that this would be more restrictive than currently reguired, and that thestandard could be improved without the need to increase the amount of reguired landscapingot: C' c:"i --*i TJO ': CJC)~c:c: onqo T!r f C .£ -4- oc f 5 cuaxp " o 5o > -.£! c # w o £U> •- ~ C) O„. COVJ i k. '[?«. o o;• cn or- ~~0 0 r- Z •b' Qreu(A c_re o>S3 jcore 15(A Is CO•e£: reC ) ~w r *: C)C) £!.±- Ci1 C.) C)o i)-C) T! 11 0) ^ Q ^o O .5 •£ 0 4-» "o c 0'•£oQ 0)£ re £ ^«^- re u 0) 2 <*-re V£** _(A T3Oare0(A•acre~ ™a> 4-* T3£•™.3 £ ureJ3 "S(A V(A ^Q •oQ) "re _O ^eo 4,^ V(A O•cre o£ "o ~Q QX Oin The difficulties in implementing the current standard can be resolved by: 1) reguiring that half(not an "average" of 50%) of the arterial setback located closest to the arterial be landscaped.and 2) allowing accessory structures within the arterial setback, as discussed above.—.S2"Ei 0)tre Q)£ 2 I1 CO CO _l< < QUJ U_ Q O2 po 10o CMO ino ON UJ DZUJ UJo Q O ^ Z CN zi ^O roN Q-Modified Rows from Table A, Continuedmdments to Planned Development (PD) ChapterO)E<Discussion/Analysis^ o>E o> Q>WOQ. 8 Q. 0 C0 0 Currently, walls are not permitted within the arterial setback landscape buffer area. However, in thecase of residential projects adjacent to a noisy arterial, it may be necessary to construct a noiseattenuation wall within the setback area if a noise study indicates such, and the wall cannot be locatedoutside the setback due to topography. Therefore, staff is recommending that noise attenuation walls 1allowed within the landscaped portion of the arterial setback (subject to a noise studv recommendati<-C o —and topographic limitations).Also, to provide some flexibility to residential property owners, staff recommends that walls/fences nohiqher than 42-inches be allowed within the landscaped portion of the arterial setback area. Althouqthe landscaped portion of the arterial setback is required to be commonlv owned/maintained, it canfunction/appear as yard space for the residences. For example, a condominium project with attached <detached units facing an arterial street would be setback the required distance, but the required arteria£_£• ~ ^ §-'•£ o 2>-c ro— Ja 05 0 ro. = — o 'ro ro -5 -JB .c d^ (Q *; P" d) 'T Q.£ S ( §- ^ •1 o j; o •- "•- O Q .2* '</> -a c ?'> 0 0 2 g ro to ro ' -n "O >N,-S c 0 < .2 £ » o CM landscape setback area would function and appear as the project's front yard. Allowing a 42-inch wallwithin the setback area would allow residents to delineate and protect their yard space from pedestriantraffic, and is consistent with the fencing provisions allowed on all other non-PD residential properties.Note: As a result of the modifications discussed in row 19b, above, this standard (and thediscussion in this row) has been further modified to specify that noise attenuation walls (incertain circumstances), and walls no hiqher than 42-inches would be allowed within the"landscaped portion" of the arterial setback. The current standard and the modified proposedstandard discussed in row 19b does not restrict the placement of walls within the portion of thearterial setback not required to be landscaped (the half of the setback located farthest from the.2 0>•cra D ^2 5j 5 -2 5 o> 8^5 •*_ o - TO 1> -Q 5 15_ to3l fl)55= <L> TJ "O = *2 ">l=i 3 .C i5i 158_ 0 g2 .2 *. o The PD standards currently require that community recreation space be centrally located, but does notp|*^rtfw CV^ntnl tn whnt ^t^lff rf^r*Ommf^Pr'0 r»l*arifwlrn-i i'lrnt tr"»Q r^^rQ^tirtn nmi \r\ci ^ontr«illu \i-\i-"ntar\ ir»c c £• c 11> c• c^ Ci {: c > 'c !Sn- c 5 .£\ Ii : h- c) .j j t - £ : 0 : C>s •*•11>^I "<•I C5 t: c * "r; i • t 1 \ . t ' -*-1 'i,• -* _ > T ' c. ; £ H^ cil > : o > OJ: V), C 0! C) 0)) 0)) u ! ci |~ R T« flto (/I ~i'« ~nc«j a;! 'S3 c; c: T!C)Ti- c:c:.1! C) C)oo2- £10) 0)£'. c:5 questions raised at the October 18, 2006 Planninq Commission meeting, staff has determinedthat there may be difficulties in locating a recreation space in a "central" location (due totopoqraphv. habitat, etc.). Recreation space does not necessarily need to be "central" in orderV_cr be easily accessible to the units it is intended to serve. Therefore, staff recommends deleting tlQ)ft requirement that community recreation space be "centrally located": and rather, specify that it Idesigned to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the units the space is intended toserve.^'c 1Eoo 5o -d=5 0E ro« 8 5 0 ^ o o 0•i=! ocu ro™s-ro <" 13 C D) O ro "ro— 0) "O u < 2? ^ "* 05-07) MODIFIED ANALYSISModified Rows from Table A, Continuedendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter< EQ- <O _J CNO in0 ON'1— Z UJ Q ZLU ^UJ Oz z Qa: „O „_ 0 ° Z <*>-, 0)^ enO to N CL Discussion/Analysis^cV TJCV E ^f •oVw0Q.2 Q.Currently the PD standards require projects of 25 or more units to provide area for RV storage at 20 square feet per unit. Aproject of 25 units would be required to provide 500 square feet of RV storage area for the entire project, which is slightlymore than a 2 car garage and would likely accommodate only 1 or 2 RVs. This does not seem to provide a practicalbenefit for the entire development, and is space that could be used to assist a project to achieve the required densities ofthe General Plan.Staff recommends applying the RV storage requirement to projects with 100 or more units. A project with 100 units wouldbe required to provide 2,000 square feet of RV storage, which is a large enough area to accommodate a number of RVsthat would be beneficial to the overall project.Also, staff is recommending that the RV storage area requirement not apply to projects located within the RMH and RHland use designations. As discussed in row 38, above, the density of the RH designation is the most difficult to achievewhen current standards are applied. Providing area to store RVs is not a critical standard to ensure high qualitydevelopment in high density, multiple-family projects. Residents of high density projects (like multiple, attached, three stor>condominiums) are not as likely to require RV storage facilities as residents of single-family developments. In the RMHand RH designations the space required for RV storage is area that is better utilized for the construction of dwellings(consistent with the RMH and RH density ranges, and to provide recreation area.At the October 18, 2006 Planning Commission meeting. Planning Commissioner's and the BIA raised questions1 about whether or not the City should continue to reguire RV storage for PD projects. Scott Mollov with the BIA1 recommended that the RV storage reguirement be eliminated because it is a luxury amenity that benefits only afew residents, but is a financial cost to all residents to maintain.Staff has researched the availability of most commercial RV storage sites within Carlsbad and the surroundingcommunities of Oceanside, Encinitas, San Marcos, Vista, and Solana Beach. The commercial storage facilitiesindicated that there is very limited availability of RV storage space within North San Diego County. Staff alsocontacted other jurisdictions and did not find another city that reguires RV storage as part of residential! development. In addition, staff reviewed aerial photos of some of the existing RV storage areas within residentialdevelopments throughout the city. The aerial photos showed that most of the RV storage areas were not beingfully utilized (at the time the photos were taken).Staff agrees with the BIA that RV storage is an amenity that benefits only a portion of the residents in acommunity, but is subsidized by all residents. The primary objective of these proposed amendments to the PDstandards is to modify development standards to improve the ability to implement the required residentialdensities of the General Plan. RV storage is one of the development standards that has caused difficulty for some1 projects (especially smaller infill projects) to meet the reguired density. RV storage is also not a necessity toensure high gualitv development.Staff originally recommended that RV storage not be reguired for projects of fewer than 100 units, nor for projects| in the RH land use designation (for the reasons discussed above). After further consideration, and in response toI the BIA's concerns, staff also recommends that RV storage not be reguired in the RMH designation, as well.Staff recognizes that there is a demand for RV storage, and that it is a nice amenity where it can be provided| without impacting the ability to achieve reguired residential densities. Therefore, as proposed, RV storage wouldI be required for projects of more than 100 units that are located in the RM or lower density residential land useI designations. Projects of more than 100 units within the RM or lower density designations will have more landarea to provide residential units and other amenities (like RV storage)."cQJ 0) 1—'5s 0).c t , j£ TO (/) T> S~ 03 i_ Q}Q. o> O *"" N « <" •> £ 0) Q) - — O) ^ ro Q. OS. «lin CO CO QUJ QO if)o<a.(J CNcpino <O i-z UJ:>Q Zill LLJ U Q O (0 N OL Modified Rows from Table A, Continuedndments to Planned Development (PD) ChaptercuE<Discussion/Analysis4^ C CU E•occuE "UcuCO QLOk.Q. O4-1 ^CUc k..5 When staff met with the Chamber of Commerce on November 2, 2006, one of the Chambeimembers commented that the PD standards should ensure that RV storage areas are des01 t Dre accommodate large RVs. The current PD standards do not regulate the design of RV storw .•_!areas, except for the overall minimum area reguired. The size of RVs varies, therefore, ralthan specify a minimum parking area to accommodate the larger RVs, staff recommendsspecifying that the storage are be designed to accommodate RVs of various sizes.'o •2O ^Eo ^^CO OL COok. '5ocu k. 4^re£ ^^•ok.re ^cre4^COre •o•D< ct o4-»re•n OUIUJCuure o*^tJcuc_g '35cuT3 CU.Q 2 COre£re 52 cuQEreu co'cuEoszk.o•*-o E cu COcu_N CO CO3 Q 'Cre> u4-»CU co*«2 Ql_ 0>+•»«5 recOS2cuQ w"reo_Q J2Iin"*l 1 °o % 5= | 0 (The following analysis replaces the analysis in row 71 of Attachment 4 to the October 18, 2006Commission Staff Report):The current PD standards reguire a minimum 33% or 50% (depending on the number6 §?CO CO aJ 4-*Oc< cu•oreu£ cu0) O.c 4JCoi 0 4-* 2•*- X fim.*ure.Q 4-*0(0 cuJ3 0 •+•* *-•O0) 2Q re _c £c3 cu.c4^ 14—0 UJc_re Q *rf Ok. 14— CUJ=25% (depending on number of floor plans) of the units must be setback 30 feet from tco cn.c4^ £v»o 4-*Ocu 2a 2•o i <Ua +J0 £re &c3 0 4-t «4- O 5?inCM k.o 5?COCO 14—0 E 3 E 'xreE re•acre 0) i0)Q 2a cu•areu 45oCO3 0 *JC2 H— 0) *rf•s 4-i O£ c 4-10)cu »4- CU O CO™re D The initial purpose of these reguirements was to reduce the prominent appearance of th<c £ Cci ':Ci < cTi{TcJt cc ~ct_c <c(1Loc t£'i< ^ ) > £> J: -*M ) 0 11 !]c: Q1 _ )~0 ; C! *i ._ > 1| f >T 5,1i t, ; .t-! r»c-I\\: c i. <1 .£: i • £! cn> tM Ll>4. t. c: -t-1 C i "t; [! c0H** ! T i o j 2 i c I S ! d > j> s > >• iii ! i i i) i Ii r : C L ' i) 5: it-j ^ r i) c • .£ I i ; c k.£ (0co from the street. However, the standards are very inflexible and result in limited opt^rf (0 £ *^_c* 03 ^«<4>^_0 "S a _> T"'ocuQ CO_tti (0 re c 0 COoc "a T 0_c 'Ec '35cuTJ T3cre ac 4^reu0 City Council Policy No. 66 (Livable Neighborhoods) reguires dwellings to be designed scoCO O Z ^h.the residence (not the garage) is the prominent feature in relation to the street. Polio_a "S ff also reguires a variety of garage configurations in a project (i.e. front entry, side entc CT 1Q loaded, recessed). In addition, City Council Policy No. 44 (Neighborhood Architecturalcu n^ c Guidelines) includes various reguirements that ensure dwellings are visually interestir«4-o k.cuAE sufficient building articulation, and are in scale with the lot size (e.g., minimum nuEou. <4- _0) n different floor plans, multiple building planes, front porches, front entries that are visil£re w*rf ^the street, etc.).All Planned Development projects with one-family dwellings or twin homes on smalltr_c _"« 'xo k.cu £14-*O COre 1 tore CO*co 6 ^re 5 0z CO.2'o "oa. CO CO 6z T3Cre ^~•t oZ CO.2'o "5a. 5 4-tUV!a3CO •5 co 4Jre standards (i.e. building setbacks, lot coverage, etc.) are sufficient to regulate the locgarages.^_ -r, O) CD^? C ^ > -Q CO0o 5reo cu13uo 23ccu2 EI £*• 'E > °> £ I Vj r-' J—4-f) cu! **: 0> 3 a>: Q yj •— - 1*-*J ^« r\•o cd c c o -2 5 o S 5 c R -ri73 o ro 5 w O ?.s CN Q. ro - a> -§ w co j» Q. § £ g i? "<""•* "irs ^O -*5 >-. fJ*. -T5 -*5 -«S 05 rvC X ^ Cre g^l2 § goo igO^^^go 5 IlilliSS CCOTi-S^i:1^2 c ^ o t3 O -tr; o •gS-s'O c**- §••= sl=^-§2^c S^.SSroQ00 2 t^l-S-S®!*• &roi;t~t~SS- k-t--*-sQ..c:Ct2 .<o 55 w -9 -9 ."= lu•6™ r^ t rrr tf\ tT\ i e|!il!|z ^s.yss^^cu P c -? P o "fe oo^J 5o5OO£x- i-^ CO CO < < Q LU U_ Q O f- 9mo U csio ino ON •z. LU Q-z. LU LU O Z Q o2 CD ° Oo?NJ Q.Modified Rows from Table A, Continuedndments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter0)E<Discussion/Analysis ' |"c0>E TJCO E ^ TJ0)(0 Q. 2 O.Requiring an average setback has been difficult for staff to calculate and implement, and does notensure a minimum setback (an average of 15 feet could result in one building setback of 0 feet and onebuilding setback of 30 feet). It is also not clear if the average is based on separate buildings or a singlebuilding with varying building planes. Staff recommends establishing a minimum setback of 45 10 feet,not an average of 15 feet.Staff originally proposed to reguire multiple family dwellings be setback a minimum of 15 feet (noaverage) from a street. The BIA and Mike Howes (Howes Weiler & Associates) both commented 1that the 15 foot minimum setback would be more restrictive (because the current "average" I.c d<n m T— Cre.c 00w UreJ2 "5<n o>J3 5 M O TJ '3 0> Eo £ 5 "re TJ 3 O *-»V£ tn ure "S street setback is measured from the outside of the reguired street width (including curb, quttei.parkway, and sidewalk), which results in structures being setback an additional 10 to 12 feet Ifrom the street curb.In response to comments from the BIA and Mike Howes, staff conducted further analysis of thisstandard and determined that a 10 foot minimum street setback would be appropriate for Imultiple-family dwellings. A 10-foot minimum street setback is currently reguired for one-family Idwellings on small lots (and is recommended for one-family & two-family condominium projects). IIn addition, a minimum 10-foot front yard setback is permitted (provided the front yard is Ilandscaped) within the RD-M zone (for any residential, non-planned development project - one- Ifamily, two-family, & multiple-family). Reguiring a minimum 15 foot street setback for multiple- Ifamily PD projects would be more restrictive than the current RD-M zone standards.Reguiring a minimum 10-foot street setback for multiple family dwellings is consistent with thereguirements for one-family dwellings and the standards for development in the RD-M zone. Iwhich is a zone where the majority of multiple-family development occurs in the city. IIChanging the minimum setback to 10 feet allows the format of Table E (standards foCondominium Projects) to be simplified. The modified format is reflected in the proposed Iamendments. |£ >-0+-» ^10 *T— • 0 03 "oo — - Eo c t 3 ^ up O ^T S ^"P 8> o) E = 0:5 0 01 E 3 5 •- TJ 0 •|^> !•?.§ cj> 3 cQ. 3 03co E £ 00r- 05-07) MODIFIED ANALYSISModified Rows from Table A, Continuedendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter< EQ. <o_J CN9LOO ON 1— ZLU ^>QzLU ><£ LU O Z Z D ^ CD\^/ . CD ° "Z. ^ ^ (U O ro5 N Q_ rec Discussion/"£0) E•oc 0) < ^0 (AOao a E ° ^ai c c "it si Sill | g «. « S's'"\ 11 Jl 11! i - % 1 1 .|| i\ * ll «S t|p f£ I| Igilrf ^ 'r— ^ ^3 ro 1 . /3 ^ S i_ -c Z S: C 1° -1 *H-~ c — to'uf ( D £ ja '5 c E aj * •- £ o ~ £5 H < IJ l|s tislg-5 E ro a. -o § ~ J ' ,- fl) .•_> r/> --* CO *•c £3 a. ro ;L £! ^ co c •ii oj oj ~ o ~ £ ^ •*The current PD standards require more private recreaprojects with 1-10 units (120 square feet) than for proj'or 60 square foot balcony).These standards were established when projects werunderlying General Plan designation; and it was likelydensity and have more area to provide private recreatiHowever, all projects are now required to implementdesignation. Therefore, each project (regardless of ttthe amount of area available to provide private rectanrlarrl annlir.ahlp.-tn-nrnipnte nf mnrp than 10 uniteects be required to have a minimum 60 squareIsj Q > E' 3if > -Q i C: O• O 1! »• Q 43 jl re '. j;L— - ! (A ) —Ei ~*: "S|5) *-• 5 _a> n "5are reTJcn "<A co_ore.a 0) .c 1 4-1 0) lii '(A ou .2 j=u 'E co_o re o 0a o •«Q •Qa d does not specify a minimum dimension for patiosv-\n/-icarl for nolioo <5nH o mlrilmi im rt\ry^nn oi/->i-i nf Cprojects of more than 10 units. The current standarc "oJ a M- C 'oca £ T: £ £ 'E '£ < (/.a'c c. 0 -ccn > > i i j i i feet is proposed for balconies, patios, and porches.1-1C V) IS "2 2w a. GU C <-> Sro .2Q. C i meetinq, staff has identified an inconsistencySince the October 18, 2006 Planninq Commission(A fc2 (A TJ re 3 6 Z u "o0_ 'o oo 5o i between the City's Architectural Desiqn Guideliinimum of 100 square feet with a minimum IE re 0> o (A O reQ 2'5a £ o "re(A 0 Q O Q "rec o fie front of a house, are considered "porches". Idimension of 8 feet. "Patios", when located on tlporches" must be a minimum of 60 square feet IThe Architectural Desiqn Guidelines specify that "nt PD standards are more restrictive than the Iwith a minimum dimension of 6 feet. The curreo> S JS o> JQ 5 •3 1 •oc3 O D 0> £ C0 •D0) "reuo "o '•reo Architectural Desiqn Guidelines.Staff has not identified any benefit to require a "ifloor. In terms of "minimum" standards, th4-i O TJCOu0> (A re co •od> •«uo co 15 re cre.c S. £ •o Cre •oc0u (A O 'E 3 I_ T3 Cre o_o c 3 2 requirement should be the same for units on a qtwo-story units could comply with the current Ifloors. In addition, a condominium project with£ CO o •«Q 1 0) re3 O (A OO T- re cre ^ V£ S standards by providinq a 60 square foot balcona consistent standard for patios, porches, and !qround floor. The proposed standard will ensureectural Desiqn Guidelines. |balconies, and ensure consistency with the Architi»_ 0n E d 0r~^-* Co •omIIIro t-§8Ea> 5? ro"- .9 T3OJ ^= m ^ ^ T3Q. i O ^OD Pj Z5 -^^y *^0) i- C ^_;ro o s's1 S Q- ro c £ jg S 'Ec. o 2 "o 5 EXHIBIT Y1 ZCA 05-02 / LCPA 05-. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATlL . AMENDMENTS STRIKE-OUT/UNDERLINE OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS CHAPTER Chapter 2 1.45 PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS 21.45.010 Intent and purpose. 21.45.020 Applicability. 21.45.030 Definitions. 21.45.040 Permitted zones and uses. 21.45.050 Application and permit. 21 .45.060 General development standards. 21 .45.070 Small-lot, single-family and two family dwelling dDevelopment standards for one-family dwellings and twin-homes on small lots. 21 .45.080 Multiple-dwelling dDevelopment standards for condominium projects. 21.45.090 Residential additions and accessory uses. 21 .45. 1 00 Amendments to permits. 21.45.110 Conversion of existing buildings to planned developments. 21.45.120 Expiration, extension and revisions. 21.45.130 Proposed common ownership land or improvements. 21.45.140 Maintenance. 21.45.150 Failure to maintain. 21.45.160 Model homes. 21 .45.170 Restriction on reapplication for planned development permit. 21 .45.01 0 Intent and purpose. A; _ The purpose of the planned development ordinance is to: Al Recognize the need for a diversity of housing and product types; 82. Provide a method for clustered property development that recognizes that the impacts of environmentally and topographically constrained land preclude the full development of a site as a standard single-family subdivision; G3. Establish a process to approve the following: separate ownership of dwelling units with lots or exclusive use areas of less than seven thousand five hundred square feet in size or as otherwise allowed by the underlying zone; condominium ownership in multiple-unit buildings; and conversion of existing, residential development to condominiums; a. _ One-family dwellings and twin-homes on individual lots of less than 7.500 square feet in size or as otherwise allowed by the underlying zone: b. _ Condominium projects consisting of two-family and multiple-family dwellings, as well as one-family dwellings developed as two or more detached dwellings on one lot: C; _ Condominium conversions; and d. _ Private streets; & - Allow the development of small-lot subdivisions in existing R-1 neighborhoods when the proposed site is contiguous to a higher intensity land use or an existing project of comparable or higher & - Allow the development of small lot subdivisions, two-family and multiple-family dwellings on existing R-1 zoned properties when the project site contains sensitive biological resources as identified in the Carlsbad habitat management plan; E-. - Permit the development of small -lot subdivisions in multi-family zones (except when the multiple- family zone implements the RH land use designation) as an alternative product type to attached dwelling units; and G4. Encourage and allow more creative and imaginative design by including relief from compliance with standard residential zoning regulations. To offset this flexibility in development standards, planned developments are required to incorporate amenities and features not normally required of standard residential developments. 21.45.020 Applicability. A. A planned development permit is required for the development of single-family lots or exclusive use areas one-family dwellings or twin-homes on lots of less than seven thousand five hundred 7.500 square feet or as otherwise allowed by the underlying zone, attached or detached condominiums, and the conversion of existing residential development to condominiumscondominium conversions, and private streets. B. These regulations do not apply to attached residential units proposed for inclusion as part of a commercial development project. 8C. Any application for a planned development permit that was deemed complete prior to the effective date of the ordinance reenacting this chapter, shall not be subject to the amended provisions of this chapter but shall be processed and approved or disapproved pursuant to the ordinance superseded by the ordinance codified in this chapter. &-. Enlargement of buildings that are legally nonconforming is permitted provided that such enlargement does not increase the floor space more than forty percent of that existing prior to such enlargement and that the new addition complies with tho new setback and lot coverage requirements of this chapter. D. If there is a conflict between the regulations of this chapter and any regulations approved as part of the city's certified local coastal programs, a redevelopment plan, ef-a master plan or specific plan, the regulations of the local coastal program, redevelopment plan, or the master plan or specific plan shall prevail. E. A planned development permit shall apply to residential projects only, as specified in "Table A Permitted Residential Uses" of this chapter. The city council, planning commission or planning director, as provided in this chapter, may approve a permit for a planned development in any residential zone or combination of zones subject to the requirements thereof except as they may be modified in accord with this chapter. When approved, a planned development permit shall become a part of the zoning regulations applicable to the subject property. E-. In granting a planned development permit, the planning commission or city council may modify the plan or impose such conditions as it deems necessary to protect the public health, safety and gonoral welfare. Any development standards of the underlying zone in which the property is situated, including yards, parking, coverage, signs, fences and walls, may be modified by the planning commission or city council as necessary to accomplish the purposes of this chapter. R A planned development permit shall be required for the development of a private street within a residential development that is not otherwise subject to the requirements of this chapter. Such residential development shall not be subject to any development standard of this chapter, except the private street standards. 21.45.030 Definitions. A. Whenever the following terms are used in this chapter, they shall have the meaning established by this section: Al. "Condominium project" means a common interest subdivision development defined by Sections 1350-1376 1351 of the California Government Civil Code, and which consists of two or more attached or detached dwelling units on one lot. 82. "Driveway (SF)" means an improved surface on private property intended for exclusive vehicular access from a public/private street or drive-aisle to open/enclosed parking for a single residential unit (attached or detached) detached single family home. G3. "Driveway-aisle (Project)" means an improved surface on private property intended for shared vehicular access (serving two or more residential units, attached or detached) from a public/private street to a driveway(s) or open/enclosed parking for two or more residential units. & "Duplex" means two homes on one lot attached by a common wall and under common ownership. Duplex may be converted to individual ownership with approval of a planned development r\s\pmn if|tSlrl I MIL. 14. "Net pad area" means the building pad of a lot excluding all natural or manufactured slopes greater than tbfee 3_feet in height except intervening manufactured slopes between split-level pads on a single lot. f-5. "Planned development" means a form of development usually characterized by a unified site design for a number of housing units, clustering buildings and providing common open space, recreation and streets. 66. "Twin-home" means two homes dwellings attached by a common wall where each home dwelling and is on a separate lot or exclusive use area has that allows for separate ownership. 21.45.040 Permitted zones and uses. A: Permitted Zones. The planning director, planning commission or city council may approve a permit for a planned development in the R-1, R 2, R-3, RD-M, R-W and P-C residential zones or combination of zones subject to the requirements of this chapter. When approved, a planned development permit shall become the zoning regulations applicable to the subject property. 8A. Permitted Uses. Table A. Permitted Residential Uses, specifies the types of residential uses, and the zones where such uses are permitted, subject to the approval of a planned development permit. The uses specified in Table A are in addition to any principal use, accessory use, transitional use or conditional use permitted in the underlying zone, planned developments that are proposed in the following residential zones may include the following residential uses listed in Table A, Permitted Residential Uses, below. TABLE A PERMITTED RESIDENTIAL USES Legend: P = Permitted (#) Number within parenthesis = Permitted only in certain circumstances. X = Not permitted Zone R-1 R-2 R-3 RD-M R-W R-P RMHP P-C (3) V-R Accessory Uses (4) Residential Use Single family Dotached Dwelling One-Family Dwelling or Twin- Home on Small Lots (one unit per lot) X-mor(4K» X_P{§> XP XP NMX (51 P XiTl (81 X_(91 Condominium Project One-family dwellings - (3) or (4) Two-family dwellings - (1) or (4) Multiple-family dwellings - (4) One-family or two-family dwellings - P Multiple-family dwellings - (2) or (4) P P P 161 P III (81 191 Twn r~ f^rnilv/1 — 01 1 illy O\A/fil|jng *vm V (K\" W X X X X X IMtjItinlp D\A/p||jnQ fC\ /Q\\v/ \w X^2H5) X X X X X (1) Ofliy-pPermitted when^-4) the project site is contiguous to a higher intensity land use designation or zone, or an existing project of comparable or higher density; or 2) the project site contains sensitive biological resources as identified in the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. (2) OftJy-pPermitted wherc-4)-the proposed project site is contiguous to a lot or lots zone R-3, R-T, R- P, C-1, C-2, C-M or M, but in no case shall the project site consist of more than one lot nor be more than ninety feet in width, whichever is less; or 2) the project site contains sensitivo biological resources as identified in tho Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. (3) Permitted when developed as two or more detached units on one lot. (4) Permitted when the project site contains sensitive biological resources as identified in the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. In the case of a condominium project, attached or detached units may be permitted when the site contains sensitive biological resources. (5) Permitted when the R-P zone implements the RMH land use designation. (6) Permitted when the R-P zone implements the RMH or RH land use designations. (37) Permitted uses shall be consistent with the master plan. (8) Refer to the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Master Plan for permitted uses. (49) Refer to Table F for specific permitted accessory uses. -(§) "Housing for senior citizens" is not permitted in R 1 and R 2 zones. {§) Only permitted when the project site contains censitive biological resources as identified in tho Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. 21.45.050 Application and permit. A. Application. 1. The application for a planned development permit shall be made in writing on the form provided by the planning department, and shall be accompanied by the required fee in an amount specified by city council resolution. 2. The application shall include a site plan, building elevations and floor plans (i.e. site plan, building elevations, floor plans, landscape plans, etc.) as required by the city's submittal requirements, which demonstrate compliance with addressing all development standards and design requirements as contained in this chapter and shall be accompanied by the required fee in an amount specified by city council resolution. a. A planned development permit application for a small-lot subdivision (intended to be developed with one dwelling per lot) may be approved without architecture and plotting; in which case, approval of a major planned development permit amendment will be required at a later date to authorize the proposed structures and their placement. b. A planned development permit application for a condominium project shall require approval of architecture and plotting concurrent with the approval of the condominium subdivision. 3. The application for a planned development permit shall state whether the applicant intends to develop the project as a planned development or condominium project and the proposed method of land division (i.e., postage stamp small lots, or air-space condominiums). AB. Processing Procedures. 1. Table B, Required Processing Procedures, identifies required procedures for mMinor (four or fewer dwelling units) and mMajor (five or more dwelling units) Planned Development permits. TABLE B REQUIRED PROCESSING PROCEDURES Topic Decision-Making Body or Official Map Required Required Findings Public Notice Required Public Hearing Required Appeals Minor Planned Development Permit Planning Director Minor Subdivision Map (See Title 20, Chapter 20.24) See Section 21.45.050(BCJ See Title 20, Chapter 20.24. Section 20.24.1 15 No See Chapter 21 .54, Section 21 .54.140 Maior Planned Development Permit fmnrn thin fifl DIA Planninq Commission (PC) City Council (upon PC recommendation) Up to 50 DU More than 50 DU Major Subdivision Map (See Title 20, Chapter 20.12) See Section 21.45. Chapter 21. 54, Section 050(BCJ 21.54.060(1) Yes See Chapter 21 .54, Section 21 .54.150 8C. Required Findings. 1J The planning director, planning commission or city council shall approve or conditionally approve a planned development permit only if it finds that both of the following facts exist findings are made: 4a. The proposed project is consistent with the general plan, and complies with all applicable provisions of this chapter, and all other applicable provisions of this code development standards included within this chapter; 2b. The proposed project density, site design and architecture are compatible with surrounding development will not be detrimental to existing uses, or to uses specifically permitted in the area in which the proposed use is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroundings, or traffic. c. The project will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare: dL The project's design, including architecture, streets, and site layout: L Contributes to the community's overall aesthetic quality; ii. Includes the use of harmonious materials and colors, and the appropriate use of landscaping: and iii. Achieves continuity among all elements of the project. D. Modifications to Development Standards. I. The decision-making body with the authority to approve a planned development permit may approve a modification to the development standards specified in this chapter if all of the following findings are made in writing: a. The proposed planned development designed with the modified development standard(s) is consistent with the purpose and intent of this chapter: and b. The proposed modification(s) will result in the preservation of natural habitat as required by the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP); and c. The amount of natural habitat preservation required by the HMP could not be achieved by strict adherence to the development standards of this chapter: and d. The proposed modification(s) will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare: and e. If the project is located within the coastal zone, the modification is consistent with all Local Coastal Program policies and standards for the protection of coastal resources. 2. Any application for a planned development permit that involves a request for a modification to the development standards of this chapter shall include documentation that clearly demonstrates the modification is necessary to implement the natural habitat preservation requirements of the HMP. 3. The decision-making body with the authority to approve a planned development permit may modify the plan, or impose such conditions or requirements that are more restrictive than the development standards specified in this chapter, the underlying zone or elsewhere in this code, as deemed necessary to protect the public health, safety and general welfare, or to insure conformity with the general plan and other adopted policies, goals or objectives of the city. 21.45.060 A. General development standards. _AII planned developments shall comply with the general development standards specified in Table C below. Specific standards applicable to one-family dwellings and twin-homes on small-lots can be found in Table D; and standards applicable to condominium projects can be found in Table E., single-family/two-family dwelling and multiple dwelling condominium projects can be found in Tables D and E, respectively. B. In addition to the provisions of this chapter, a planned development project shall be subject to the development standards of the project site's underlying zone. C. If there is a conflict between the development standards of this chapter and the development standards applicable to the project site's underlying zone, the standards of this chapter shall prevail. Exception: the development standards specified in the city's local coastal program, a redevelopment plan, master plan or specific plan shall prevail if such standards conflict with the standards of this chapter. D. When approved, a planned development permit shall become a part of the zoning regulations applicable to the subject property. TABLE C GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO ALL PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS REF. NO. C.1 C.2 SUBJECT Density Arterial Setbacks DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Per the underlying General Plan designation. When two or more general plan land use designations exist within a planned development, the density may net-be transferred from one general plan designation to another without a general plan amendment. Circulation Element of the General Plan shall maintain the following minimum setbacks from the right-of-way: Prime Arterial 50 Feet Major Arterial 40 Feet Secondary Arterial 30 Feet Carlsbad Boulevard 20 Feet arterial shall be fully landscaped to enhance the streetscene and buffer homes from traffic on adjacent arterials. and: • Shall contain a minimum of one 24" box tree for every 30 lineal feet of street frontage; and • Shall be commonly owned and maintained TABLE C. CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. C.2. cont. SUBJECT Arterial Setbacks, cont. Building Setbacks C.3 C.4 C.5 Permitted Intrusions into Setbacks/ Building Separation Streets Drive-aisles DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Project perimete landscaped por walls that: r walls qreater than 42 inches in heiqht shall not be located in the required tion of the arterial setback landscaped buffer, except noise attenuation • Are required by a noise study, and • Due to topography, are necessary to be placed within the required landscaped portion of the arterial setback. All cetbocKc chsll bo mocicurcd from the property line from the bsck of cidcwslk or from the VIVMWW« t.%." 11 1W Whl «VfcV»l W. Permitted intrusions into required buildinq setbacks shall be the same as specified in Section 21.46.120 of this code. The same intrusions specified in Section 21.46.120 shall be permitted into required buildinq separation. Projecting architectural featuroo, required building setbacks. Private Public Street Trees within parkways 3 or fewer dwelling units 4 or more dwelling units All projects Minimum right-of-way width 56 feet Minimum curb-to-curb width 34 feet Minimum parkway width _ „ , . . . ... (curb adjacent) Minimum sidewalk wic ij,ij ICCJL, II I\«IUUII IIJ VUI U 5 feet (setback 6 inches from property ^ line) Minimum right-of-way width 60 feet Minimum curb-to-curb width 34 feet Minimum parkway width 7.5 feet, including curb(curb adjacent} ' a Minimum sidewalk wic One-family dwellings and twin homes on small-lots Condominium projects 5 feet (setback 6 inches from property ^ line) A minimum of one street tree (24-inch box) per lot is required to be planted in the parkway alonq all streets. Street trees shall be spaced no further apart than 30 feet on center within the parkway. Tree species should be selected to create a unified image for the street, provide an effective canopy, avoid sidewalk damage and minimize water consumption. Minimum 12 feet wide when the drive-aisle is not required for emergency vehicle access, as determined by the Fire Chief. If the drive-aisle is reguired for emergency vehicle access, it shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide. Minimum 20 feet wide. No parkinq shall be permitted within the minimum required width of a drive-aisle. A minimum 24-foot vehicle back-up/maneuvering area shall be provided in front of garages, carports or uncovered parking spaces (this may include driveway area, drive-aisles, and streets). Additional width may be reguired for vehicle/emergency vehicle maneuvering area. Parkways and/or sidewalks may be required. No more than 24 dwelling units shall be located alonq a sinqle-entrv drive-aisle. All drive-aisles shall be enhanced with decorative pavement. TABLE C. CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. C.6 C.7 SUBJECT Number of Visitor Parking Spaces Required <1) OB Private/Public Otr-notoOil ^^U Location of V[sitor Parking Driveways DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Projects with ' units or fewe 1 pmt - unjt Projects 11 un ts °6g2c or more ~GC for tno first 10 unite pluc 1 cp3C6 for coch 'I unite obovo 10 space per each unit. be roundod to the nearest hiqhest whole number. When calculatinq the required number of visitor parkinq spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parkinq space, the required number of visitor parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. On Private/ Public Streets On Drive-aisles On a Driveway As parallel parkinq alonq public/private street(s) (minimum 34-feet wide curb-to-curb), as follows: • Alonq both sides of any private/public street(s) located within the project boundary. • Alonq the abutting side and portion of any existing public/private street(s) that is contiguous to the project boundary. In parkinq bays alonq driveways, drive-aisles, or public/private streets within the project boundary. When visitor parking is provided as on-street parallel parking, not less than 24 lineal feet per space, exclusive of drivewav/drive-aisle entrances where parallel parking spaces are located immediately adjacent to drivewav/drive-aisle aprons, then 20 lineal feet may be provided. Within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, on-street parkinq shall not count toward meeting the visitor parkinq reguirement. Visitor parking must be provided in parking bays that are located outside the reguired minimum drive-aisle width. Outside the Beach Area Overlay Zone Within the Beach Area Overlay Zone One required visitor parkinq space may be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 40 feet or more. For projects with 10 or fewer units, all required visitor parkinq may be located within driveways (located in front of a unit's qaraqe), provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more. One required visitor parkinq space may be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 40 feet or more. If the streets within and/or adjacent to the project allow for on-street parkinq on both sides of the street, then visitor parkinq may be located in a driveway, subject to the following: • All required visitor parkinq may be located within driveways (located in front of a unit's qaraqe), provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more. • If less than 100% of the driveways in a project have a depth of 20 feet or more, then a .25 visitor parkinq space will be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 20 feet or more (calculations resultinq in a fractional parkinq space credit shall always be rounded down to the nearest whole number). TABLE C. CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. C.7. cont SUBJECT Location of Visitor Parking, cont. Private Streets Public Streets TFGGS Driveway Dwollino Unit Sotback from Open Parking C.8 C.9 Screening of Parking Areas Community Recreational Space ^ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD The minimum driveway depth required for visitor parking On a ... (20 feet or 40 feet) applies to driveways for front or side- Driveway, _j?7 . loaded garages, and is measured from the property line. cont. pi«|gu» back of sidewalk, or from the edge of the drive-aisle. whichever is closest to the structure. For projects of more than 25 units, up to 25% of visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (8 feet by 15 feet). No overhang is Compact permitted into any reguired setback area or over sidewalks less than Marking 6 feet wide. For all projects within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, up to 55% of the visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (8 feet by 15 feet). „. . , Visitor parking spaces must be locatedDistance from m,,,.-lir.,,| iri ' tr,r,;r^i ,,,,11^.™ „-.«•. f.™.. measured in a logical waiKing patn rion no more than 300 feet as i the entrance of the unit it ^- could be considered to serve. canopy, avoid sidewalk damage and minimize water concumption. ^ Additionol width may bG rcciuirGd for moncuvGrino ores in front of Qoroocc C3rportc or AH-oOpen parking areas sbaU-should be screened from adjacent residences and public rights-of-way by either a view-obscuring wall, landscaped berm. or landscaping, except parkinq located within a driveway. All projects of more thsn 10 dwGllinci unite choll provide ^00 "*QU3rG feet of centralized Community recreational space shall be provided for all projects of 11 or more dwelling units, as follows: Minimum Project is NOT within RH general communitv plan designation recreational Project IS within RH general plan space required designation 200 square feet per unit 150 square feet per unit rojec s wi Community recreational space shall be provided as either (or both) dwell'no .. passive or active recreation facilities. Projects with 26 Communitv recreational space shall be provided as both passive and or more than 25 active recreational facilities with a minimum of 75% percent of the area . dwelling units allocated for active facilities. Projects with 50 Communitv recreational space shall be provided as both passive and or more than 50 active recreational facilities for a variety of age groups (a minimum of dwelling units 75% of the area allocated for active facilities). TABLE C. CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO.SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD C.9. cont. Community Recreational Space, cont. Projects with 50 or more than 50 dwelling units, cont. All projects (with 11 or more dwelling units) Recreation Area Parking For projects consisting of one-family dwellings or twin homes on small-lots, at least 25% of the community recreation space must be provided as pocket parks. • Pocket park lots must have a minimum width of 50 feet and be located at strategic locations such as street intersections (especially "T-intersections") and where open space vistas may be achieved. Community recreational space shall be located and designed so as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the units it is intended to serve. Credit for indoor recreation facilities shall not exceed 25% of the required community recreation area. Required community recreation areas shall not be located in any reguired front yard and may not include any streets, drive-aisles, driveways, parking areas, storage areas, slopes of 5% or greater, or walkways (except those walkways that are clearly integral to the design of the recreation area). In addition to required resident and visitor parking, recreation area parking shall be provided, as follows: 1 space for each 15 residential units, or fraction thereof, for units located more than 1.000 feet from a community recreation area. The location of recreation area parking shall be subject to the same location reguirements as for visitor parking, except that required recreation area parking shall not be located within a drivewav(s). Examples of recreation facilities include, but are not limited to, the following: ' Actives Passives Swimming pool with cabana area Children's playground equipment Spa Courts (tennis, racquetball, volleyball, basketball) Tennis court, racauetball court, volleyball court, basketball court, Recreation rooms or buildings Horseshoe pits Pitch and putt Grassy play areas with a slope of less than 5% (minimum area of 5.000 square feet and a minimum dimension of 50 feet) a minimum of 100 feet by 100 feet and Any other facility deemed by the planning director to satisfy the intent of providing active recreational facilities. Benches Barbecues Community gardens ©f Grassy play areas with a slope of less than 5%. 1. Credit for indoor recreation facilities shall not exceed 25% of the required centralized community recreation area. 2. Required recreation areas shall not be located in any required front yard and may not include any driveways, parking areas, walkways, storage areas, or any slopes of 5% or 3. For single family or two family projects of 50 units or more, at least 25 percent of the common recreation space must be provided as pocket parks. Pocket park lots must have a minimum width of 50 feet and be located at strategic locations such as street intersections (especially "T-intersections") and where open space vistas may be achieved.' Note: These community recreational space requirements shall not apply to housing for senior citizens (refer to Chapter 21.84 of this code for common area requirements for housing for senior citizens). Recreation Area Porkinci 1 space for each 15 residential lotc or fraction thereof for lots located more than 1,000 feet from a centralized community recreation center lot. Note: Housing for senior citizens is not required to be provided with recreation area parking. TABLE C. CONTINUED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS REF. NO. C.10 C.11 C.12 C.13 SUBJECT Lighting Utilities Recreational Vehicle (RV) Storage1" Storage Space Antennas DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Lighting adequate for pedestrian and vehicular safety shall be provided. Separate utility systems shall be provided for each unit. 4-r Required for projects with 25-100 or more units, or a master or specific plan with 100 or more planned development units. Exception: RV storaqe is not required for projects located within the RMH or RH land use desiqnations. approaches. & Developments located within master plans or residential specific plans may have this requirement met by the common RV storage area provided by the master plan or residential specific plan. RV storaqe areas shall be desiqned to accommodate recreational vehicles of various sizes (i.e. motorhomes, campers, boats, personal watercraft. etc.). 4r-The storage of recreational vehicles shall be prohibited in the front yard setback and on any public or private streets or any other area visible to the public. A provision containing this restriction shall be included in the covenants, conditions and restrictions for the project. All RV storaqe areas shall be screened from adjacent residences and public riqhts-of-wav bv a view-obscurinq wall and landscapinq. All RV storaqe areas shall be landscaped to 480 cubic feet of separate storage space per unit. If all storage for each unit is located in one area, the space may be reduced to 392 cubic feet. This Required storage space shall be separately enclosed for each unit and be conveniently accessible to the outdoors. The Required storaqe space may be desiqned as an enlargement of the required a covered parking structure provided it does not extend into the area of the required parking stall, and does not impede the ability to utilize the parkinq stall (for vehicle parkinq). A qaraqe (12'x20' one-car, 20'x20' two-car, or larqer) satisfies the required storaqe space per unit. This requirement is in addition to closets and other indoor storage areas. rnniilfitinnF. This standard does not apply to housing for senior citizens (see Chapter 21.84 of this code). 21.45.070 Small lot, single-family and two-family dwelling development standards. Development standards for one-family dwellings and twin-homes on small lots. A. In addition to the general development standards found in Table C, planned developments that include s4fifleone-family dwellings or twin-homes on small lots two-family dwelling product types shall comply with the following development standards found in Table D, One-Family Dwellings and Twin-Homes on Small Lots. Small-Lot, Single Family and Two-Family Dwelling Development Standards. TABLE D SMALL LOT, SINGLE FAMILY AND TWO FAMILY DWELLING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Ref. No. D.1 D.2 SUBJECT Standard Livable Neighborhood Policy Architectural Requirements DEVELOPMENT STANDARDRequirement Must comply with city council Policy 66, Principles for the Development of Livable Neighborhoods. Must comply with city council Policy 44, Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines. 10 TABLE D. CONTINUED ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Ref. No. D.3 SUBJECT Minimum Lot Area D.4 D.5 D.6 Maximum Lot Coverage Minimum Lot Width (1) Minimum Street/Drive- Aisle Frontage Maximum Building Height D.7 Minimum Front Setback from a Private or Public Streetami. public street ^ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD One-family g OOQ sauare feet fone dwe||ina Der |ott Twin-homes 3,750 sauare feet (one dwelling per lot) 3,500 square feet (one-familv or twin-home - one dwellinq per lot) when either: 1. The project site contains sensitive bioloqical resources as identified in 2. The site has the Carlsbad habitat manaoement plan; or a qeneral plan designation of RMH and unique Exception circumstances such as one of the following exists: a. The project is for lower income or senior citizen housinq; b. The site is located west of Interstate 5; c. The dwellinq units are designed with alley-loaded qaraqes; or d. The site is either located contiquous to a Circulation Element roadway or within 1 200 feet of a commuter rail/transit center, commercial center or employment center. feet of 3 commuter roil/troncit center commercJ3l center or employment center 1 2 story homes Lots eou3l to or cirester thsn 5 000 CQU3re foot ^0 of the net P3d sres* 1 story homes 60% of the net pad area 45% of the net pad area for all lots in a project, if the minimum lot „ . . area in the project is 5,000 sauare feet or qreater./ story Homes 50% of the net pad area for all lots in a project, if the minimum lot area in the project is less than 5,000 sauare feet. 3r Porches with no livable space above the porcht and porte-cocheres no more than 20 feet in width and 6 feet in depth are exempt from lot coverage requirements. 4r SmgteOne-family dwellings on lots equal to or greater than 5,000 square feet 2r SmgteOne-familv dwellings on lots less than 5,000 square feet 50 feet (35 feet when a lot is located on a cul-de- sac, or the curved portion of a sharply curved street/drive-aisle) 40 feet (35 feet when a lot is located on a on-cul-de- sac, or the curved portion of a sharply curved street/drive-aisle) Lots located on the curved portion of sharply curved streets/drive-aisles or cul-de- sacs: 25 feet. Residential structure 10 feet 1 PnvFTFrl front nnrrh R fppt 4? Direct entry garage 20 feet 11 TABLE D. CONTINUED ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Ref. No.SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD D.8 Minimum Setback from a Drive- Aisle(<) B. From a Hriv/c wr^V 1. Residence Residential structure 2r-Garage 8-5.feet, fully landscaped (walkways providing access to dwelling entrvwavs may be located within required landscaped area) § 3 feet 3r Garages facing directly onto a project driveway drive-aisle shall be equipped with an automatic garage door opener. Minimum Street On sharply curved streets or oul de-sacs: 35 feet. This frontage may be reduced to a minimum of 25 feet if adequate guest parking (that does not directly back onto the street) is provided near the end of the cul de-sac in parking bays or another acceptable manner. Such lots must reach a width of 35 feet at some point near tho middle of the lot. Minimum Street Side Yard Setback 10 feet; 20 foot setback required for garagos that faco a street side yard. D.9 One-family dwellings Minimum Interior Side Yard Setback Twin-homes 1. Two story homes on lots with a minimum width of 60 feet and all one story homes regardless of lot width shall have a minimum side yard setback equal to 10% of the lot width on each side. 2. All two story homes on lots that are less than 60 feet wide shall have a combined minimum side yard sotback equal to 25% of the lot width with a minimum side yard setback of 5 feetr Residential structure Residential structure and Garage Each interior side yard setback shall be a minimum of 10% of the lot width; provided that each side yard setback is not less than 5 feet, and need not exceed 10 feet. Located on the front half of the lot Located on the rear half of the lot Same as reguired for residence. Need not exceed 5 feet Any second story living space above a garage shall observe the same interior side yard setback reguired for the residence. One interior side yard setback may be reduced to 0 feet (zero lot line): provided the other side yard setback is a minimum of 20% of the lot width, and need not exceed 20 feet. 3. Zero lot lino homes may reduce one side yard setback to 0 feet provided that the other cide yard setback is equal to 20% or 25% of the lot width as required herein. One side yard - 0 feet (the side yard where the dwellings on each lot are attached). The other side yard setback shall be a minimum of 20% of the lot width, and need not exceed 20 feet D.10 Minimum Rear Yard Setback (where the rear property line does not front on a street or drive-aisle) fef Residential structure 4-7-20% of lot width, provided the rear yard setback is not less than 10 feet, and need not exceed 20 feet. 2r 5 feet from rear property line located on the rear half of the let Garage (located on the rear half of the lot) Sr-Any second story living space above a garage shall observe the same rear yard setback required for "residence", above, a minimum 10 foot setback from tho rear property line. D.11 Maximum Building Height Same as reguired by the underlying zone and not to exceed two stories (5) 12 TABLE D. CONTINUED ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Ref. No.SUBJECT Recreational Space Private Rear Yard Common recreation D.12 Private Recreational Space Tandem Visitor Parking Credit D.13 Resident Parking — DEVELOPMENT STANDARD 1 ProjectE of 1 10 dwellino unite* *^5 feet x ^5 feet of uccable rear yard with no slope gradient greater than 5 percent. ^ Projecte of more than 1 0 dwellino unite" 1 8 feet x 1 8 feet of ueeable rear yard with no slope gradient greater than 5 percent. greater than 5 percent. 400 square feet (mav consist of moreiviiniiYiurn 10131 area per unit .. .. . »man one recreational space| Minimum dimension of recreational space 15 feet Required private recreational space shall be located at qround level and desiqned so as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the dwelling it is intended to serve, and shall not have a slope qradient qreater than 5%. Required private recreational space shall not be located within front yard setback areas, and mav not include any driveways, parkinq areas, storaqe areas, or walkways (except those walkways that are clearly inteqral to the desiqn of the recreation area). Open or lattice-top patio covers mav be located within the required private recreation space (provided the patio cover complies with all applicable standards. includinq the required setbacks specified in Section 21.45.090). Attached solid patio covers and second story decks/balconies mav project into a required private recreational space, subject to the following: • The depth of the projection shall not exceed 6 feet (measured from the wall of the dwelling that is contiguous to the patio/deck/balcony). • The lenqth of the projection shall not be limited, except as required by any setback or lot coverage standards. • The patio cover/deck/balconv shall comply with all applicable standards, includinq the required setbacks specified in Section 21.45.090. thst the gorDge is set b3ck 3 minimum of ''O feet from the front property line' 3nd foot in length. 2 spaces per a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or as either'6' 2 separate one-car qaraqes (minimum 1 2 feet x 20 feet each) i A minimum of 33% of all unite ehall include Qaraoes that are recee°ed a minimum of 5 feet behind the front house facade house facada provided that tha papacies do not eyr.eari f>n% of the total house frontane 13 TABLE D. CONTINUED ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Ref. No. D.14 D.15 SUBJECT Garaqes for 3 or more cars- in-a-row Driveways DEVELOPMENT STANDARD GT No more than 20% of the total project units may include garages with doors for 3 or more carstbr-ee-in-a-row car garages that directly face the street, including Three in a row whether constructed as 3 one-car garages located adjacent to each othe^ or constructed as a two-car garage separated from a one-car garage with all garage doors directly parallel to Garages that are recessed 20 feet or more back from the forward-most plane of the house shall not be subject to the 20% 3-car oarage limitation stated above, are exempt from Garaqes with doors for 3 or more cars in-a-row shall not be permitted on lots less than 5.000 square feet in area. 3r Driveways for side-loaded garages must incorporate be enhanced with decorative pavement to improve appearance. n' Lot width is measured 20' behind the front property line. 19\ Sathar:kc are aooJicahla tn ctrofltr. f hat inr.li irlo-aackwauc anrl sidewalks alnnn hnth-fiirJAg Fnc-eviRtinn ctroots without parkways, the front setback shall be as follows: Front porch—15', Residence—15' (average), 10' (minimum), Sido entry garage—10', Direct entry garage—26^ -The average front yard setback is determined by adding together all of the unit front yard setbacks (tho sotback for each unit should be moasured from that element of each building, excluding projoctions, that is located closest to the front property line) and dividing that total by tho total number of project units. Garage standards do not apply to alley loaded projects See Table C in Section 21.45.060 for required setbacks from an arterial street. Building setbacks shall be measured from one of the following (whichever is closest to the building): a) property line: or b) the outside edge of the required street right-of-way width. Building setbacks shall be measured from one of the following (whichever is closest to the building): a) property line: b) the outside edge of the required drive-aisle width; c) the back of sidewalk; or d) the nearest side of a parking bay located contiguous to a drive-aisle (excluding parking located in a driveway in front of a unit's garage). If a project is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, building height shall be subject to the(5) (6) requirements of Chapter 21.82 of this code. The required resident parking within the R-W zone shall be 2 spaces/unit. 1 of which must be covered. Any uncovered required parking space in the R-W zone may be located within a required front yard setback and may be tandem. 21.45.080 Multiple dwelling development standards Development standards for condominium projects. A. fn addition to the general development standards found in Table C, planned developments that include multiple-dwelling units condominium projects shall comply with the following development standards listed in Table E, Multiple Dwelling Development Standards Condominium Projects. REF. NO. JL1 MULTIPLE SUBJECT Standards Livable Neighborhood Policy TABLE E DWELLING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Requirement Must comply with city council Policy 66, Principles for the Development of Livable Neighborhoods. 14 TABLE E. CONTINUED CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. E.2 E.3 E.4 U> SUBJECT Architectural Requirements Maximum Let Coverage Maximum Building Height Minimum Building Setbacks Private or Driveway DEVELOPMENT STANDARD One-family and two-family dwellings Multiple-family dwellings Must comply with city council Policy 44, Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines There shall be at least three separate building planes on all building elevations. The minimum offset in planes shall be 18 inches and shall include, but not be limited to. building walls, windows, and roofs. All building elevations shall incorporate a minimum of four complimentary design elements, including but not limited to: • A variety of roof planes: • Windows and doors recessed a minimum of 2 inches; • Decorative window or door frames: • Exposed roof rafter tails: • Dormers; • Columns: • Arched elements; • Varied window shapes: • Exterior wood elements: • Accent materials such as brick, stone, shingles, wood, or siding; • Knee braces: and • Towers. 60% on a project basis of total project net developable acreaae. Same as required by the underlyinq zone, and not to exceed three stories (1> Projects within the RH qeneral plan designation (1> From a private or public street Ul IJ> From a drive- aW 40 feet, if roof pitch is 3:1 2 or greater 35 feet, if roof pitch is less than 3:12 Building heiqht shall not exceed three stories Residential structure _. . . . . 5. To d Direct entry garage structure (all floors, except as specified below). 3ra floors directly above a garage 2r Garage 10 feet 1 1 foot-1 — 1 — llrfl^l . , (3) 1 Q fggt 1 0 fset 20 feet 8-5 feet, fully landscaped (walkways providing access to dwelling entryways may be located within reguired landscaped area) 0 feet when projecting over the front of a garage § 3 feet & Garages facing directly onto a driveway-aisle shall be equipped with an automatic garage door opener. From the perimeter The buildinq setback from an interior side or rear property lines of the perimeter property line shall be the same as required by project site (not adjacent the underlying zone for an interior side or rear yard to a public/private street) setback. 15 TABLE E. CONTINUED CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO.SUBJECT Architectural Design Elements U ILZ Minimum Building Separation Resident Parking ^ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD minimum offset in p)3nes sh3ll be 18 inches Dnd shsll include but not bo limited to building walls, windows and roofs. elements: ******* *"•"*•'' i. Exterior wood elements; 0 0 10 feet ^0 feet 3ver3Q0 with 3 minimum of 10 feet between structures No structures (i o All dwelling types One-family and two-family dwellings Multiple-family dwellings If a project is located within the RH qeneral plan designation. resident parkina shall be provided as specified below, and may also be provided as follows: • 25% of the units in the project may include a tandem two-car garage (minimum 12 feet x 40 feet). • Calculations for this provision resultinq in a fractional unit may be rounded up to the next whole number. 2 spaces per unit, provided as either: " a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or * 2 separate one-car qaraaes (minimum 12 feet x 20 feet each) ' In the R-W Zone, the 2 required parking spaces may be provided as 1 covered space and 1 uncovered space (S| Studio and one- bedroom units Units with two or more bedrooms 1.5 spaces per unit, 1 of which must be covered (5) When calculating the required number of parkina spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parkinq space, the required number of parkinq spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 2 spaces per unit, provided as either: • 4 — a one-car qaraqe (12 feet x 20 feet) car qaracie and 1 covered or uncovered space per unit: or ( > 3 Housinp for senior citizens' 1 5 covered £p3ces per unit provided). • a two-car qaraqe (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or • 2 separate one-car qaraqes (minimum 1 2 feet x 20 feet each) • In the R-W Zone and the Beach Area Overlay Zone. the 2 required parkinq spaces may be provided as 1 covered space and 1 uncovered space (a] 16 TABLE E. CONTINUED CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. E.7. cont. SUBJECT Resident Parking, cont. Visitor Parking Compact Parking Recreational Space Privsts Common E.8 Private Recreational Space DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Multiple-family dwellings, cont. Required parking may be provided within an enclosed parking garage with multiple, open parking spaces, subject to the following: • Each parking space shall maintain a standard stall size of 8.5 feet by 20 feet, exclusive of supporting columns; and • A backup distance of 24 feet shall be maintained in addition to a minimum 5 feet turning bump-out located at the end of any stall series. Reguired resident parking spaces shall be located no more than 150 feet as measured in a logical walking path from the entrance of the units it could be considered to serve. 1 10 units or Iccc* 1 cpocc for oach ^ dwcllino unite or frsction thereof above 10. 5. Visitor parking must be provided in parking bays. ^ Prniprtp nf mnrp thin 1 n HwfMlinn i mitp* 1 n ft v10ft mtin nr fi ft vinft hnlrnnv 1 ProiGctc of more thon 10 dwelling unite' SQQ GGncrsI Stsndordc Table C One-familv and two-family dwellings Minimum total area per unit 400 square feet (may consist ofK more than one recreational space) Minimum dimension of . g , . recreational space Reguired private recreational space shall be located at ground level and designed so as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the dwelling it is intended to serve, and shall not have a slope gradient greater than 5%. Reguired private recreational space shall be located adjacent to the unit the area is intended to serve. Reguired private recreational space shall not be located within any reguired front yard setback area, and may not include any driveways, parking areas, storage areas, or common walkways. Open or lattice-top patio covers may be located within the reguired private recreation space (provided the patio cover complies with all applicable standards, including the reguired setbacks). Attached solid patio covers and second story decks/balconies may project into a reguired private recreational space, subject to the following: • The depth of the projection shall not exceed 6 feet (measured from the wall of the dwelling that is contiguous to the patio/deck/balconv). • The length of the projection shall not be limited, except as reguired by any setback or lot coverage standards.. The patio cover/deck/balconv shall comply with all applicable standards, including the reguired setbacks specified in Section 21.45.090. 17 TABLE E. CONTINUED CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS REF. NO. E.8. SUBJECT Private Recreational Space, cont. DEVELOPMENT STANDARD Multiple-family dwellings Minimum total area per unit (patio, porch, or balcony) Minimum dimension of patio, porch or balcony Required private recreational 60 square feet 6 feet space shall be functional, usable, and easily accessible from the dwelling it is intended to serve. Projects within the RH general plan designation may opt to provide an additional 75 sguare feet of community recreation space per unit (subject to the standards specified in Table C of this Chapter), in lieu of providing the per unit private recreational space specified above. Setbacks are applicable to streets that include parkways and sidewalks along both sides. For existing streets without parkways, the front setback shall be as follows: Front porch—16 feet, residence—20 foot minimum, side entry garago—10 feet, direct entry garage—20 feet. The average front yard setback is determined by adding together all of the unit front yard setbacks (the setback for each unit should be measured from that element of each building, excluding projections, that is located closest to tho front property line) and dividing that total by the total number of project units. If a project is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, building height shall be subject to the reguirements of Chapter 21.82 of this code. See Table C in Section 21.45.060 for reguired setbacks from an arterial street. Building setbacks shall be measured from the outside edge of the reguired street right-of-way width, Building setbacks shall be measured from one of the following (whichever is closest to the building): a) the outside edge of the reguired drive-aisle width: b) the back of sidewalk; or c) the nearest side of a parking bay located contiguous to a drive-aisle (excluding parking located in a driveway in front of a unit's garage). Any uncovered reguired parking space in the R-W zone may be located within a reguired front yard setback and may be tandem. This standard does not apply to housing for senior citizens (see Chapter 21.84 of this code). d) (2) FT (5) (6) 21.45.090 Residential additions and accessory uses. Residential Additions and Accessory Uses. Table F includes a listing of residential additions and accessory use standards that are permitted based on the type of residential use, the type of permit required and the required development standards. A. General. 1.Additions and accessory uses shall be subject to all applicable development standards of this chapter, unless otherwise specified in this section. 2. Enlargement of buildings that are legally non-conforming by reason of inadequate setbacks is permitted, provided that such enlargement does not increase the floor space more than 40% of that existing prior to such enlargement, and that the new addition complies with the setbacks and lot coverage requirements of this chapter. B. One-family dwellings and twin-homes on small lots. 1. Table F lists the provisions for residential additions and accessory uses to one- family dwellings and twin-homes on small lots. 2. The additions and accessory uses listed in Table F shall be subject to the approval/issuance of a building permit. TABLE F RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS/ AND ACCESSORY USES STANDARDS TO ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Addition/Accessory Use Attached/detached patio covers (2> Pool, spa Non-habitable detached accessory buildings/ structures (e.g., garages, workshops, decks over 30 inches in height) (1) (2) (3) Minimum Front Yard Setback 10 feet to posts (2-foot overhang permitted) 20 feet 20 feet Minimum Side and Rear Yard Setbacks 5 feet to posts (2-foot overhang permitted} 5 feet - pool 2 feet - spa 5 feet 18 TABLE F. CONTINUED RESIDENTIAL ADDITIONS AND ACCESSORY USES TO ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS Addition/Accessory Use Habitable detached accessory buildinqs (i.e. quest houses and second dwellina units) (Z'13)( ' Additions to dwelling (attached) Minimum Front Yard Setback Minimum Side and Rear Yard Setbacks Same setbacks as required for the primary dwellinq Same setbacks as required for the dwellinq Notes: (1) Maximum building height is 1 story and 14 feet with a 3:12 roof pitch or 10 feet with less than a 3:12 roof pitch.(2> Minimum 10-foot separation required between a habitable building and any other detached accessory building/structure. '•*' Must be architecturally compatible with the existing structure. Second dwellinq units are subject to Section 21.10.030.'"' C._ Condominium projects. I. _ Additions and accessory .uses to condominium projects shall be subject to Section 21.45.100 (amendments to permits). 1 JfJU, VI Use O jrtglp fgryiilw <SFK Two fgno ji\/ ffp) SP gp yp SJVFP gp jp SF, TF S£ Attached/Detached Patio Oowprp? Garages, Workshops Frontyard Arbors Tnnl ^hfri^ Df^rkR nvpr *^0 inches in height Porte cochoro Room Additions, Other Habitable Structures Second Dwelling Units Setback 20 fset 20 fset 5 feet Of! font^W 1 l*OL Must observe 3K homp with 3|j development standards of SeCtiOn °1 A^ 070 with-cili development standards and of Sections 21. 10.030 and ?1 AF, n?n «_riu>a j ui u Opfl-j^fsLf C f/->/^t »^u ICG 1 \\J posts with 3 permitted 2 ^QQf overhang g fegt K fa^f\J ICCl g.jfeat Must obEGrvs S3IT1P setbacks as hQry%gj Setback 5 fggt to QQpfp \A/JtH ?1 2-foot g fgg( NA 5 fee^ NA Open or lottics within the required private recreation pr\<^f%gs See (2) arbors not th^n A. ft v fl ft Y lOftor'Ift 5fin r\ r i v / f*\Ai o y\Jl 1 V WVdy §00 M\ s^ cp« /o\ /o\oee ^;, ^o; Permit BuildinQ A ^fl it J on BuildinQ Pi iJIHinnC7UIIVJU iy Residential A HHtf ion A rjfjjtJQn Building 19 lol* SF s^ gp Jp Guest Houses Pnnl ^nn Satellite Antenna Must comply with 3 II development standards of Cf*f*f jf^nOdJllVI 1 °1 4*i 070 20 feet NA c; feet nool NA g feet POO! 2 fegt — NA See ("*) (3}OBB \f.), \-3/ NA Residential Addition Build i no See QQctiongL 01 53 1/iQ 91 dfi nfin {4}—Maximum building height is 14 feet with a 3:12 roof pitch or 1910 feet with less than a 3:12 roof pitch. (2)—Minimum 10 foot separation required between habitable structures. tlnQ structurs &-. Residential Addition Permit. Application for a planned development residential addition permit (PDRAP) shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in this subsection. A-. Application Process. An application for a planned development residential addition permit may be made by the owners of the property or an authorized agent. The application for a residential addition permit shall be made in writing on the form provided by the planning department and shall be accompanied by the required fee. The application shall include amended exhibits, graphics, statements or other information as specified by the planning director. 2-. Noticing. Upon the acceptance of a complete application and payment of the required fees, the planning director shall notify, at least fifteen days prior to a decision on an application by mail or personal delivery, all property owners as shown on the latest equalized assessment role and located within one hundred feet from the property line of the subject property. a Written Objections. Any person so notified may file written objections or a written request to be heard within ten days after the mailing or personal delivery of the notice. If a written request to be heard is filed, the planning director shall schedule a hearing and provide written notice to the applicant and the person who requested the hearing at least five days prior to the hearing. The hearing is not a public hearing and may be informal. & Notice of Decision. Notice of the planning director's decision on a residential addition permit shall be mailed to the applicant within five days of the date of the decision. The planning director may approve or conditionally approve the request if all of the required standards are met. If a hearing is held, he shall render his decision within ten days after the conclusion of the hearing. The letter shall also be sent to any person who requested notice or appeared at the hearing. &-. Appeal. Any decision of the planning director pursuant to this section may be appealed by any person to the planning commission in accordance with Chapter 21.54, Section 21.51.140 of this 21.45.100 Amendments to permits. A. Amendments to a permit may be initiated by the property owner or an authorized agent^ or by motion of the city council, as follows: 4B. Minor Amendment. V. _ A project revision may be considered and approved as a minor amendment only if all of the following findings are made: a. Density. The proposed revision does not increase the density (i.e., the addition of units )7; b. _ The proposed revision does not decrease the density by more than 10%ton percent . and provided the density is not decreased below the minimum density of the underlying residential land use designation of the General PlanT; of c. _ The proposed revision does not change the boundary of the subject property; ferd_. Addition of New Land Use. The proposed revision does not involve the addition of a new land use not shown on the original permit (e.g., adding a commercial use to a residential project, replacing single-family units with attached residential units, vice versa for each example, etc); 20 ©re. Rearrangement of Land Uses. The proposed revision does not rearrange the major land uses within the development (e.g., it does not exchange the locations of single-family units with attached units); drf. Compliance with Standards. The proposed revision does not create changes of greater than 10%ten percent, provided that compliance will be maintained with the applicable development standards of this code as follows: (4)L Per individual lot or structure basis: Yards, setbacks Building floor area, coverage or height (except that height reductions of more than 10%ten percent are permitted); {3)]L On an aggregate project basis: Parking, open space, recreation or landscaping areas; g. The proposed revision is architecturally compatible with existing structures within the development. e2. Application Process. a. The application for a minor amendment shall be made in writing on the form provided by the planning department and shall be accompanied by the required fee. b. The application shall include amended exhibits, graphics, statements or other information as may be required to explain and justify the request; 13. Notice. a. If the planning director considers the amendment minor in nature the planning director shall give written notice by mail or personal delivery to all property owners within three hundred 100 feet of the subject property, as shown on the latest equalized assessment role, at least fifteen 15 days prior to a decision on an application; g4. Effective date of orderA0pea4. Otherwise, any decision of the planning director pursuant to this section shall be processed, heard and determined a. The effective date of the planning director's decision and method for appeal of such decision shall be governed by in accordance with Section 21.54.140 of this code; 2-C. Major Amendment. I- Any other revision to a project that does not meet the criteria for a minor amendment, as described in subsection "B.1" of this section, shall be considered a major amendment. 2. An application for a major amendment of a planned development permit shall be processed, heard and determined in the same manner as an application for a planned development permit. 3. When necessary, the amendment shall be accompanied by an amendment to the corresponding parcel map or tentative map. 21.45.110 Conversion of existing buildings to planned developments. A. Applicability. 1. Any application for the conversion of existing buildings to a planned development (e.g.. converting apartments to condominiums) a condominium conversion, shall not be subject to all the amended provisions of this chapter but shall be processed and approved or disapproved pursuant to the ordinance in effect at the time that the original project was approved or constructed. B. Building Plans and Gas/Electric Plan. 1. An application for conversion of an existing structure to a planned development shall include building plans indicating how the building relates to present building and zoning regulations and where modifications will be required. 2. Also, the application shall include a letter from San Diego Gas and eElectric explaining that the plans to connect the gas and electric system to separate systems are acceptable. C. Conversions within the Coastal Zone. 1. The conversion of existing residential units within the Coastal Zone that are occupied by persons or families of low or moderate income shall be subject to the requirements of Section 65590 of the California Government Code. GD. Notice to Tenants and Findings. !. Each prospective and existing tenant of the proposed condominium project shall be given written notice of the proposed conversion in accordance with Sections 66452.8 and 66452.9 of the California Government Code (Subdivision Map Act): and 2. In addition to all other required findings for a subdivision, the city council shall find that: make all of the findings set forth in Section 66427.1 of the California Government Code (Subdivision Map Act). 21 A-. First Notice. Each of the tenants of the proposed condominium or planned development project has been or will be given one hundred eighty days written notice of intention to convert prior to termination of tenancy due to the conversion or proposed conversion. The provisions of this subdivision shall not alter or abridge the rights or obligations of the parties in performance of their covenants, including, but not limited to, the provisions of services, payment of rent or the obligations imposed by Section 19<11, 1911.1 and 1911.2 of the Civil Code. 3r. Right to Contract for Purchase.—Each of the tenants of the proposed condominium or planned development project has been or will be given notice of an exclusive right to contract for the purchase of their respective units upon the same terms and conditions that such units will be initially offered to the general public at terms more favorable to the tenant. The right shall run for a period of not less than ninety days from the date of issuance of the subdivision public report pursuant to Section 11018.2 of the Business and Professions Code, unless the tenant gives prior written notice of his intention not to exercise the right. & Relocation Assistance. The subdivider shall provide relocation assistance equal to one month's rent to any residential tenant who relocated from the building to be converted after receipt from the subdivider of the notification required by this chapter, except when the tenant has given notice of his intent to vacate prior to receipt of the notification from the subdivider. Relocation assistance shall be provided no later than fifteen days following the subdivider's receipt of notification from the tenant of the tenant's intent to vacate unless other arrangements are made in writing between the tenant and the subdivider. 21.45.120 Expiration, extension and revisions. A. The expiration, extension or revision of a planned development of four or less lots or units shall be governed by the provision of Section 20.24.160, 20.24.180 and 20.24.080 of this code. B. The expiration, extension or revision of a planned development of five or more lots or units shall be governed by the provisions of Sections 20.12.100, 20.12.110 and 20.12.120 of this code. 21.45.130 Proposed common ownership land or improvements. A. Where a planned development contains any land or improvement proposed to be held in common ownership, the applicant shall submit a declaration of covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&Rs) with the final map. Such declaration shall set forth provisions for maintenance of all common areas, payment of taxes and all other privileges and responsibilities of the common ownership. B. The CC&Rs shall include provisions: 1. Ffor maintenance of all common areas, payment of taxes and all other privileges and responsibilities of the common ownership. 2. The CC&Rs shall include provisions pProhibiting the homeowners' association from quitclaiming land in an association easement for ownership to private property owners thus allowing the homeowners to privatize a common area for his own use. C. The CC&Rs shall be reviewed by and subject to approval of the planning director. (Ord. NS-612§1 (part), 2001) 21.45.140 Maintenance. A. All private streets, walkways, parking areas, landscaped areas, storage areas, screening sewers, drainage facilities, utilities, open space, recreation facilities and other improvements not dedicated to public use shall be maintained by the property owners. Provisions acceptable to the planning director shall be made for the preservation and maintenance of all such improvements prior to the issuance of building permits. 21.45.150 Failure to maintain. A. Public Nuisance. V. All commonly-owned lots, improvements and facilities shall be preserved and maintained in a safe condition and in a state of good repair. 2. Any failure to so maintain is unlawful and a public nuisance if it endanqersiro the health, safety and general welfare of the public and js_a detriment to the surrounding community. B. Removal of Public Nuisance. 1L In addition to any other remedy provided by law for the abatement, removal and enjoinment of such public nuisance, the community development director or public works director may, after giving notice, cause the necessary work of maintenance or repair to be done. 22 2. The costs thereof shall be assessed against the owner or owners of the project. C. Notice of Maintenance Required. 1. The notice shall be in writing and mailed toi a. aAll persons whose names appear on the last equalized assessment roll as owners of real property within the project at the address shown on the assessment roll; and b. Notice shall also be sent to aAny person known to the public works director to be responsible for the maintenance or repair of the common areas and facilities of the project under an indenture or agreement. 2. The public works director shall also cause aAt least one copy of such notice te shall be posted in a conspicuous place on the premises. No assessment shall be held invalid for failure to post or mail or correctly address any notice. & Commence Work Within Thirty Days of Notice. 3. The notice shall particularly specify^ a. Tthe work required to be done^ and shall state that b. That if-the work is not must be commenced within thirty 30_days after receipt of such notice! and diligently and without interruption prosecuted to completionT: and c. If upon the expiration of the 30 day period, the work is not commenced and being performed with diligence, the city shall cause such work to be done^r-in which case^ the cost and expense of such work, including incidental expenses incurred by the city, will be assessed against the property or against each separate lot and become a lien upon such property. B-. Expiration of Thirty-Day Period. If, upon the expiration of the thirty day period provided for in subsection (D) of this section, the work has not been done, or having been commenced, is not being performed with diligence, the public works director shall proceed to do such work or cause such work to be done. D. Upon completion of such work, the community development director or public works director shall file a written report with the city council setting forth the fact that the work has been completed and the cost thereof, together with a legal description of the property against which the cost is to be assessed. I. Tho public works director shall thereafter give notice in writing to the owners of the project in the manner provided in subsection (C) of this section Written notice shall be provided to all persons specified in subsection C.1 of this section of the hour and place that the city council will pass upon the public works director's written report and will hear any protests against the assessments shall be provided. Such notice shall also set forth the amount of the proposed assessment. Fa. Hearing. Upon the date and hour set for the hearing, the city council shall hear and consider the public works director's report and any protests before proceeding to confirm, modify or reject the assessments. GE. Confirmation of Assessment. A list of assessment as finally confirmed by the city council shall be sent to the city treasurer for collection. I. If any assessment is not paid within ten days after its confirmation by the city council, the city clerk shall cause to be filed in the office of the county recorder a notice of lien, in a form approved by the city attorney. R Notice of Lien. a. From and after the date of recordation of such notice of lien, the amount of the unpaid assessment shall be a lien on the property against which the assessment is made, and such assessment shall bear interest at the maximum rate allowed by law until paid in full. b. The lien shall continue until the amount of the assessment and all interest thereon has been paid. c. The lien shall have priority according to law. 21.45.160 Model homes. A. Except for model homes, building permits for construction within the proposed planned development shall not be issued until a final subdivision map has been recorded for the project. B. A maximum of six model home units may be constructed prior to recordation of the final map, provided that adequate provision acceptable to the planning director and city attorney are made guaranteeing removal of such complex if the final map is not recorded. 23 110 21.45.170 Restriction on reapplication for planned development permit. A. The restrictions on the reapplication for a planned development permit are specified in Section 21.54.130 of this code. No application for a planned development permit on the same property or essentially the same property for which a permit has been denied by the city council shall be accepted within twelve months of such denial. This provision may bo waived by the affirmative vote of a majority of the city council. 24 EXHIBIT Y2 ZCA 05-02 / LCPA 05-07 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS STRIKE-OUT/UNDERLINE OF PARKING CHAPTER Chapter 21.44 PARKING 21.44.010 Required off-street parking. 21.44.020 Off-street Pparking spaces required. 21.44.030 Parking requirements for uses not specified. 21.44.040 Parking provisions may be waived by planning commission. 21.44.050 General requirements. 21.44.060 Off-street parking-Residential zones. 21.44.070 Comprehensive planned facilities. 21.44.080 Required improvement and maintenance of parking area Joint use of off-street parking facilities. 21.44.090 Parking areas in R-3, R-P and R-T zones Common parking facilities. 21.44.100 Landscaping of parking areas Parking area plan. 21.44.110 Compact parking. 21.44.120 Tandem parking Substandard. 21.44.130 Required garage standards in residential zones. 21.44.010 Required off-street parking. Every building, or portion of building hereafter erected, and every change of use in an existing building, shall be provided with permanently maintained parking space as provided in this chapter, and such parking space shall be made permanently available and be permanently maintained for parking purposes; provided, however, that for single family residences any alterations or additions providing less than three hundred square feet of cumulative additional floor space (over the amount of the original dwelling structure) shall be exempted from this requirement. In cases where a fractional parking space is required, the number of required spaces shall be rounded to the nearest, highest whole number. (Ord. 0804 § 1 (part), 1086) A. Off-street parking, designed in accordance with the requirements of this chapter, shall be provided for: 1j All newly constructed buildings: 2. Additions to existing buildings, except for: a. Additions or alterations to an existing one-family dwelling when the addition or alteration results in less than 300 square feet of cumulative additional floor space (over the amount of the original dwelling structure): 3; Any change of use within an existing building. B. All reguired parking shall be made permanently available and be permanently maintained for parking purposes. C. When calculating the reguired number of parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the reguired number of parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 21.44.020 Off-street Pparking spaces required. A,. The number of off-street parking spaces required for the uses or structures designated in this section shall be no less than as set forth in Table A. below, the following: B. In the case of multiple uses in a building or on a lot the total requirements for off- street parking facilities shall be the sum of the requirements for the various uses computed separately. Off-street parking facilities for one use shall not be considered as providing reguired parking facilities for any other use except as specified in Section 21.44.080 for joint use. //A TABLE A NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED USE Residential Uses Commercial. Industrial. and Other Non- Residential Uses One-family dwellings Two-family dwellings (apartments only), for condominium projects see "planned developments" Multiple-family dwellings (apartments only), for condominium projects see "planned developments" Second dwelling units Planned Developments Fraternities Mobile Home Parks Residential Care Facilities Rooming House Housing for senior citizens Time-share projects Bed and Breakfast Uses Bowling Alleys Delicatessen Drivinq_Rang_es Financial Institutions and Professional Offices Furniture and Appliance Sales NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES Two spaces per unit, provided as either: • a two-car garage (minimum interior 20 feet x 20 feet); or ' two separate one-car garages (minimum interior 12 feet x 20 feet each) Same as reguired for one-family dwellings Visitor parking Studio and one-bedroom units Units with two or more bedrooms Visitor parking Same as reguired for multiple-family dwelling visitor parking. 1.5 spaces/unit, one of which must be covered 2 spaces/unit, one of which must be covered Projects with 10 units or fewer Projects with 11 units or more A .30 space per each unit. A .25 space per each unit. Visitor parking spaces may be covered or uncovered. 1 space (covered or uncovered), in addition to the parking reguired for the primary use (single,one-family dwelling). The additional parking space may be provided through tandem parking (provided that the one-family dwelling garage is accessed by a driveway with a minimum depth of 20 feet), or within the front yard setback. See . C_hapter_21 .45. 1.25 spaces for each sleeping room 2 spaces per unit, plus 1 visitor parking space for every 4 units. 2 spaces, plus 1 space/three beds 1 space for each sleeping room 1.5 covered spaces per unit, plus 1 covered space for an onsite manager's unit (when provided), and 1 visitor parking space per every five units, subject to approval of a site development plan. 1.2 spaces per unit 2 spaces, one of which must be covered for the owner's unit. plus 1 space for each guest room. 6 per alley 1 space/250 sguare feet of gross floor area 1 space/tee plus reguired parking for accessory uses. Medical Office Financial Institutions Other office uses Office uses in the village redevelopment zone and areas within 300 feet of its boundary 1 space/200 sguare feet of gross floor area 1 space/250 sguare feet p^gross floor area 1 space/250 sguare feet of gross floor area 1 space/300 sguare feet of gross floor area 1 space/600 sguare feet of gross floor area TABLE A. CONTINUED NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES REQUIRED USE Commercial. Industrial, and Other Non- Residential Uses, cont. Golf Courses Gvms and Health Spas Hospitals Hotels and Motels Industrial building ("spec" - no specific uses identified) Libraries Library Substations Manufacturing Mortuaries Motor Vehicle Uses Museums Professional Care Facilities Public Assembly Recreational Vehicle Storage Areas Research and Development (R&D) Restaurants Retail Uses Schools Theaters Warehouse NUMBER OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES 6 spaces/hole plus required parkinq for accessory uses. 1 space/200 square feet of qross floor area 3 spaces per bed. or 1/200 square feet of qross floor area. whichever is qreater. 1.2 spaces per unit 1 space/250 square feet of qross floor area1 1 space/200 square feet of qross floor area 1 space/250 square feet of qross floor area 1 space/400 square feet of qross floor area, plus 1 space for each vehicle used in conjunction with the use 1 space/50 square feet of assembly area Sales 1 space/400 square feet of qross floor area 4 spaces for every work bay (up throuqh three work Repair bays), plus 2 spaces per bay in excess of three bays. Workbays do not count as parkinq spaces. 1 space/500 square feet of qross floor area .45 parkinq spaces per every bed 1 space/5 seats, or 1 space/100 square feet of assembly area. whichever is qreater 1 space for every 10,000 square feet of storaqe area, with a minimum of 3 spaces. 1 space/250 square feet of qross floor area Bio industrial R&D - 1 space/300 square feet of qross floor area Less than 4,000 square feet in size 4.000 square feet or qreater Individual Shopping Center Preschools/ Nurseries Elementary Schools High Schools Colleges. Vocational Schools 1 space/100 square feet of qross floor area 40 spaces plus 1 space/50 square feet of gross floor area in excess of 4.000 square feet. 1 space/300 square feet of qross floor area. 1 space/200 square feet of qross floor area . 1 space/employee plus 1 space for each 10 students, with an adequate loadinq and unloading area 1 space/employee, with an adequate loading and unloading area 1 space/employee plus 1 space for each 10 students, with an adeguate loadinq and unloading area 1 space/employee plus 1 space for each 3 students, with an adeguate loading and unloading area 1_ spacelS seats 1 space/1,000 square feet of gross floor area, plus 1 space for each vehicle used in conjunction with the use Projects proposing a "spec" industrial building may provide parking at manufacturing or warehouse standards, provided a deed restriction is recorded on the property indicating that these uses on the //¥ property will be retained and no other type of use creating a need for additional parking will be permitted, unless more parking area is provided to meet city parking standards. 2 Uses permitted in the underlying zone may be allowed in under-parked shopping centers without the need to provide additional parking, provided there is no expansion of floor area (this does not apply to conditionally permitted uses). (a) Residential. (1) Standard Single-Family, R 1, R-A, E-A and RE Zones. Two car garage with the following exceptions: One additional paved off street (covered or uncovered) parking space shall be provided for a second dwelling unit and shall comply with the requirements of this chapter. The additional parking space may be provided through tandem parking (provided that the garage is set back a minimum of twenty feet from the property line) or the front yard setback. (2) Planned Unit Developments and Condominiums Two standard covered parking spaces. Exceptions: studio-1.5 spaces/unit, one covered/unit, planned unit developments in the RW zone-two standard spaces, one covered/unit, and second dwelling unit-one space/second unit, one covered or uncovered. Any uncovered required parking space for units in the RW zone may be located within a required front yard setback and may be tandem. The parking space for a second dwelling unit may be provided through tandem parking (provided that the covered parking spaces for the primary dwelling unit are located within a two-car garage and the garage is setback a minimum of twenty feet from the property line) or in the front yard setback. In addition, parking areas for guest parking must be provided as follows: 0.5 spaces for each unit up through ten units, 0.3 spaces for each unit in excess of ten units. Credit for visitor parking may be given for frontage on local streets that meet public street standards for detached single- family residential projects subject to the approval of tho planning commission; not less than twenty-four linoal feet per space exclusive of driveway entrances and driveway aprons shall be provided for each parking space, except where parallel parking spaces are located immediately adjacent to driveway aprons, then twenty lineal feet may be provided. (3) Apartments. Studio and one bedroom 1.5 spaces/unit. Two bedroom and more 2 spaces/unit. In addition, parking areas for guest parking must be provided as follows: 0.5 space for each unit up through ten units. 0.25 space for each unit in excess of ten units. (4) All Residential Uses Beach Area Overlay Zone Same as the requirements for planned unit developments and condominiums with the following exceptions: No credit will be given for onstreet parking. Twenty percent of the visitor parking may be provided as tandem parking for existing substandard lots if the garages are setback at least twenty feet from the front property line, or in the case where no individual property lines are present, then at least twenty feet from the edge of the street pavement or sidewalk whichever is closest to the structure. (5) Fraternities-1.25 spaces for each sleeping room. (6) Mobile Home Parks -Two spaces per unit plus one guest parking space for every four units. (7) Residential Care -Two spaces plus one space/three beds. (8) Roominghouse Ono space for each sleeping room. (9) Housing for Senior Citizens-Minimum 1.5 covered spaces per every unit, plus one covered space for an onsite manager's unit (when provided) and one guest parking space per every five units, subject to approval of a site development plan. (10) Time-Share Condominiums-Minimum 1 .2 spaces per unit subject to approval of a conditional use (b) Commercial. (1) Bed and Breakfast Inns Two standard spaces, one of which must be covered for the owner's unit, plus one space for each guest room. (2) Bowling Alleys-Six per alley. (2.5) Delicatessen — One space/two hundred and fifty square feet of gross floor area. (3) Driving Ranges- One space/tee plus required parking for accessory uses. (4) Financial Institutions and Professional Offices. (A) Medical Office One space/two hundred square feet of gross floor area. (B) Financial Institutions One space/two hundred fifty square feet of gross floor area. (C) One space/two hundred fifty square feet of gross floor area. For office uses in the village redevelopment zone and areas within three hundred feet of its boundary One space/three hundred square feet of gross floor area. (5) Furniture and Appliance One space/Six hundred square feet of gross floor area. (6) Golf Courses-Six spaces/hole plus required parking for accessory uses. (7) Gyms and Health Spas-One space/two hundred square feet of gross floor area. (8) Hospitals-Three spaces per bed or one per two hundred square feet of gross floor area, whichever is (9) Hotels and Motels--1.2 spaces per unit. (10) Libraries-One space/two hundred square feet of gross floor area. (A) Library Substations --One space/two hundred fifty square feot of gross floor area. (11) Mortuaries-One space/fifty square feet of assembly area. (12) Motor Vehicle. (A) Sales One space/four hundred square feet of gross floor area. (B) Repair-Four spaces for every work bay (up through three work bays). Two spaces per bay in excess of three bays. Workdays do not count as parking spaces. (13) Museums --One space/five hundred square feet of gross floor area. (•M) Public Assembly One space/five seats or one space/one hundred square feet of assembly area, whichever is greater. (15) Recreational Vehicle Storage Areas- One space for every ten thousand square feet of storage area, with a minimum of three spaces. (16) Restaurant. (A) Less than four thousand square feet in size One space/one hundred square feet gross floor area. (B) Four thousand square feet or greater Forty plus one space/fifty square feet of floor space in excess of four thousand square feet. (17) Retail. (A) Individual-One space/three hundred square feet of gross floor area. (B) Shopping Center-One space/two hundred square feet of gross floor area. (18) Schools. (A) Preschools/Nurseries--One space/employee plus one for each ten students, minimum, with an adequate loading and unloading area. (B) Elementary Schools One space/employee, minimum, with an adequate loading and unloading area. (C) High Schools-- One space/employee plus one space for each ten students, minimum, with an adequate loading and unloading area. (D) Colleges, Vocational Schools-One space/employee plus one space for each three students, minimum, with an adequate loading and unloading area. (19) Theaters One space/five seats. (20) Professional Care Facilities .45 parking spaces per every bed. (c) Industrial. (1) Manufacturing- -One space/four hundred square feet of gross floor area plus one stall for each vehicle used in conjunction with the use. (2) Research and Development-One space/two hundred fifty square feet of gross floor area. (A) Bio industrial research and development One space/three hundred feet of gross floor area. (3) Warehouse-One space/one thousand square feet of gross floor area plus one stall for each vehicle usod in conjunction with tho uso. (Ord. MS 703 § 1, 20GM; Ord. NS 662 § 6, 2003; Ord. NS 307 § 1, 1995; Ord. NS 288 § 1, 1091; Ord. NS 283 § 10, 1001; Ord. MS 271 § 6, 1991; Ord. NS 179 § 3, 1001; Ord. NS 138 § 1, 1991; Ord. 08O1 § A (part), 1086) 21 .44.030 Parking requirements for uses not specified. A: _ Where the parking requirements for a use are not specifically defined herein, the parking requirements for such use shall be determined by the planning commission, and such determination shall be based upon the requirements for the most comparable use specified in this chapter. (Ord. 9804 § 4 (part), 1986) 21.44.040 Parking provisions may be waived by planning commission. A. _ The planning commission may, by resolution, waive or modify the provisions as set forth in this title establishing required parking areas for uses such as electrical power generating plants, electrical transformer stations, utility or corporation storage yards or other uses of a similar or like nature requiring a very limited number of persons. (Ord. 9804 § 4 (part), 1986) 21.44.050 General requirements. The following general requirements shall apply to all parking spaces and areas: TABLE B PARKING SPACES AND AREAS Subject Parking space size Compact parking Minimum width of aisles that provide access to parking spaces Circulation Location of reguired parking Requirement Standard parking space Parallel parking space Compact parking space Nonresidential zones Residential zones All zones 30 and 45 degree parking spaces 60 degree parking spaces 90 degree parking spaces Minimum area of 170 sguare feet Minimum width of 8.5 feet Maximum overhang of 2.5 feet, provided the overhang does not encroach into any reguired landscape setback. Minimum length of 24 feet, exclusive of drivewav/drive-aisle entrances and aprons Minimum length of 20 feet if located immediately adjacent to a drivewav/drive-aisle apron Minimum width of 7 feet Minimum width of 8 feet Minimum length of 15 feet No overhang permitted Up to 25% of the total reguired parking spaces mav be com pact spaces. Up to 45% of the reguired visitor parking spaces mav be compact spaces. Compact car spaces shall be located in separate parking aisles from standard sized spaces. Aisles for compact car spaces shall be clearly marked with permanent pole signs denoting "Compact Cars Only". Compact car spaces shall be located in close proximity to the facility they are intended serve, so as to encourage their maximum usaqe. One-way traffic 14 feet wide Two-way traffic 24 feet wide One-way traffic 18 feet wide Two-way traffic 24 feet wide 24 feet wide 20 feet wide - where no vehicles pull into or back-out into a drive-aisle from a parking space. Additional width mav be reguired for vehicle/emergency vehicle maneuvering area. Circulation within a parking area must be such that a car entering the parking area need not enter a street to reach another aisle and that a car need not enter a street backwards. This provision shall not apply to off-street parking reguired for one- family and two-family dwelling units. For one-family, two- family, and multiple- f a m i 1 y dwellings For other residential uses or care facilities (e.g., housing for senior citizens, hospitals, residential care facilities, etc.) For uses other than those specified above See Section 21.44.060. Not more than 150 feet walking distance from the nearest point of the parking facility to the nearest point of the building that the parking facility is reguired to serve. Not more than 300 feet walking distance from the nearest point of the parking facility to the nearest point of the building that the parking facility is reguired to serve. TABLE B. CONTINUED PARKING SPACES AND AREAS Subject Required landscaping of parkinq areas Development and maintenance of public or private parking areas with a capacity for 5 or more vehicles For parkinq areas having a capacity of five or more vehicles (except parkinq provided for one- familv and two-family dwellings) Surfacing Border Barricades, Screening, and Landscaping Entrances ana exits Requirement For purposes of required landscaping, the words "parkinq area" shall include all blacktop or paved areas, including access wavs and areas. At least 3% of the parkinq area shall be planted and maintained with trees listed on the city's official street tree list, or approved shrubs. Said trees or shrubs shall be: • Contained in planting areas with a minimum dimension of 4 feet and bounded bv a concrete or masonry curb of a minimum of 6 inches in height: • Located throughout the off-street parkinq areas in order to obtain the maximum amount of dispersion. All landscaped areas shall be served bv a water irriqation system and be supplied with bubblers or sprinklers. All plans for such landscaped areas shall be approved bv the planninq director prior to the construction and placement thereof. Off-street parkinq areas shall be paved or otherwise surfaced and maintained so as to eliminate dust or mud, and shall be so qraded and drained as to dispose of all surface water. In no case shall such drainaqe be allowed across sidewalks or driveways. Every parkinq area that is not separated by a fence from any street or alley property line upon which it abuts, shall be provided with a suitable concrete curb or timber barrier not less than 6 inches in heiqht, and located not less than 2 feet from such street or alley property lines, and such curb or barrier shall be securely installed and maintained: provided no such curb or barrier shall be required across any driveway or entrance to such parkinq area. Every parkinq area abutting property located in a residential zone shall be separated from such property bv a solid wall, view-obscurinq fence or compact everqreen hedge 6 feet in heiqht measured from the qrade of the finished surface of such parkinq lot closest to the contiquous residential^ zoned property; provided, that alonq the required front yard, the fence, wall or hedqe shall not exceed 42 inches in heiqht. No such wall, fence or hedqe need be provided where the elevation of that portion of the parkinq area immediately adjacent to a residential zone is 6 feet or more below the elevation of such residential^ zoned property alonq the common property line. Any liqhts provided to illuminate any public parkinq area. semi-public parkinq area or used car sales area permitted bv this chapter shall be so arranqed as to reflect the liqht away from any premises upon which a dwelling unit is located. The location and desiqn of all entrances and exits shall be subject to the approval of the planninq director or other desiqnated person, provided no entrance or exit, other than on or from an alley, shall be closer than 5 feet to any lot located in a residential zone. TABLE B. CONTINUED PARKING SPACES AND AREAS Subject Parking areas for commercial or office/professional uses in R-3, R-P and R-T zones Requirement No parking lot to be used as an accessory to a commercial or office/professional establishment shall be established until reviewed bv the planning commission and its location approved. Such approval may be conditioned upon the commission's reauirinq the planting and/or maintenance of trees, shrubs or other landscaping within and along the borders of such parking area. The parking lot shall be no farther than 50 feet when measured from it's closest boundary to the commercial or office/professional establishment to which it is accessory. Such parking lot shall be used solely for the parking of private passenger vehicles. (4) Size and Access. Each off-street parking space shall have an area of not less than one hundred seventy square feet exclusive of drives or aisles and a width of not less than eight and one-half feet. Subject to the approval of the planning director, up to a two and-one-half foot overhang may be permitted. Each space shall be provided with adequate ingress and egress. Aisles to and from parking stalls shall not be less than: (A) Fourteen feet wide for thirty and forty-five degree parking; (B) Eighteen feet wide for sixty-degree parking; (C) Twenty four feet wide for ninety degree parking. Circulation within a parking area must be such that a car entering the parking area need not enter a street to reach another aisle and that a car need not enter a street backwards. This provision shall not apply to off street parking required for one family and two-family dwelling units. When the required parking space for one-family, two-family or multiple family structure in any residential zone is not to be provided in a covered garage, each such required car spaco shall be not less than two hundred square feet in area and shall be so located and/or constructed that it may later be covered by a garage structure in accordance with the provisions of this title, with the following exceptions: second dwelling units and planned unit developments in the R-W zone. (2) Locations. Off-street parking facilities shall be located as hereinafter specified. Where a distance is specified, such distance shall be the walking distance measured from the nearest point of the parking facility to the nearest point of the building that such facility is required to serve: (A) For one family, two-family or multiple family dwellings, parking facilities shall be located on the same lot or building site as the buildings they are required to serve; (B) For hospitals, sanitariums, homes for the aged, asylums, orphanages, roominghouses, lodginghouses, club rooms, fraternity and sorority houses not more than one hundred and fifty feet from the buildings they are required to serve; and (C) For uses other than those specified above, not over three hundred feet from the building they are required to serve; (3) Mixed Occupancies in a Building. In the case of mixed uses in a building or on a lot, the total requirements for off-street parking facilities shall be the sum of the requirements for tho various uses computed separately. Off-street parking facilities for one use shall not be considered as providing required parking facilities for any other use except as hereinafter specified for joint use; (4) Joint Use. The planning commission may, upon application by the owner or lessee of any property, authorize the joint use of parking facilities by the following uses or activities under the conditions specified in this title: (A) Up to fifty percent of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a use considered to be primarily a daytime use may be provided by the parking facilities of a use considered to be primarily a nighttime use; up to fifty percent of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a use considered to be primarily a nighttime use may be provided by the parking facilities of a use considered to be primarily a daytime use, provided such reciprocal parking area shall be subject to conditions set forth in paragraph (D) below; (B) Up to one hundred percent of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a church or for an auditorium incidental to a public or parochial school may be supplied by parking facilities of a use considered to be primarily a daytime use, provided such reciprocal parking area shall be subject to conditions set forth in paragraph (D) below; (C) The following uses are typical daytime uses; banks, business offices, retail stores, personal service shops, clothing or shoe repair or service shops, manufacturing or wholesale buildings and similar uses. The following uses are typical of nighttime and/or Sunday uses: Auditoriums incidental to a public or parochial school, churches, dance halls, theaters and bars; (D) Conditions required for joint use: (i) The building or use for which application is being made for authority to utilize the existing off street parking facilities provided by another building or use, shall be located within one hundred fifty foet of such parking facility, (ii) The application shall show that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the buildings or uses for which the joint use of off -street parking facilities is proposed, (iii) Parties concerned in the joint use of off-street parking facilities shall evidence agreement for such joint use by a proper legal instrument approved by the city attorney as to form and content. Such instrument, when approved as conforming to the provisions of this title, shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder and copies thereof filed with the planning director and the planning commission. (E) Up to fifty percent of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a church may be jointly utilized by an on site, accessory, child day care center provided there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the church and child day care center. (5) Common Facilities. Common parking facilities may be provided in lieu of the individual requirements contained herein, but such facilities shall bo approved by the planning commission as to size, shape and relationship to business sites to be served, provided the total of such off-street parking spaces, when used together, shall not be less than the sum of the various uses computed separately. When any such common facility is to occupy a site of five thousand square feet or more, then the parking requirements as specified herein for each of two or more participating buildings or uses may be reduced not more than fiftosn percent upon approval of development plans by the planning commission in the manner prescribed for a conditional use permit as set forth in Chapter 21.50. (b) The plan of the proposed parking area shall be submitted to the planning director at tho time of the application for the building permit for the building to which the parking area is accessory. The plans shall clearly indicate the proposed development, including location, size, shape, design, curb cuts, lighting, landscaping and other features and appurtenances of the proposed parking lot. (c) All parking areas in the R-A, R-E and R-1 zones shall be subject to the same restrictions governing location of accessory buildings on a lot as defined in the zone in which the parking area is located. In all other residential zones, the side yard setback for uncovered, off street parking areas may be reduced up to zero feet provided that a six foot-high masonry wall (or some other solid material approved by the planning commission) is built along the property line adjacent to the setback area. (Ord. NS 109 §20, 1007; Ord. NS 288 § 2, 1091; Ord. MS 283 § 11, 1991; Ord. 9801 § <\ (part), 1986) 21 .44.060 A. Off-street parking-Residential zones. In all residential zones the following parking regulations shall apply: 1. _ Garages, parking stalls, carports and RV parking spaces (excluding those in approved RV parking lots) shall be for the exclusive use of the residents only and shall not be separately sold or rented to nonresidents of the property. 2. _ Required parking spaces for dwelling units shall be located subject to the following: TABLE C LOCATION OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Parking Required For: One-family. Two-family, and Multiple- family dwellings All dwelling types Multiple-family dwellings Location Standards For Required Parking Spaces Reguired parking spaces shall be located on the same lot or building site as the buildings they are required to serve. Reguired parking shall not be located within the front yard setback. Reguired uncovered parking spaces may be located within the side and/or rear yard setback, provided that a 6 foot-high masonry wall (or some other solid material approved by the decision-making authority) is built along the property line adjacent to the setback area. Reguired parking spaces shall be located no more than 150 feet as measured in a logical walking path from the entrance to the unit it could be considered to serve. TABLE C. CONTINUED LOCATION OF REQUIRED PARKING SPACES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Parking Required For: One-family. Two-family, and Multiple- family dwellings, cont. Visitor parking for two-family and multiple- family dwellings Second dwelling units Existing substandard frontage lots with a width of less than 50 feet Subterranean parking Location Standards For Reguired Parking Spaces Same as parking required for primary residential use, with the following exception: • Reguired visitor parking need not be located within a garage. • Reguired visitor parking spaces shall be not more than 300 feet walking distance to the unit the parking space is reguired to serve. • For projects with 10 or fewer units (outside the Beach Area Overlay Zone), all reguired visitor parking may be located within driveways (located in front of a unit's garage), provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more (measured from the front property line, back of sidewalk, or edge of drive-aisle. whichever is closest to the structure). Same as parking reguired for primary residential use, with the following exceptions: • May be located in the front yard setback; and • May be located as a tandem space on a driveway in front of the primary residence's garage (provided the garage is set back a minimum of 20 feet from the property line Tandem parking within the front yard setback shall be permitted, provided: • There is a minimum of one parking space per dwelling unit located within the reguired setback lines: and • The front yard building setback is no less than 20 feet (in the R-W zone, the front yard setback shall be no less than 10 feet to a second or third building floor). A zero foot setback for subterranean parking shall be permitted, provided that within the setback area(s) all of the "subterranean parking structure" is completely underground and the setbacks are fully landscaped, except for driveways necessary to provide access. 3. standards: Garages in residential zones shall be constructed according to the following TABLE D RESIDENTIAL GARAGE STANDARDS Residential Use Garages for one-family and two-family dwellings Garages for multiple- family dwellings (if provided for reguired parking) Garage Standard The two reguired parking spaces per unit shall be provided within either: • A two-car garage with a minimum interior dimension of 20 feet by 20 feet: or • Two one-car garages with interior dimensions of 12 feet by 20 feet each. One-car garage Two-car garage (both spaces for same unit) Multiple one-car garages in one structure Enclosed parking garage with multiple open parking spaces Minimum interior dimensions of 12 feet by 20 feet. Minimum interior dimensions of 20 feet by 20 feet. Each separate, one-car garage shall have interior dimensions of 12 feet by 20 feet, exclusive of supporting columns. As a minimum, each space shall be separated from the adjacent garage, floor to ceiling, by a permanent stud partition with 1/2-inch gypsum board on one side, where no additional fire protection is reguired. Each parking space shall maintain a standard stall size of 8.5 feet by 20 feet, exclusive of supporting columns or posts.. A backup distance of 24 feet shall be maintained in addition to a minimum 5 feet turning bump-out located at the end of any stall series. 10 4. regulations: The parking of vehicles in residential zones shall be subject to the following TABLE E WHERE VEHICLES CAN BE PARKED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Type Of vehicle Passenger vehicles, and Light-duty commercial vehicles used transportation by an occupant Recreational vehicles. boats, and trailers One-family. two-family, and multiple-family dwellings One-family individual lots (in addition to parking spaces provided as the dwelling) One-family dwellings on individual lots Where Vehicles Can Be Parked Garaqe Covered or uncovered parking spaces provided as required for the dwelling unit In the required front yard on a paved driveway or parking area that: 1) Does not exceed 30% of the required front yard area: or 2) Is comprised of 24 feet of width extended from the property line to the rear of the required front yard, whichever is greater. A paved area between the required front yard and the actual front of the building, as long as it is an extension and does not exceed the width of the area described above. Any other area of the lot provided that they are screened from view from ., I_|* • LA. fthe public right-of-way. For corner lots, the provisions of this subsection shall apply to the required street side yard: however, in no case, shall the provisions of this section allow parking in both the reguired front yard and the required street side yard. In an enclosed structure observing all required setbacks Open parkinq in the side yard or the rear yard Open parkinq in the reguired front yard if the parkinq area does not exceed the maximum paved area permitted for passenger vehicles, and the planning director determines, after qivinq the same notice as provided for administrative variances in Section 21.51.040 of this code. that access to the side or rear yard cannot be provided. In makinq this determination, the planninq director shall consider: 1. Whether parkinq in, or access to, the side or rear yard would require structural alteration to the existing residence, or would reguire the removal of significant or unigue landscaping. A fence shall not be deemed to prevent access to the side or rear yard; 2. Whether parkinq in or access to the side or rear yard would require extensive grading: 3. Whether, because of the confiquration of the lot, existing landscaping, the location of the structures on the lot, and the size of the recreational vehicle, parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would interfere with visibility to or from any street: 4. Whether allowing parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would interfere with traffic on the street or sidewalk, or would encroach into the street and utility right-of-way. Any person objecting to a decision made pursuant this subsection may reguest in writing within ten days of the determination by the planninq director, an administrative hearing with the planninq director. The planninq director shall apply the criteria of this section in making his determination. The decision of the director shall be final unless the director's decision is appealed to the planning commission. The effective date of the planning director's decision and method of appeal of such decision shall be governed by Section 21.54.140 of this code. Note: A corner lot is deemed to have reasonable access to the rear yard. Notwithstanding the above, during the construction of a permanent one- family dwellinq on a lot, the owner of the lot may live in a recreational vehicle upon said lot during construction of said dwelling for a period not to exceed 6 months: 11 TABLE E. CONTINUED WHERE VEHICLES CAN BE PARKED IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES Type Of Vehicle Recreational vehicles, boats, and trailers, cont. Inoperable Vehicles Heavv-Dutv Commercial Vehicles One-family dwellings on individual lots, cont. One-family, two-family. & multiple-family dwellings One-family. two-family, & multiple-family dwellings Where Vehicles Can Be Parked The provisions listed in this section are not intended to supersede more restrictive homeowner provisions contained in approved conditions, covenants and restrictions (CC&Rs). If the provisions of any such CC&Rs are less restrictive than the ordinance codified in this section. then the provisions contained herein shall apply. Storage or parking of inoperable, wrecked, dismantled or abandoned vehicles shall be regulated by Chapter 10.52 of this code, with the following exception: • For one-family dwellings on individual lots, not more than two vehicles in any inoperable, wrecked or dismantled condition may be parked in the side yard or rear yard while said vehicles are being repaired or restored by the owner of the property, provided the vehicles are visually screened from the public right-of-way. No heavy-duty commercial vehicles as defined by Section 10.40.075 of this code, except for trailers as permitted by the provision for "recreational vehicles, boats, and trailers" above, shall be parked on any residential lot, except while loading or unloading property; or when such vehicle is parked in connection with, and in aide of, the performance of a service to the property on which the vehicle is parked. -f^) Passenger Vehicles. Passenger vehicles including light-duty commercial vehicles used as a principal means of transportation for the occupant of the residence may be parked in the required front yard in single-family zones on a paved driveway or parking area which does not exceed thirty percent of the required front yard area or an area that is comprised of twenty-four feet of width extended from the property line to the rear of the required front yard whichever is greater. Passenger vehicles may also be parked in a paved area between the required front yard and the actual front of the building as long as it is an extension and does not exceed the width of the area described above. Passenger vehicles may be parked in any other area of the lot provided that they are screened from view from the public right-of way. For corner lots, the provisions of this subsection shall apply to the required street side yard; however, in no case, shall the provisions of this section allow parking in both the required front yard and the required street sideyard. {2} Recreational Vehicles. Recreational vehicles, boats and trailers may be parked in single- family zones as follows: (A) In an enclosed structure observing all required setbacks; (B) Open parking in the side yard or the rear yard; {G} Open parking in the required front yard if the planning director determines after giving the same notice as provided for administrative variances in Section 21.51.040 of this code that access to the side or rear yard cannot be provided. In making this determination, the planning director shall consider: (i) Whether parking in or access to the side or rear yard would require structural alteration to the existing residence or would require the removal of significant or unique landscaping. A fence shall not be deemed to prevent access to the side or rear yard, (it) Whether parking in or access to the side or rear yard would require extensive grading, (wi) Whether because of the configuration of the lot, existing landscaping, the location of the structures on the lot, and the size of the recreational vehicle, parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would interfere with visibility to or from any street, (iv) Whether allowing parking of the recreational vehicle in the front yard would interfere with traffic on the street or sidewalk or would encroach into the street and utility right-of-way. The area for the parking of the recreation vehicle in the front yard shall not exceed the maximum paved area permitted for passenger vehicles. A corner lot is deemed to have reasonable access to the rear (G>) Notwithstanding the above, during the construction of a permanent single-family residence on a lot, the owner of the lot may live in a recreational vehicle upon said lot during construction of said residence for a period not to exceed six months; 12 (E) - The provisions listed in this section are not intended to supersede more restrictive homeowner provisions contained in approved conditions, covenants and restrictions. If the provisions of any such conditions, covenants and restrictions are less restrictive than the ordinance codified in this section, then the provisions contained herein shall apply. (3) - Inoperable Vehicles. — Storage or parking — of inoperable, — wrecked, — dismantled — of abandoned vehicles shall be regulated by Chapter 10.52 of this code; provided, however, that not more than two vehicles in any inoperable, wrecked or dismantled condition may be parked in the side yard or rear yard while said vehicles are being repaired or restored by the owner of the property provided the vehicles are visually screened from the public right-of-way. (4) - Heavy Duty Commercial Vehicles. No heavy-duty commercial vehicles as defined by Section 10.40.075 of this code except for trailers as permitted in subsection (2) above shall be parked on any residential lot except while loading or unloading property; or when such vehicle is parked in connection with, and in aide of, the performance of a service to tho property on which the vehicle is {§) - Multiple Family Projects. The location of vehicle parking for multiple-family residential projects shall be regulated by Sections 21. 44. 050, 21.44.060 and 21. /H. 070 of this code. (§) - Planned Development. For residential projects developed under Chapter 21.45, parking shall be regulated by the planned development permit. f£) - Administrative Hearing. Any person objecting to a decision made pursuant to subsection (2)(C) above may request in writing within ten days of the determination by the planning director, an administrative hearing with the planning director. The planning director shall apply the criteria of this section in making his determination. The decision of the director shall be final unless the director's decision is appealed to the planning commission. The effective date of the planning director's decision and method of appeal of such decision shall be governed by Section 21. 54. "MO of this code. (Ord. NS 675 § 39, 2003; Ord. 98tM § 1 (part), 1086) 21.44.070 Comprehensive planned facilities. A. _ Areas may be exempted from the parking requirements as otherwise set up in this chapter, provided: (1.)- Such area shall be accurately defined by the planning commission after processing in the same manner required for an amendment to the zoning title; (2.) No such district may be established and exempted from the provisions of Section 21.44.43020 unless sixty percent 60% or more of all record lots comprising such proposed district are zoned to uses first permitted in a commercial (C) or industrial (M) zone; (3.) Such exemptions shall apply only to uses first permitted in the commercial (C) or industrial (M) zones; (4.) Before such defined district shall be exempt as provided in this section, active proceeding under any applicable legislative authority shall be instituted to assure that the exempted area shall be provided with comprehensive parking facilities which will reasonably serve the entire district. (Ord. 9804 § 4 (part), 1986) 21.44.080 _ Joint use of off-street parking facilities. A. The planning commission may, upon application by the owner or lessee of any property, authorize the joint use of off-street parking facilities by the following uses or activities: 1- _ Up to 50% of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a use considered to be primarily a daytime use may be provided by the parking facilities of a use considered to be primarily a nighttime use: 2. _ Up to 50% of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a use considered to be primarily a nighttime use may be provided by the parking facilities of a use considered to be primarily a daytime use: 3. _ Up to 100% of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a church or for an auditorium incidental to a public or parochial school may be supplied by parking facilities of a use considered to be primarily a daytime use: 4. _ Up to 50% of the parking facilities required by this chapter for a church may be jointly utilized by an on-site. accessory, child day care center provided there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the church and child day care center. 13 ISff 5. The following uses are typical daytime uses: banks, business offices, retail stores, personal service shops, clothing or shoe repair or service shops, manufacturing or wholesale buildings and similar uses; 6. The following uses are typical of nighttime and/or Sunday uses: auditoriums incidental to a public or parochial school, churches, dance halls, theaters and bars. B. The planning commission may authorize the joint use of off-street parking facilities by the uses or activities specified above, subject to the following conditions: •\. The buildings or uses associated with the joint use of a parking facility shall be located within 150 feet of such parking facility. 2. The application shall show that there is no substantial conflict in the principal operating hours of the buildings or uses for which the joint use of a parking facility is proposed. 3. Parties involved in the joint use of a parking facility shall provide evidence of agreement for such joint use by a proper legal instrument approved by the city attorney as to form and content. Such instrument, when approved as conforming to the provisions of this title, shall be recorded in the office of the county recorder and copies thereof filed with the planning director. 21.44.090 Common parking facilities. A. Common parking facilities may be provided in lieu of the individual requirements contained herein, but such facilities shall be approved by the decision-making authority as to size, shape and relationship to business sites to be served, provided the total of such off-street parking spaces, when used together, shall not be less than the sum of the various uses computed separately. B. When any such common facility is to occupy a site of 5.000 square feet or more, then the parking requirements as specified herein for each of two or more participating buildings or uses may be reduced not more than 15%, subject to approval by the decision-making authority. 21.44.100 Parking area plan. A. The site plan submitted with a building permit application for the building to which a parking area is accessory shall clearly indicate the proposed development, including location, size, shape, design, curb cuts, lighting, landscaping and other features and appurtenances of the proposed parking area. 21.44.080 Required improvement and maintenance of parking area. Every lot used as a public or private parking area and having a capacity of five or more vehicles shall be developed and maintained in the following manner: (4^ Surfacing. Off street parking areas shall be paved or otherwise surfaced and maintained so as to eliminate dust or mud and shall be so graded and drained as to dispose of all surface water. In no case shall such drainage be allowed across sidewalks or driveways; (2) Border Barricades, Screening and Landscaping. (A) Every parking area that is not separated by a fence from any street or alley property line upon which it abuts, shall be provided with a suitable concrete curb or timber barrier not less than six inches in height; located not less than two feet from such street or alley property lines and such curb or barrier shall be securely installed and maintained; provided no such curb or barrier shall be required across any driveway or entrance to such parking area, 8) Every parking area abutting property located in one of the residential zones shall be separated from such property by a solid wall, view obscuring fence or compact evergreen hedge six feet in height measured from the grade of the finished surface of such parking lot closest to the contiguous residential zone property; provided, that along the required front yard the fence, wall or hedge shall not exceed forty two inches in height. No such wall, fence or hedge need be provided where the elevation of that portion of the parking area immediately adjacent to a residential zone is six feet or more below the elevation of such residential zone property along the common property liner (G) Any lights provided to illuminate any public parking area, semi-public parking area or used car sales area permitted by this chapter shall be so arranged as to reflect the light away from any promises upon which a dwelling unit is located; (3) Entrances and Exits. The location and design of all entrances and exits shall be subject to the approval of the planning director or other designated person, provided no entrance or exit other than on or from an alley shall be closer than five feet to any lot located in an "R" zone. (Ord. 9804 § 4 (part), 1986) 14 21.44.090 Parking areas in R-3, R P and R T zones. Every parking area located in an R-3, R-P or R-T zone shall be governed by the following provisions in addition to those required above: (4) No parking lot to be used as an accessory to a commercial or office/professional establishment shall be established until it shall first have been reviewed by the planning commission and its location approved. Such approval may be conditioned upon the commission's requiring the planting and/or maintenance of trees, shrubs or other landscaping within and along the borders of such parking (2) Such a parking lot to be used as an accessory to a permitted commercial or office/professional establishment shall be so located that the boundary of such parking lot closest to the site of the commercial or office/professional establishment to which it is accessory shall be not more than fifty feet distant; (3) Such parking lot shall be used solely for the parking of private passenger vehicles; (4) No sign of any kind, other than one designating entrances, exits, conditions of use or the location of visitor parking spaces in residential projects shall be maintained on such parking lot. Any such sign shall not exceed eight square feet in area. (Ord. 9804 § 4 (part), 1986) 21.44.100 Landscaping of parking areas. Every required parking area having a capacity of five or more vehicles, except in R-A, R-1 and R- 2 zones, shall bo landscaped as follows: (4) For purposes of this section, the words "parking area" shall include all blacktop or paved areas,.including access ways and areas; (2) At least three percent of said area shall be planted and maintained with trees listed on the city official stroot tree list, or approved shrubs; (3) Said trees or shrubs shall be: {A) Planted in accordance with the requirements of Section 20.16.180 of this code, (B) Contained in planting areas with a minimum dimension of four feet and bounded by a concrete or masonry curb of a minimum of six inches in height, (G) Located throughout the off-street parking areas in order to obtain the maximum amount of dispersion; (4) All landscaped areas shall be served by a water irrigation system and be supplied with bubblers or sprinklers; (§) All plans for such landscaped areas shall be approved by the city planning department, and city manager prior to the construction and placement thereof. (Ord. 9804 § 4 (part), 1986) 21.44.110 Compact parking. Compact parking space shall be permitted and regulated as follows: (4) Nonresidential zones, up to twenty-five percent of the total required parking spaces may be compact spaces. (2) Residential zones up to forty-five percent of the required visitor parking spaces may be compact spaces. (3) All compact parking spaces regardless of the zone shall comply with the following criteria: (A) Compact car spaces shall be located in separate parking aisles from standard sized (B) Aisles for compact car spaces shall be clearly marked with permanent pole signs denoting "Compact Cars Only;" {Q-. Compact car spaces shall be located in close proximity to the facility which they serve so as to encourage their maximum usage; (O) Compact spaces must be a minimum width of eight feet and a minimum length of fifteen feet with no overhang permitted. (Ord. 9804 § 4 (part), 1986) 15 21.44.120 Tandem parking Substandard. (a) Tandem parking within the front yard setback shall be permitted for those existing substandard frontage lots with a width of less than fifty feet, provided there is a minimum of one parking space per dwelling unit provided for within the required setback lines, and that the front yard building setback be no less than twenty feet. (te) Front yard building setbacks for second and third floors in R W zones only, shall be allowed to extend to the ten-foot setback line when tandem parking is utilized in the front yard. (Ord. 9804 § f( (part), 1986) 21.44.130 Required garage standards in residential zones. Required garages in residential zones shall be constructed according to the following standards: (4^ Garage Area in the R 1 Zone. All garages shall have minimum dimensions of twenty feet by twenty feet as measured from the interior wall edges of the garage. (2) Garage Area in Multi family Zones. (A) Single-car garage. All garages shall have minimum dimensions of twelve feet by twenty feet as measured from the interior wall edges of the garage. (8) Double-car garages (both spaces for same unit). All garages shall have minimum dimensions of twenty feet by twenty feet as measured from the interior wall edges of the garago. (G) Multi 'Single-car garages in one structure. Each separate, single car garage shall have interior dimensions of twelve feet by twenty feet, exclusive of supporting columns. As a minimum, each space shall be separated from the adjacent garage, floor to ceiling, by a permanent stud partition with one half inch gypsum board on one side, where no additional fire protection is required: (3) Underground garages with shared open parking shall maintain a standard stall size of eight and one-half feet by twenty feet, exclusive of supporting columns or posts. A backup distance of twenty-four feet shall be maintained in addition to a minimum five feet turning bumpout located at the end of any stall series. (4) In all residential zones other than R -1, garages, parking stalls, carports and RV parking spaces (excluding those in approved RV parking lots) shall be for the exclusive use of the residents only and shall not be separately sold or rented to nonresidents of the property. (Ord. 9804 (part), 1986; Ord. 9792 § 1, 1986) 16 /a? EXHIBIT Y3 ZCA 05-02 / LCPA 05-07 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS STRIKE-OUT/UNDERLINE OF BEACH AREA OVERLAY ZONE CHAPTER Chapter 21.82 BEACH AREA OVERLAY (BAO) ZONES 21.82.010 Intent and purpose. 21.82.020 Application. 21.82.030 Permitted uses. 21.82.040 Site development plan required. 21.82.050 Building height. 21.82.060 Parking. 21.82.070 Dwelling units per lot. 21.82.080 Approved projects. 21.82.010 Intent and purpose. A. The intent and purpose of the beach area overlay (BAO) zone is to supplement the underlying residential zoning by providing additional regulations for development within designated beach areas to: (1.) Ensure that development will be compatible with surrounding developments, both existing and proposed, in the beach area; (2.) Provide for adequate parking as needed by residential projects; (3.) Ensure that adequate public facilities will exist to serve the beach area; (4.) Protect the unique mix of residential development and aesthetic quality of the area. 21.82.020 Application. A. The beach area overlay zone shall apply to any residentially zoned property within the area bounded by the AT&SF Railroad right-of-way to the east, the Pacific Ocean to the west, Buena Vista Lagoon to the north and Agua Hedionda Lagoon to the south. 21.82.030 Permitted uses. A. In the beach area overlay zone, any principal use, accessory use, transitional use or conditional use permitted in the underlying zone is permitted subject to the same conditions and restrictions applicable in such underlying zone and to all of the requirements of this chapter. 21.82.040 Site development plan required. A. No building permit or other entitlement shall be issued for any use in the beach area overlay zone unless there is a valid site development plan approved for the property processed pursuant to Section 21.06 (Q-Overlay Zone) of this code. When a development requires a conditional use permit or is processed pursuant to Chapter 21.45 of this code, a site development plan is not required unless the planned development is for four or less units in which case a site development plan shall be processed. Further, a site development plan is not required for the construction, reconstruction, alteration or enlargement of a single-family residential dwelling on a residentially zoned lot. 21.82.050 Building height. A. No newly constructed, reconstructed, altered or enlarged residential structure within the beach area overlay zone shall exceed thirty feet and two stories if a minimum 3/12 roof pitch is provided or twenty-four feet and two stories if less than a 3/12 roof pitch is provided. Building height shall be measured as defined in Section 21.04.065 of this title. Underground parking areas and basements shall not be considered a story. In the case of underground parking as defined in Section 21.04.370 of this title, or basements as defined in Section 21.04.045 of this title, building height shall be measured from the existing grade. 21.82.060 Parking. A. With the exception of the parking standards specified in this section, the parking standards specified in Chapter 21.44 shall apply. B. The parking standards specified in Chapter 21.45 shall apply to planned developments within the BAO zone. (a) Resident Parking. All dwelling units shall have at least two full-sized residential parking spaces, one of which must be covered, except for studio units, which shall have a ratio of 1.5 parking spaces per unit, for which one space per unit shall be covered.—In cases where a fractional parking space is required, the required number of spaces shall be rounded to the nearest, highest whole number. {fe)C. Visitor Parking. (1.) Visitor parking shall be provided for all residential development, as follows: TABLE A NUMBER OF VISITOR PARKING SPACES REQUIRED Number of Units Projects with 10 dwelling units or less Greater Projects with 11 units, . 4 ,* i ii- .,or more tnan iu dwelling units Amount of Visitor Parking 1 space for each 2 dwellinq units or fraction thereof A .30 space per each unit or fraction thereof. §°mppff fnr thp fir^t 10 nnit^ nlii0 1 ^n^pp for p^ph 4 Hwpllinn unite 3bove 10 or fraction thereof. A .25 spdce per each unit or fraction f haranf Twenty percent of the visitor parking spaces may be provided as tandem parking if the garages are set back at least twenty feet from the front property line, or in the case where no individual property lines are present, then at least twenty feet from the edge of the street pavement or sidewalk, whichever is closest to the structure; 2. When calculating the required number of parking spaces, if the calculation results in a fractional parking space, the reguired number of parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole number. 3. Required visitor parking may be provided within driveways, subject to the following: a. One required visitor parking space may be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 40 feet or more. b. If all streets within and/or adjacent to the project allow for on-street parking on both sides of the street, then visitor parking may be located in a driveway, subject to the following: i. All reguired visitor parking may be located within driveways, provided that all dwelling units in the project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more. H. If less than 100% of the driveways in a project have a depth of 20 feet or more, then a .25 visitor parking space will be credited for each driveway in a project that has a depth of 20 feet or more (calculations resulting in a fractional parking space credit shall always be rounded down to the nearest whole number). iv. The minimum 20-foot driveway depth required for visitor parking applies to driveways for front or side-loaded garages, and is measured from the property line, back of sidewalk, or from the edge of street pavement, whichever is closest to the structure. (24.)- Up to fifty-five percent 55% of the visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (eight feet by fifteen feet); (35.) No credit will be given for on-street parking to satisfy any of the parking requirements above. (e) Building setbacks from open parking areas shall not be less than five feet. (4)— Screening of Parking Areas. All open parking areas consisting of five or more spaces shall be screened from adjacent residences and public rights'Of-way by either a view-obscuring wall or landscaping subject to the approval of the planning director. 21.82.070 Dwelling units per lot. (a) Unless a lower residential density is established by the underlying zoning, the number of residential dwelling units permitted on a lot shall be as follows: /a? (1) For property which has a general plan designation of RLM residential low-medium density, the residential density shall be 1.0 to 4.0 dwelling units per acre. (3) For property which has a general plan designation of RM residential medium density, the residential density shall be 4.1 to 9.0 dwelling units per acre. (3) For property which has a general plan designation of RMH residential medium-high density, the residential density shall be 9.1 to 15.0 dwelling units per acre. (4) For property which has a general plan designation of RH residential high density, the residential density shall be 15.1 to 23.0 dwelling units per acre. (b) Whenever density is established in terms of ranges, the density for a project shall be the lowest density established by the range unless the planning commission or the city council, whichever is the final decision-making body for a project, finds that a greater density within the range is justified under the provisions of the general plan. 21.82.0S70 Approved projects. A. This chapter shall not apply to projects having received final discretionary approval, pursuant to Titles 20 and 21 both, from the eCity of Carlsbad prior to June 26, 1985. If projects exempted above have not commenced construction and made substantial progress towards completion by June 26, 1987, then this chapter shall apply to those projects at that time. 130 f . ( The City of Carlsbad Planning Department A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Item No. P.C. AGENDA OF: October 18, 2006 Application complete date: N/A Project Planner: Gary Barberio, Chris DeCerbo, and Jennifer Jesser Project Engineer: N/A SUBJECT: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS - A request for a recommendation to adopt a Negative Declaration, and recommendation of approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to: (1) amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation, and; (2) amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. I. RECOMMENDATION That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 6140 RECOMMENDING ADOPTION of a Negative Declaration and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6141 and 6142 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of ZCA 05- 02 and LCPA 05-07 based on the findings contained therein. II. INTRODUCTION This proposal involves a City-initiated Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to: (1) amend standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation, and; 2) amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. This proposal is consistent with the applicable portions of the General Plan and internally consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and the Local Coastal Program. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND This proposed Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment consists of: (1) amending standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation, and; 2) o I3t ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS October 18, 2006 Page 2 amending the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. The reasons for this amendment are as follows: A. General Plan: Consistent with State law, the Land Use Element of the General Plan was amended in 2005 to include a new provision requiring all residential projects to achieve the minimum density of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation (GPA 03-13). B. State Law: Additionally, Government Code Section 65863 requires that the City shall not approve residential projects at a density below that used to demonstrate compliance with Housing Element law, unless it is found that the remaining residential sites in the City are adequate to accommodate the City's share of the Regional Housing Need (RHNA), or additional sites are identified with equal or greater density. For the current and proposed Housing Elements, the Growth Management Control Point density (GMCP) was used to demonstrate compliance with Housing Element law. If a project is proposed below the GMCP the City is required to make the findings specified in Government Code Section 65863. Each time the City approves a project at a density below the GMCP, the burden to provide those units gets transferred to the remaining residential sites in the City. As more residential sites develop there are fewer and fewer sites available to accommodate the number of units the City is required to provide by Housing Element law and the Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA). Therefore, if the City continues to approve development projects at densities below the GMCP there may come a point in time when the remaining number of residential sites is not adequate to accommodate the City's share of the regional housing need. For reference, the General Plan has five residential land use designations with minimum, GMCP and maximum densities as shown below. Land Use Designation RL- Residential Low Density RLM - Residential Low Medium Density RM - Residential Medium Density RMH - Residential Medium High Density RH - Residential High Density Minimum Density (du/ac) 0 0 4 8 15 Growth Management Control Point (du/ac) 1 3.2 6 11.5 19 Maximum Density (du/ac) 1.5 4 8 15 23 Based upon a historical review of approved residential development projects since the adoption of the City's Growth Management Program in 1986, it is concluded that minimum and GMCP densities are achievable subject to the development standards of the City's base underlying residential zones (i.e.; R-l, R-2, R-3, and RD-M). However, both minimum and GMCP densities have generally not been achieved or have been much more difficult to achieve when residential projects are subject to the additional development standards of the City's Residential Overlay Zones (i.e.; Planned Development and Beach Area Overlay). In these circumstances, specific standards 135, ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS October 18, 2006 Page 3 within each overlay zone are impediments to achieving minimum and GMCP densities, particularly for infill development sites and sites designated RMH (11.5 du/ac GMCP) and RH (19 du/ac GMCP) and intended for the City's highest density residential projects. C. Habitat Management Plan: With the adoption of the City's Habitat Management Plan, the development area for a number of residential properties has been reduced to as little as 25% of the total site area. The remaining 75% area of these properties is required to be set aside as open space to preserve sensitive habitat. The Land Use Element of the Carlsbad General Plan acknowledges this condition and includes a policy (Residential Policy C.3) which specifies that the City will "consider density and development right transfers in instances where the property owner is preserving open space consistent with the City's Habitat Management Plan". For example, a site with 10 developable acres and an RM Land Use designation (6 du/acre GMCP) could achieve up to 60 total dwelling units at the GMCP. If 75% of the site is preserved in open space and the units are transferred to the remaining 2.5 site acres, the project could yield a maximum density of 23 du/acre (57 units on 2.5 acres). In this circumstance, the 2.5 acre site would be required to be redesignated to RH and the modifications to the PD standards proposed with this amendment would provide the necessary flexibility to accommodate a higher density clustered development project resulting from this density transfer, while still maintaining consistency with the Growth Management Plan. For the aforementioned reasons, City staff undertook a comprehensive assessment of the applicable residential development standards of the Zoning Ordinance and identified those standards which should be amended to enable residential property owners the ability to achieve the unit yield potential of their land consistent with the Growth Management Plan, while still ensuring the achievement of high quality residential project design. Accordingly, this report includes recommendations regarding specific development standards which should be modified to accommodate minimum and GMCP densities. D. Planned Development Ordinance Update: The last time the Planned Development (PD) Ordinance was comprehensively updated was in 2001. This proposed project addresses those development and design standards of the PD Ordinance, which after 5 years of implementation, were determined by staff and the residential development community to require further refinement due to ambiguities and inconsistencies. Prior to scheduling this proposed Zone Code Amendment for public hearing, staff distributed draft ordinance text revisions to the Carlsbad Development Community (i.e.; the BIA, Architects, Developers, Engineers and Planning Consultants) for review, comment and input. Although there was limited feedback (3 letters), the general consensus of opinion was very supportive of the proposed ordinance amendments. IV. ANALYSIS As discussed above, there are two primary objectives for this project including: 1) revising development standards to enable the achievement of minimum and Growth Management Control /33 ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS October 18, 2006 Page 4 Point residential densities, and; 2) amending the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. Reference can be made to Attachment 4 for a detailed discussion and analysis of all text revisions. Exhibits "Y1" - "Y3" includes a strike-out and underline version of the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments. The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing its compliance/consistency with the following: A. Carlsbad General Plan; B. Zoning Ordinance (Title 21); and C. Local Coastal Program. A. General Plan Pursuant to State Planning Law, a City's Zoning Ordinance is one of the primary means for implementing a City's General Plan. Accordingly any amendment to a Zoning Ordinance is required to be consistent with the applicable policies and programs of the General Plan. As described in Table 1 below, this proposal to: (1) amend development standards within the City's Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation, and; 2) amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies is consistent with the applicable policies and programs of the General Plan. Particularly relevant to this proposed project are the Land Use, and Housing Elements. TABLE 1 - GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE ELEMENT GOAL, OBJECTIVE, POLICY OR PROGRAM ORDINANCE CONSISTENCY Land Use Consider density and development right transfers in instances where the property owner is preserving open space consistent with the City's Habitat Management Plan. With the adoption of the City's Habitat Management Plan (HMP), the development area for a number of residential properties has been reduced to as little as 25% of the total site area. The remaining area of these properties is required to be preserved in open space pursuant to the HMP. This project will modify development standards to provide the flexibility necessary to accommodate higher density clustered development projects that result from density transfers while still maintaining consistency with the Growth Management Plan. Land Use Amend Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (zoning ordinance), as necessary to be consistent with the approved land use revisions of the General Plan. The Land Use Element of the General Plan was amended in 2005 to include a new provision requiring all residential projects to achieve the minimum density of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation. The proposed standards modifications will provide the flexibility required to achieve minimum General Plan densities. ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS October 18; 2006 PageS TABLE 1 - GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE CONTINUE ELEMENT GOAL, OBJECTIVE, POLICY OR PROGRAM ORDINANCE CONSISTENCY Housing Element New housing developed with a diversity of types, prices, tenures, densities and locations and in sufficient quantity to meet the demand of anticipated City and regional growth (RHNA). Modify certain development standards or recommend that certain Municipal Code changes be implemented to encourage the development of low or moderate income housing. The City is required by State Housing Element law to accommodate its designated share of the regional housing need (RHNA). The proposed Carlsbad Housing Element (2005-2010) identifies that the City has a Regional Housing Need (RHNA) of 2,689 lower income and 1,333 moderate income dwelling units. State Housing Element law assumes that lower and moderate income housing is achievable at 20 du/ac and 12 du/ac respectively. Government Code Section 65863 requires that the City shall not approve residential density below the density used to demonstrate compliance with Housing Element law (in our case the GMCP). Coincidentally, the City's Growth Management Control Point densities for RH and RMH designated properties are 19 du/ac and 11.5 du/ac respectively. The proposed standards modifications will provide the flexibility required to achieve the City's RHNA for lower and moderate income housing and to also comply with Government Code Section 65863. B. Zoning Ordinance An integral component of any Zoning Ordinance Amendment is a requirement to find that the proposed text amendments are internally consistent with the procedures and standards of the rest of the existing Zoning Ordinance that is not proposed for amendment. One of the primary objectives of this project is to amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and to correct inconsistencies with other sections of the Zoning Ordinance. Consistent with this objective, Table "A" includes a discussion of the specific amendments proposed to achieve this internal Zoning Ordinance consistency. Staff has also analyzed the proposed amendments associated with the other project objective (to amend standards to enable the achievement of minimum and Growth Management Control Point residential densities) and finds that these standards amendments are internally consistent. ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS October 18, 2006 Page 6 C. Local Coastal Program The Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Chapters are included in the City's Zoning Ordinance, which is one of the implementing ordinances for the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program (LCP). Because the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance would apply within the City's Coastal Zone, a Local Coastal Program Amendment is being processed to ensure consistency between the proposed amended Zone Code and the City's LCP. LCPA 05-07 will add the amended version of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Chapters to the implementation portion of all of the City's LCP segments. The policies of the Local Coastal Program emphasize topics such as preservation of agricultural lands and scenic resources, protection of environmentally sensitive resources, provision of shoreline access, and prevention of geologic instability and erosion. The proposed revisions to the Zoning Ordinance will not adversely impact coastal resources, obstruct coastal views or otherwise damage the visual beauty of the coastal zone and are therefore consistent with the policies of the Local Coastal Program. No permanent construction or development is involved with the proposed amendment. In addition, all projects processed pursuant to these revised standards that also require a Coastal Development Permit shall be required to comply with all applicable provisions and policies of the certified Local Coastal Program and shall not result in significant adverse impacts to coastal resources. Given the above, the proposed amendments to the standards of the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zone Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance are consistent with the Local Coastal Program. V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The proposed project was reviewed for potential adverse environmental impacts in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Since the proposal does not involve physical development, no significant environmental impacts are anticipated to occur. All future development projects processed pursuant to the amended Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance shall be subject to site specific environmental review at the time of project application. Given the environmental analysis, a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration was posted in the newspaper and mailed to the State Clearinghouse on April 13, 2006 for public review. One letter of comment (Public Utilities Commission) was received during the 30-day review period. The submitted letter, along with a letter of response to the comment letter received, are attached to the staff report as a part of the Negative Declaration. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6140 (Neg. Dec.) 2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6141 (ZCA) 3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6142 (LCPA) 4. Zoning Code Amendment (ZCA 03-02) Analysis 5. Exhibit "Yl" - "Y3" - Strike-out and underline version of the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendments 03 O 9mo <0.o 9ino O WN to HI HIQ OO 01 I Table A>f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapterw 10E 3 CO jplicability, permitted zones/uses, and application/processing requirements |fc^ c "c•^ o w0)D)C 0 ^ c ^uO> CO Discussion/Analysis |"c i•o 0 E •D0> 0Q.f\8QL Currently the Planned Development chapter specifies development standards for two categories ofresidential land use: 1) "small-lot, single-family and two-family dwellings"; and 2) "multiple dwellings".These standards by definition apply to single-family homes on individual lots or attached dwellings (twoor more units in one building). One difficulty that staff has had when implementing these developmentstandards is achieving the density requirements of the General Plan when an applicant proposes todevelop detached one-family dwellings on one lot as a condominium project (rather than on individuallots).Because a detached one-family dwelling does not meet the definition of a "multiple dwelling" (three ormore units in one building) the standards for "small-lot single-family" development have been applied toproposals for condominium projects consisting of detached one-family dwellings on one lot. However,the development standards for "small-lot single-family" development were primarily intended fordwellings built on individual lots and, when applied to a detached unit. condominium project, result in animpediment to the ability to achieve and implement the density ranges of the General Plan.Staff is proposing several modifications to the PD development standards to provide additionalflexibility to better implement the residential density ranges of the General Plan. One of the proposedmodifications is to change the provisions for "multiple dwellings" to apply to "condominium projects".As proposed, the standards for "condominium projects" would apply to two or more attached dwellings(two-family and multiple dwellings) or detached one-family dwellings on one lot. Detached one-familydwellings developed as a "condominium project" would be subject to standards such as minimumbuilding separation and private recreation space, but will no longer be required to comply with therequirements for one-family dwellings built on individual lots.In addition, the current provisions for "small-lot, single-family and two-family dwellings" are proposed tobe changed to apply to "one-family dwellings and twin-homes on small-lots" (one dwelling per lot). Thespecific changes to the various development standards are analyzed later in this table.(D.c "co.c (/)CDCO J!5 o •j= *"C (/)(D CO 1° **— "o_o exto co, O):t CD-o *-0 Q:> Q. Q "0 w0) 3 o ~°§•! ct W3 C(0•Ml Q0. "c £kaL.3 O 0> Cc o ^ %, 5 £ +~t "° o .2—?• i* ~ "c c 50 CO $ CD 73 O ro 5 r^z Q}E c •2^CD i "O)"0 c >, S "v-— oco 5 IECO 1 "c jtoc o o •— -» o Q-p "eno> Q) ^ 0 Q. — J; = -The replacement of terms is necessary to reflect the proposal discussed in row 1 , above. Also, theterm "single-family" is being replaced with "one-family dwelling" to be consistent with the terminologyused throughout the Zoning Ordinance.8.1 = 10 = O „ 0 > w "w *~~ ~o c c. = 1 A isro J5 -5 "° 8||§ "o E ~5 2^ c ai Efc'JLjfg =„; ||1 || CD ^~ o0 — -^* "O •^ 'in jo . .2 o *-•" a, "tn •—^; O p- "^^ E ?= ,° T -§ ^ E £ | o H" s > t/5 = CM The City has received requests to develop "private streets" as part of residential developments that donot otherwise require approval of a PD permit. However, the PD regulations are the only Citystandards that allow for the creation of a "private street". Therefore, staff is proposing to specify that aPD permit is required for "private streets", even when a project isn't otherwise subject to PD standards(i.e. not a small lot or condominium project).o "(0 "D ~tn CO "53TD 0c i=E 3 wco OT Q> O CD Q. "~ *"* "CD Q. CO "Jo c "c/> o co c o•*-• O *-*§ ij -52•t: <D coc w w»:&!-}-; -^ t- .E CO Ot_5 i^ *^— ^ *"" "^ ro &"Q. O 5 co" CO CO CO < < 9ino O csis>ino 5N LU S Q•z. LU LU O Q §5 ^ o>O co N CL Table A, continued: Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chaptero ^i mE E3 V)ility, permitted zones/uses, and application/processing requirements, continued.an ~hA Q_ m "c0) •*••C o*•* 0>O) (0 ^^o ' ^~ c.0 •*-»0o CO Discussion/Analysis+j 0) TJ C0) ^ Q)U)s.s0. J2oW C These sections specify the uses permitted by the PD regulations. Table A of Section 21 .45.040 Ithe uses permitted with a PD permit. Therefore, Sections 21. 45.1 OLD, E & F are redundant andnecessary.LL °3 LU Q" O O iri 2 CM O 1CO SI 00Q •<*• 1 V) % "8.1 CO !2 T3 0 Since this provision applies to a building addition, it is more appropriate to locate it with the standfor additions. Also, to be consistent with the City's regulations for "nonconforming buildings and i(Chapter 21 .48 of the Zoning Ordinance), the section is proposed to be modified to clarify that adto nonconforming buildings are permitted if the nonconformity is due to inadequate setbacks (asspecified in Section 21.48.090). Other provisions for modifications to nonconforming buildings arsubject to Chapter 21.48, and need not be repeated in the PD chapter.r~,£ C ^~ O Q) S S . % ^5 .y ^ • Q _i C Q. < ^ " 0 Q. CO 0 § S0 <t '«-• CJ) o •"-•_c = co c w 0 4_l QJ 0 • Q ' C/} (/) -^ ^S Tf ^ ^ 0 c~ n> T— • *o "f^ CO1 1 p o. ^ -| | "rn f/i O <~ /i\ "^^ £ fD" '-g 0 £ c_ 0 g> 0) •- .2 — "~- - -!5 T3 2 o> ?^ 3 to "F -o*-" t ^^ ^ IU ^(D •= • *,. -C ^ oi•- E ^ c* ~ S c fll l^ •^ Q >^ Q. •— •lisl ^-^^ co < JD c m 1 °-S *-*-<__ n«Q ra o Section 21. 45. 020. D specifies that the city council, planning commission or planning director ma^approve a PD permit, and Section 21. 45. 020. E specifies how the decision maker may modify orcondition the project for public health, safety or welfare.Section 21.45.050 (Application and permit) also specifies which decision maker can approve a PIproject. Section 21. 45.020. E is redundant and proposed to be deleted. Also, the provisions thatthe decision maker to modify or condition a project is more appropriate to be located in the "appliand permit" section (21.45.050).Q 0CM °- = -p- LO c O § ^ S " 'fiT— -g 0 O^ 0 co 5} 1 0£~ g co CM mO (~*l t~~i •2 "o LO 10 "0 < T-' ^ Q i_-CM CM CD ^_SEE ATTACHMENT 5 TO THE DECEMBER 6, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPOIConsistent with the proposal discussed in row 1 , above.o 2? .~ o ^*-• c oo c —0 £- 0'o* c^ o o E = o c •— ~•— ^ c o .52 a)•o o cc 0 •—S's"! •»- "Oo w§•§!US*= — 0 0 ±i -D•o- H.oj co o -£-. ^4— ' "O °^. 0ifS*1*— X: 1112: (/> co - 0 (/) *J The definitions are proposed to be amended to better distinguish between a "driveway" that exckserves a single dwelling unit and a "drive-aisle" that provides shared access to more than one un•occo c uT CO$ 0 *c Q ^ C =_^ i.s>i= 0 0 ^5 5T. §^ 0 •6 .> IP oo CO C" Q}iT ^_»0 co t; CD 0 W m o -Q °•^ IU L 1 ^^ j—The definition of a twin-home is two dwellings (attached by a common wall) where each dwellingseparate lot. The current definition further defines "twin-home" as "each home and lot ...has sepownership". The proposed modification would clarify that each dwelling/lot is not required to be,"may" be owned separately.Also, with the exception of the term "twin-home", the word "home" in the definition is proposed toreplaced with "dwelling" for consistency with the terminology used throughout the Zoning Ordinar"0 Eo .C .b:5e L_ *£- C .2 1•o 0 -C ^'•5o 05 Q Q. "Q 0 CO CD £ §5 £Q.2. <CV Q)ro .g 3 i ™-d g 111 | III Io w *•* "oX: 0 T3 0> c 0 c> o </> T5•o N o 5 co "o 2 E 7 .— -Q0 — — (/) E ^ c co n **— -^ ^~ Q) ^ 0 f\J (y) J- 0 ,n 0 /-^0 ^ .— O *— ' 5 h- o "5. co | .E S £ E 0 g Ci 0 <«g E g g ^ . O .3IO ^ LO ID Q ^ 0 ^ r °- CM F ^ CM "Oc ro c c 3o <t> o o — "o 13 "o t> E 0 .C 0 00 CO H CO CO Q. _0 ^3,co ^ o 0 X]" "- w"O rr ^00J §.0 tt O l~m ~i^ *- E ^^ i— (D 0 S Q. O OJ*l^ .-— . _ tj ^fl m w 1>0 *~ o CT "~ 0 '"5 ^ in co o^" .c V; T— ~ M "o -sc: 0 CO 0 o •£ <n'•j-f co ., cb CO §" = <D ?k °>O coN Q.Table A, continuedF Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chaptero>* re E 3to -&o>3 _C oQ (A42 remeility, permitted zones/uses, and application/processing requiJOre_o Q.re , r C0>*••.E o+•* (0 fl)encre O ^c .0 "50>CO -]Discussion/Analysis*rf E "Oc i^ ^voCOoaoca. ro o 2 roil Hit/> T3 Psiio_ ro "55X co '— S£ *a* TS •*-•-So^— V Q- •*- '"co ^ w C CD <1>o > c•^ Q> og-D N 1*5 To ensure that residential development in the R-P (Residential-PMobile Home Park), and V-R (Village Redevelopment) zones carsmall-lot subdivision, it is necessary to add the R-P, RMHP, andPD is permitted."o CD CO •S nCO 1— 1h- 0-o co co-g c IEo 5 N c °T w r--o oC M ro coCL ro X 0 ^> ^"o: ^LOo_ "frI -—KCN<D c "d£ g CD T3 "G oT3 CD —< co ro ^ >< _ CD e- >*~ ro ro .-^ •- .•?? si *isf| l|«|i -"=§ <2d).^c^ *; | T Q. c5 •f S <£ 1 = | § 2 c § » £ roc SB'S— o>~ oEwl--m2 % !5'jjj g § i.® S-l (/) 05 -2 *> ^^ C -^ Q) O ' (D i^"3d QJ ^ (0 Q) v~ '> ~^: *~» .—• o) c "o i QJ /i» c £ Jn *3 O n\ ^~ CI _C O O *** OJ *^CO Si . O "*"* "^ N ^~* i« -C C O ^_« _ i* -^ ._ | QJ Q^ C O 11 mil |SJ||Currently a PD is only allowed in the R-1 zone when the project Jland use or a project with comparable or higher density, or whenresources identified in the HMP.Staff is recommending that a PD also be allowed in the R-1 zonecondominium project consisting of two or more detached units orflexibility in being able to achieve the General Plan density requirsmall infill sites it is difficult to meet the minimum density requirerconstructing an attached dwelling product type, which is not perncontains sensitive habitat.Allowing the development of a detached condominium project insite design and placement of dwellings, which will better enable <requirements. Also, a detached condominium project will have trsubdivision where each dwelling is detached from the other dweldifference would be in land ownership - one being a common intindividual lot ownership._^^•S EQ .2Q. CD.Ero S E o II "c =S 0 0 Q O • Q) CD 2^o CM x: o C $ j/> '^ 5? C (i) o 00 ^ 0t^*nJ» "5~o roO CD "JJ 2£-o CM /S9 CO CO ino Q.O_l CN 9 ON UJ 2QZ111 UJo Z Q Oz ^ ^ON coQ-Table A, continued>f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapterw ^reE E3(/>bility, permitted zones/uses, and application/processing requirements, continuedre_o H Q.re "c_0) ^c2 UJ0) D)Cre O ,1 c_o "»0> V)Discussion/Analysis"ca>E•nco E ^•oV oQ.20. 0) 2 . £^c to o to The current PD regulations require concurrent approval of dwelling architecture and plotting at the tinof the approval of a small-lot subdivision. However, the City does not currently require dwellingarchitecture and plotting for approval of a standard residential subdivision (e.g., R-1 zone, 7,500 squ;foot minimum lot size).It is not uncommon for the original applicant of the subdivision map to sell the land the map applies t<and a different developer actually constructs the dwellings. If architecture and plotting of dwellings isrequired with the approval of a small-lot subdivision, the developer who actually builds the homes willikely propose a different product than proposed by the original applicant. This results in the need toamend the PD permit, and additional staff time to review a second set of plans for architecture andplotting.Allowing the approval of architecture and plotting after the approval of a small-lot subdivision willeliminate the City's time spent reviewing plans for dwellings that may not be constructed. Delayedarchitectural review is consistent with the City's requirements for standard residential subdivisions. 1City has also authorized delayed architecture review for small-lot subdivisions within the Carrillo Ranand Villages of La Costa Master Plans.With delayed architectural review, a developer will be required to submit dwelling architecture andplotting plans, and obtain approval of a PD permit amendment prior to construction of the dwellings.Q 0- 03 "cCO CD a) g-c'o' 5 " ~n 3 *•^ o o CO -C Q. -2'i-g o c co S ° CD.(/>!=m '> .3 CM 3 ;P c UJ 0 O •«-' *— |2?w E "™ m £T w o =73 CO t (p •i 0 &52 £ co -o CO This requirement is outdated, and reflects when the City used to have separate regulations forcondominium projects. The current PD regulations apply to small lot subdivisions and condominiumprojects, and both types of projects are considered "planned developments".QJr™* C/±= .a c o CD to•+-* • — S TJ i- o"w Q) o m °'2"^S C ^^ c ^f*CO CD c ^ •— £ o CM Q-'X "55 cS- i > °CO ^ Q) '.S3 C O "^ CD - a5 "SS2- ^Hl ! ! c: _ 03 Q. 2 o w c '5 ~ ro § (D .^2 Q) ™ ^ "5-S-Ecu 0..2 oa) co CD -o a5Q £ § Q D- 73 O ?Reformat the table for clarity (no change to existing requirements).OJc 't/J C/J82 omo in . CN Cg 0CO m H 3 fl S D. to _ Yf The current findings required to approve a PD are limited to finding that the project is consistent withthe PD standards and is compatible with surrounding development. Staff recommends addingadditional findings to ensure consistency with the General Plan and other applicable city requiremenand provide a finding related to the aesthetic quality of the project.2 . f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapterw n E co iges to General Development Standards (Section 21.45.060)&. o CM C "oa>CO I Discussion/Analysis4-1 0 E •DCQ) TJd> W OQ.2 Q. a. <_,. T3 ... Q)If ! litr~ O ^ TT T"7 **-*"? "co JS ° T «-2 o 1o ^ >,-c ^ c tl Mi HI<D in c/i >— ^J5o ^Sc-^^S £E °28|^^«g) ^Q-mE^OTj The PD chapter currently allows the decision-making body to modify tlthat are more restrictive than the PD standards. That provision is beinsection (21.45.020) to the Application and Permit section (21.45.050).Staff is also proposing to add a provision to allow the decision-making(including a reduction of standards) if the modification is necessary toconsistent with the Habitat Management Plan (HMP). This provision hCouncil's recent approval of a similar provision in the Hillside DevelopiHMP Implementation Ordinance). The PD chapter was not amendedDevelopment regulations because the provision was intended to be imthan amend the PD regulations twice).0 COco]co 1 *-Q. § 5 Ei= Q. .^** ^~rw g) 0} Q} Is Q o>O -Cin *'p ^ •*r § X — '*3= ! •JZ '"& COo o "a 0 C J— W > "0 T3 o c "O = J5 •< CO CO r- ^~ c CO ;^ Q. Q. CO CDCoN O>c- ^>» 0 T3C •3 £«+-Adding this language will provide clarification on when the standards cwhen the PD standards apply.co »4— O ~ 10 'It § "E -a a> %l^ro c w" 2*-» -j "O -CCO l— tO £ "°-"c "2 •" _f5 Q TO § to Q- w o a> 3? Q 2 o~*-^- N .E a) CN O> *o •*-• c ">.«= tf.Q i^ o K= o||| ^ (1\ _-__ vw njt_ (/)</) — "i - '^ t/) j^ fll ^ Q)'i- -^ 0) i-— S. £ ®O Q_"O £ COT_ (0 D) >•» *i — I 1! *{iiiii ^™ O 2_ CO 5u O ^~ ^ — Q) "U ^ — .S2 ^ "~ ^ '•§ -§ Poro"L— CD x~x Cl u Cu rt *TT o C ^ _.£'c5a)>o-2.-2(u ^-ao'S-'1'' ^^2>CO~(n3 ^Q-<fl£'1-tl3j* *j* tl) ^-» 0 *£j ^3 QJ -*r^ CO ^~ coEfl. ^ TO a; S 13 oc£coco5CO O j— Q -^ ^- (u 4_< r"" _^ "O O Slwo^§'^^^> °"J0™E^E CL) "*""* i-j O fl) -^ .-i i_ rn _C ^. O SEE ATTACHMENT 5 TO THE DECEMBER 6, 2006 PLANNING COThe PD regulations currently prohibit dwellings and accessory structurrequired arterial setbacks. However, only 50% of the setback (closestlandscaped and commonly owned/maintained. This has resulted in silsetback (the half not required to be landscaped) is located within the tand is often a homeowner's backyard. In such situations, a homeownany accessory structures within their backyard. This is not only an un<homeowner; it is also difficult for the City to regulate (as many accesstpermit or approval from the City).Arterial roadways (e.g. El Camino Real, La Costa Avenue, Palomar Aivolumes of traffic through the City in comparison to other types of streisetback and landscaping is to buffer homes from traffic and enhance trecommends that the required arterial setbacks for PD projects be full;owned/maintained. This will eliminate unreasonable limitations on a hiand will provide a better buffer and enhancement to the street scene.eg'L_ft\UJ t± vP CO °"~ .£§ !C T- 'i -2> *^ •o ^ .f 8 t°S. a) 0) %>c co '5. <uco >O CO -a c c« Ea) 2-ci£ "- o oC CO CO CO -Q T3-^- tu —a Jo s° O5 CO < < o o o CM9ino ON. I-z LU QzLU LJJ O Q °l(D °z <o ^ 0> O c?N CL Table A, continued>f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapterw m 3 Q General Development Standards (Section 21.45.060), continuedCOo>D) re £ O 1 CN C_o '•g£(0 Discussion/Analysisc 0)E•oc 0) < "O §ao CL lu J2 _L o .^ S SEE ATTACHMENT 5 TO THE DECEMBER 6, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORTCurrently, walls are not permitted within the arterial setback landscape buffer area. However, in thecase of residential projects adjacent to a noisy arterial, it may be necessary to construct a noiseattenuation wall within the setback area if a noise study indicates such, and the wall cannot be locatioutside the setback due to topography. Therefore, staff is recommending that noise attenuation walbe allowed within the setback (subject to a noise study recommendation and topographic limitations'Also, to provide some flexibility to residential property owners, staff recommends that walls/fences nhigher than 42-inches be allowed within the arterial setback area. Although the arterial setback isrequired to be commonly owned/maintained, it can function/appear as yard space for the residencesFor example, a condominium project with attached or detached units facing an arterial street would 1setback the required distance, but the required arterial landscape setback area would function andappear as the project's front yard. Allowing a 42-inch wall within the setback area would allowresidents to delineate and protect their yard space from pedestrian traffic, and is consistent with thefencing provisions allowed on all other non-PD residential properties.0 <u~! •4—f 1 £ c•> co "m CD•S .C C*&-B '^^ O • — §L0 £ g CO <V ro C" £— c •* -o '5i co S? > •*-• 13O <U D" CO .5 0) ^_J Q) flj < CO O oCM m Qy ^— m CO to Currently the PD regulations state building setbacks are measured from "the property line, from theback of sidewalk or from the edge of the project driveway, whichever is closest to the structure". Th<are slight differences in how setbacks are measured for one-family dwellings and twin-homes on smlots vs. condominium projects. Therefore, staff recommends that this standard be relocated to Tableand E as a footnote to the required setbacks from a street or drive-aisle.•o ^ QJ *^ '^Z•° £ m D)-" £ ~ o •E IB o "53 "§ 3 O > Q O.Q Q. 0 ^--^ 0, 8 Q = LU m °--m £ -0_£; tn i— CO c 5 p c H" ro $ g$ c|T ~ -Q ^-— 1s.|^Q:c! % s^l^? - E pH §"E a; o -2 wm *" *— ^^ (D CO **— ^^ ^ m Q 0 "^ O "wB o -s ro X ow ro o E c ^ 5 fj -§ JS 5 'S"i- w 2; co i- Q- ^_ CM Q ^ ^— CO The PD regulations allow "projecting architectural features, which do not increase the useable livingarea of a dwelling unit, (including, but not limited to, cornices, eaves, belt courses, sills, buttresses afireplaces)" to project up to 2 feet into required building setbacks. Zoning Ordinance Section 21.46.'specifies the same provisions (applicable to all development). To ensure consistency, staffrecommends referring to Section 21.46.120 for the allowed projections into required yards, rather thlisting the same regulation in two separate locations of the code.Also, staff recommends specifying in the PD chapter that the allowed projections into required yardsalso apply to required building separation. The PD regulations specify minimum building separationdistances for condominium projects (multiple dwellings currently), as well as minimum buildingsetbacks from property lines, streets and drive-aisles.d) O Jill 1 i_r!=: "~ -C "S ro d) >2 of ^ 33 to • 0.^3° £iS§ •2^2 IS s^l0 5, -55 g 2-«5 coCO CO — g 10 Q. i_ fli 13 ._ "O tneo £- 0 o w g> <o £l- §-'3 -2 .Q '5 E? ° 2 ^-E S S"2•^— o 5 c _. ^• -£i o O cooCD C •*-* "Jj; :=-«-• ^ .1 I i. ~ § ' j. o 3 '•§ <u £"52Vi *s 0 £ *^ 0 p. 0 — 'O* "m Jt: O^ *^ CO -o Q. 0 gj Q.^? 0 E 5 c O~ ^ 7?0 a, o ro jo -5 Q: Q; Q. CO S < J2 CO CMCM The standards for private and public streets are proposed to be relocated from one row to anotherwithin Table C (General Development Standards) to follow a more logical order. Also, the streetstandards are proposed to be reformatted for clarity (no change to the standards).QJQ) "too S Q. TJcco 0 .> o 05 § £0 $-8 85o cn•0 roa: to OO CM co CO IDo o CMo uSo ON LU Q2LU < LU O ^ O)O TON 0-Table A, continuedf Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter(QEE3 (/)General Development Standards (Section 21.45.060), continuedo $ 0) 0 CM. O "o 0>w Discussion/Analysis4-1 CO ETJ 0>E •o 0)<0o Q.o Q. co 0 CD o -0 .12 75 to The width of streets and drive-aisles can impact a project's ability to achieve minimum densityrequirements. The amount of area required to be paved reduces the area available to constructdwellings or provide recreation area. Planning staff consulted with the Engineering and FireDepartments and determined that the PD standards require more width for drive-aisles thanEngineering or Fire Code requirements.Currently, the PD standards require a minimum width of 24 feet for drive-aisles (currently referred t"driveway (project)"). However, Engineering and Fire regulations require a minimum of 20 feet. Tcconsistent with Engineering and Fire standards, staff is recommending the PD standard for drive-awidth be reduced from 24 feet to 20 feet. The existing provision to require additional width for vehiturn around and maneuvering will remain, which provides the City with the ability to require additioiwidth when deemed necessary for safety and emergency vehicle access.~ 0 •*- "o 5 E <D Q-.£o ^ t 2 £•fc .J2 g Q- •> j« r~ ^£* CD •*-* ^ L_ *— x"~v•o 3 s w co 0 w 0 2 ^ =• i ™w E to °, oj £ || Illl % ° \_ ^ 2 0 ^ (1) (O 9£ O Q .- P" Is 'c E "55c Q_ ro p o > f— *— C "rn **"* ^ f u) o y rn-~» -^ X Til L ^ 8 *13 8 2O **— -*-* Q) >•* flV3 o — r t CD / r\"D £sj O 0 t— '*-' rr 2 <^ Eo ^CN ^wo oj ^<i) 0 0 0 .y "o As discussed in the row above, the width of streets and drive-aisles can impact a project's ability tcachieve minimum density. This is especially true for small infill projects. The minimum 20 foot drivaisle width (as proposed) is the minimum width necessary to accommodate emergency vehicle ace(Fire) and two-way traffic for multiple dwellings (Engineering).The Fire Code only requires a 20 foot drive-aisle width when the drive-aisle is necessary for emercvehicle access. If the drive-aisle is not needed for emergency vehicle access (i.e. dwellings can b«accessed by emergency vehicles from a public street adjacent to the project boundary) then the FiCode does not require a minimum drive-aisle width.Staff is recommending a minimum width of 12 feet for drive-aisles providing access to 3 or fewerdwelling units (provided the Fire Chief determines the drive-aisle is not required for emergency vet-access). It is feasible that a drive-aisle serving a small project of 2 or 3 units will not be needed foremergency access; and therefore, the drive-aisle would not be required to be a minimum of 20 feewide (per the Fire Code).The Engineering Department also supports the proposed 12 foot wide drive-aisle for small projectsor 3 units. A 12 foot wide drive-aisle is adequate for the number of vehicles accessing a 2 or 3 uniproject. Projects of 4 or more units generate more vehicle trips, which necessitates the need for awider drive-aisle (in addition to emergency access).c JZ O> c . a> 002*0^0 CM ^ ^ T— L. 0 'o ° o£ si •s; W .b5 W 3 -22 o 0U) O <- '" » ° I s 1 "D > -n E 2 C ±j Q. CO E a> w w | | '§ 8 5 T3 '— tJO 0 'p < £ TJ > mCM •a Si The proposed change is to ensure consistency with the Fire Code, which allows 24 units to be IOCEalong a single-entry drive-aisle.tn "E ro 3 0) °l ^ "O £ &•^ co •- ° .1*5 1 0 ?1| (D 0 ro -§ co i 1 ro-gC £ 13 .c: "SJ" j? 0 E Q) I— ^t*CO csl O) 6 2 '§ CDCM m CO CO ino o CNo 10o N_ H UJ D LJJ LJJ Oz<z Q Z oo ^ 0)5 oiO 03N 0-Table A, continued: Amendments to Planned Development (PD) ChapterTT £, reEE 3 V)General Development Standards (Section 21.45.060), continuedo M0) CJ re O 1 es c •*•*u0) CO Discussion/Analysisffi E TJ C 0) E 0)(0oQ. 2 OL /-, *a T3*-> <D -~- 3 0 The amount of parking required is one of the development standards that impact a project's ability tcachieve minimum density requirements (particularly on small infill lots). In the case of the visitorparking requirements for PD projects, staff has reviewed many projects, especially smaller projects i10 units or less, where providing the required visitor parking created much difficulty in providing thenumber of dwelling units necessary to meet the minimum density requirements of the General Plan.Due to limited site area on smaller infill sites, providing the area for the required visitor parking hasoften been difficult.The current visitor parking requirements are most restrictive for the smaller projects (10 units or lessStaff is recommending the requirement be reduced from .5 space/unit to .3 space/unit. This will resiin a 1 space reduction in the required visitor parking for projects of 3 units and 5 to 8 units, and a 2space reduction for projects of 9 or 10 units (no change for a project of 1 to 2 units or 4 units).Also, staff is recommending the visitor parking requirements for projects of 1 1 or more units be reduto .25 space/unit. The reduction in the number of spaces ranges from 2 to 3 spaces per project.Staff reviewed the visitor parking requirements of other jurisdictions, and found that on-site visitorparking is not always required. The jurisdictions that do require visitor parking typically require .25visitor parking spaces per dwelling unit, which is consistent with the proposed standard.o '55 "O >• O) 2 >.E"5 13 •*^4. o> ^1 82 ?l •£ °-cof> 1 i1 £ £o co |*i O_c *~ 0 01 1 CD •> £ c CD 0o t3 3CD <-» OH .. ^ If V <n *" °? ;JL 'C<2 T *-f — • *C 0) 3 O 0 « 1 </) *~ ^ •4—*'cc/j .5i %j m . 0+ CL •<- to 04 o ^ to 3 L_ "Jit "*- Ow t co (/) •"ti ^— l£8-o3 c «n+ _3 CN ^ ^5 +o *CO2. ww '^ LOI 3 r-- CM CD JD CO CO w *,J. ? CMg §The PD standards currently allow visitor parking to be located on public or private streets that are aminimum of 34-feet wide (curb to curb). It is unclear whether or not this applies to existing publicstreets located adjacent to the project. Staff is recommending that PD projects be allowed to locaterequired visitor parking on a 34-foot wide street whether the street is built as part of the project or isexisting (except within the Beach Area Overlay Zone).For streets contiguous to the project boundary, only the side and portion of the street that abuts theproject boundary would be allowed to be counted for visitor parking. This provision will especiallybenefit smaller infill projects that do not include the construction of new streets internal to the projecFor example, a project consisting of 4 dwelling units, each with driveway access off of an existing 3^foot wide street, would be able to locate the required visitor parking (2 spaces) along the streetadjacent to the project frontage (provided there was sufficient lineal space to meet the parallel parkistandard of 24 lineal feet per space, exclusive of driveway entrances). If this provision was notallowed, the project would be required to provide additional space and paving on the project site forparking spaces (in addition to the resident parking). This standard will not apply within the Beach AOverlay Zone (see row 29, below).The location of visitor parking will still be subject to space/dimension standards and distance limitatifrom the unit the space is intended to serve.o>>•*•;c wco ^«_ o 73 O 'E Q) '-f= O"So0 O Q..U5 "Tj c 03 •^Sx. E « ofO) CD .— ^ V) L_ 3 Q) sco ja -" >»°- ™ > co 2 JtZ Q. C '> t?§ E •*^ O 3 4 -f £ "(0 CL SJ "*""* = O) "f\*^\ ^ C. i^ !'•§ °- O 1/5 CD £ COCM 144 CO CO r-oino Q. O If)o 111 Q•z. LJLJ 5 111 O•z.< Q O coN Q-Table A, continued: Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter^•" ^ n> E3 General Development Standards (Section 21.45.060), continuedo M O)c O 1 CM C_o "oO> CO Discussion/Analysisca> E •0 •ofl> 0Q. O £ _ i'iOJ .g a, ~ o0)£ E C c ® §81™ :> L!£| 0|5lo c c00™^ '55 T3•*a8!3r c (/)IssCO Z. « O T3 This is an existing requirement in the BAOZ regulations (Chapter 21.82).requirement also be specified in the PD regulations to avoid any conflictsets of regulations. Therefore, the provision for on-street visitor parking icontinue to not be allowed within the BAOZ.Oi -m O (^ >» O flj "*"^ 0 = £° ° « 0)g 0 J ^S co£ J5 Q. re «» 60 0>:SCD c .w 0 J*: >_ i— __£ co T3~ a. gj._ -•-• *~ .ji 0 g" .£ "55 *":ro i 2£ o^ •^rsT c co"S- £ o>CNJ D) 5COQ. 2 W*^ '> 0 0.Qco,o "o. Q.co(/) CO13 Cau> "co "ro 8 1o Q> CO O*-< Q JU !§ ij -•-• !lis•> 0 O) o •E ^"co J?o 3>o c o: .E c 0°— S .0 IOT™ co .c ^ ^^ "wo 'x J2 '55 _ § "> g £ S «fc ^*" CO 0 Q) -^-» "O ~Oco c j_£ J3 O C (/> =.2 5, ro ^~ •— ^* T3^ co ^ *~ 2 5 o •§Li QJ *^ c~0 .5 </> co ®lil||l 1 a: co Q S 0CO tn 0 "S3 S? «" 0 0 ^ o -n 0 — -° T3*J;j S T3__TO C- ^ •*-* m M 0 O)ji) — •£ ro c ^ fS 0 8 "° <£••-.£ C ^S "O CL _^ U. ^ *^ "tjj 3T > ^f k_ £~i|jS.c! ^^°> ^^£S. 5 •2>"= U5 "co ^ .t 'o1 c: "J£ 0 P 0 w 0 TO I 0 J ^ §" °-"0 °- W 0 ^ S"w_c:-£:-o;o.21~ 2^Jo ^"Su^-^o O >•* CZ "O ^« ^^ >, ^2 ,*ti Z} Q) "O ^- ^ •§ ^ — ra "0 '55 ^E.S^ oJcJw?" C ^ ,y . -iJc m c^ 0 — en ^ c\i ^ OWw~§;o^'>n5"0 .s^roo- ^^S"^^- co 0 w if o •— ^ — i-nsco is -c *•*• - ~Projects of 10 or fewer units are typically developed on infill sites, whicharea available to achieve required densities (in comparison to larger projdeveloped on sites with more developable land area). Small infill projectfrontage and include private drive-aisles, which do not allow on-street pais available (or permitted), the current PD standards require a project to |for visitor parking. On small infill sites, providing additional parking baysthe amount of area available to provide recreation area and meet minimiThe requirement to provide additional area for visitor parking is beneficianot include driveways in front of each unit's garage and where no parkin<standard 7,500 square foot lot subdivision is not required to provide addithe driveway in front of each unit's garage provides area where visitors cStaff is recommending that visitor parking required for PD projects of 10located in driveways (if all units in the project have driveways with a depiproject of 10 units will be required to provide 3 visitor parking spaces (asvisitor parking spaces will be satisfied if each unit has a 20 foot drivewayspaces per unit (in addition to the 2 garage spaces required for the dwellFor projects in the BAOZ, see row 32, below.li'lo •5 *• 3 CM -C ^jj 73 C ° u_ 0 *~ "i- •0 5 « SJ <n•— o" o 5 <"J2 0 o TJ ~° 3 ••— = CO 3,"co £_2 £<n 5 co to '> 3 "co > ~o >• 5> S^-o i 5 r- t— "> 0•2 o • - Q .> > -tZ -^. CD0 2 $ ^> >^~ Q. Q en ro Q (Q L» 1 1 o ,<» -I | I^NT .§*§ £"5 £ 3 Us S ! t — CO uDevelopment (PD) Chapte? CO CO _l< < ino o = c 8| <CL_o> 2 •S J2Hs •ocV < reE E 3to N_ H LU Q ZUl UJo Qo: 0O o ^ 0) £• O)O roN QL STS fl E £ 2 1 IIII1Hiiili! 2»>-S88 ^ ._ "S HE . 1§ 1 2! 1• 1 SI Is1! OroO. V) 0) c: M b a; a ji I .11 I a; -Hi -5 s 5!IfM !! .T3<uc-!2 HI!II .?! * *il !| w^i! i w-SillSIlI 5 llllifis dfi^s=s 11 o| c ro 2 =]w 'x: 1'?Q.T3 ro m w SCM O *i c 1e-li i°^£ CNCO *- £>applicaovisillowiparking to be compact is onlyojects. Staff recommends this?! I•§-£ <ST; HS 2> *-2P.Q. 03 is appltanevelopededstahe provisionreqonl lotw 25% ofn one building) condomone-fami and twithe amount ofspace nens. Moving thtable ensuresisios"um pilyn ensity prgeneral standardCurrently, the PD pmultiple-dwelling (3+ects, including smal oing to be compact will reduceieving the General Pla ddards" taacstathebleprojrkihiitor past inlinctgs.isisiellieastheill ae-dwapplic25% owhich wil"multipleto all PD?^E "fil8"> SN .<2 0) 10 X SCM 0> OJ 5 o o ™ o % "ro ro ^ *pr C ^3 'w <D CO '> -Q D5 S 2 •— Q) C > *- -^ Q "w" 53 5 d) "Ero "-"5. ro8« -J-T "OO 7~ ^~-*^ _ £_o5 '55 5 .2o: •> e-co COCO A4 U) CO Table A, continued>f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapterw 10 P. 13CO o General Development Standards (Section 21.45.060), continued |(0 O)cre O CM O tjO) CO Discussion/Analysis |c •oc 4) ^•o0)(0 0a a.The BAOZ currently allows up to 55% of the required visitor parking to be provided as compact spaces.Adding the provision to the PD chapter will clarify that the 55% compact parking provision also appliesto PD projects within the BAOZ.>. "cCD ^ != CsTGOO*-• •<—ro CM — CD c"S-.E ro J« t ~\ro v— >o • — • -^ CO£ SQ.-.SE ro O 3o o> v_ CD **^ ^^ C/J ^. ._. m O CD Q.5 CD .E •a co "O 'X< CD ^CO The current PD standards require multiple-dwelling projects to locate visitor parking no more than 150feet from the unit it could be considered to serve. Staff recommends that this provision be applicable toall PD projects. Also, staff is recommending that the minimum distance be increased to 300 feet, whichwill provide more flexibility in locating visitor parking spaces on sites constrained by habitat,topography, or shape, but will still provide visitor parking within a reasonable walking distance to theunit it is intended to serve.CD —£ E I- r- 111 CD 0 5 m F±i o JK 0)OT t .a (3 > CD ,«! ~t- o r- O ro ro CD cJ3 £ w coE ^ x h- o E « o •- => E —g-E o "w CD C *= "2•- "E CD roCD *= £ T3 Tl *-• -8?? co coO t \ "O f—E^£l•0 CD C gC £1 CD > _^ S^-13^ a> ro '11 -Str a. ^ e-co Lf)CO Staff has not identified that this requirement results in any real benefit or what purpose the setback isintended for. The standard is also unclear as to what "open parking" it refers to. For example, parkinglocated in a driveway in front of the garage of a dwelling is considered "open parking", but it serves nopurpose to require the dwelling to be setback five feet from parking in a driveway. Staff recommendsthis requirement be deleted."c O)c "CD .§ o,0 roro $i_ j- O)"c c CD 5 CD Q. .— ^ O" ^0) Q.*- O CD cj— C^^ "ro •*IS —- CD111 CO CDCO The current PD standards require that all open parking areas be screened from adjacent residencesand public rights-of-way. Staff recommends modifying this requirement by specifying open parking"should" be screened, rather than "shall" be screened. On smaller infill sites, where space is limited, itis sometimes not feasible to fully screen all open parking areas. Therefore, modifying the language tostate open parking "should" be screened will provide the City with the discretion to work with applicantsto provide screening to the extent that it is practical.Also, language is proposed to clarify that the screening requirement does not apply to open parkinglocated within a driveway.CCDQ.o <L>a?o 0 "c CD C0) '5 f 0) ••^ toij^* rn<+— \\t•r* f\\ ro £ ^ ^•£? c ^~ COS Q. ^CO The RH General Plan designation is the City's highest density residential land use designation (15-23dwelling units per acre). Achieving this higher density is critical to implementing the City's housinggoals, and is also the most difficult density to achieve on sites when current development standards areapplied. Therefore, staff is recommending that some standards be modified specifically when a projectis located in the RH designation. The proposed modified standards are those staff has identified asbeing most beneficial to enabling development to achieve the RH density range. The amount of land inthe City that is designated RH is very limited; and therefore, the standards proposed to be modified forPD projects in the RH designation would apply to a limited number of sites.The amount of required community recreational space is one standard staff is proposing to reduce onlyfor projects with the RH designation. The reduction will result in a total reduction of 50 square feet perunit of community recreation space. As an example, a 1-acre project with 15 units (minimum density)would be required to provide 2,250 square feet of community recreation space (750 square feet lessthan currently required). This reduction in community recreation space will assist in achieving therequired densities of the RH designation, yet still ensure sufficient area for useable recreation space.CD •4-» c ."ti ."^ § 5 $E "g o E -*J TT^ ro P0 0 *~O o COT3 — ro 8- "o c '= .CD, .2 /» O (0i- cl £s °£'c3 c CD ~°13 t\ O m C CO CO Q- CD "m ~cn£§£CD £ g ^ c^1ct 2? 01 c0) O111&M •••• C>•• tfi __ 3 .™ O" o "* Di 0? "O w'^o O 3 _CO.E-M 2 c ci o'E o-=3 Q> O 3 t£ 5 ~ OQ- c «0) 3 Q.c E w s Ix oUJ <-> ooCO - u 0)CD CD ro CT CO omT~ 'E ^ 0) "~CD ro CTCO oo CM CO CO N-o If)O Q_ O IT)O ON D•z. LU LU O CD CM•z. *-5 0S coO 03N Q.Table A, continued' Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter^r ^re | CO General Development Standards (Section 21.45.060), continuedo (AVO)cra O1 _0 'u0) CO Discussion/Analysisdmentca)P ^ a>(0oaoca. .~ti As currently written, projects of 1 1 to 25 units must provide passive or active recreation facilities, butis not clear if the requirement is intended to mean "one or the other, but not both", or as "either orboth". Staff recommends clarifying the meaning as "either or both".</5 "o Q. ° <— i_ **~ .£!0 ^ O 0 03 -Q. in(/> 03 '•§ TJ "OS -^ 502 =£~ o o '-0)0)^* **^ ^ 3 CO JQ t br £ -*2 Q 'C 0 0 Z3 .>.^ ,_ Wro JQ wx: CN 03*•' o *^- m T— £ o-sE C35CO •5C As currently written, the standards for common recreation area for projects of 50 or more units doesreflect the wording for projects of more than 25 units (which includes projects of 50 or more units).Staff proposes to modify the language to be consistent between the two standards (projects of 50 ormore units are listed separately because they have additional requirements).V) c.0 0 '3cr0 030 .t; WCO '*~~> c 'Eo ^ co i— § E 0 l_"- o 0°2 mE 'E £5 '38*0 t>n~ ^**£ 0 Wo" € Q. 03 ,_0.2 O ** „_,o •••SEE ATTACHMENT 5 TO THE DECEMBER 6, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORTThe PD standards currently require that community recreation space be centrally located, but does rclarify central to what. Staff recommends clarifying that the recreation area be centrally located inrelationship to all units, and that it be designed to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from trunits the space is intended to serve.3r 'c i I •§"8 £ "co Q> O 5 0 — *<nO '^o 0~ 0 CD <"c»8-03 w 3 Cco o 03 "03— 0 1 £* ,_ "* T3 <— 0m -S (/) jr The PD standards currently list areas where community recreation areas are not allowed to be locat<(i.e. front yards, driveways, parking areas, slopes greater than 5%, and walkways). However, somerecreation areas may include walkways as an integral part of the design of the recreation facility (sueas a walkway within a pocket park, or a walkway that's part of a pool facility, etc.). Staff recommendclarifying that required recreation space includes walkways that are clearly integral to the design of tlrecreation area.03 M —O 0) 0•55 —<D 3 "^ 00 '- £ 0 «?to ~^- ^3CO CD£> "oc JE— o CO Q) lo •+—* (Q tn o cu >• 03 "03 gj 03§ ii! Q._i£ 03 (/) "co c c •i .2 .2 ,>>"co "co!£ 0 0 co o o O^^ 0 0U_ L_ CM C Currently the PD standards require parking for recreation areas at a ratio of 1 space for every 15residential lots. The intent of this requirement is to provide recreation area parking based on thenumber of dwelling units in a project. "Residential lots" does not reflect the number of units in acondominium project. Staff recommends changing the recreation area parking ratio to 1 space forevery 15 residential "units".Also, staff proposes to clarify that recreation area parking shall be located in the same manner asrequired for visitor parking, except not in a driveway and the distance requirement from the recreatioarea will remain as no more than 1,000 feet.O)c coQ. 0L_CO ,c 03 i-y^ | "c0E0i_'3cr0 0£ >^!c[ 03 O CO "* CO 0) m C CO The current minimum dimensions required for an active grassy play area are excessive (10,000 squ<feet) and do not provide flexibility in the shape of the area (100 x 100). For a grassy play area to beconsidered "active recreational space" it should be large enough to allow for activities such as throwia baseball, playing Frisbee, etc. Staff recommends that 5,000 square feet be the minimum arearequired for a grassy play area to be considered "active", and that a minimum dimension of 50 feet bestablished, which will allow for flexibility in the shape and location of the area.ra > £ tj iCO *J 3 Q) J £ O 03 2 §-0 «" ^i '<fl 00c 00 0 4-i O "~ | o^S E 0 03 ,- E Z.2 -^— CO JD ^C^ qi , . C ^ m ^& E •- £ 03 0 '£ "° ^D Q"°- E ^o >< j23 W p CO t-Q C/3 C •— cr COLL ° 'E ^J. ^;V? c/> < < ino <Q. O CNo LOo <ON LU Q Z LU ^ LU OZ<Z Q <r- O? O ro £ o>O coN 0-Table A, continued: Amendments to Planned Development (PD) ChapterreE E3 CO General Development Standards (Section 21.45.060), continuedo woO) re 0 CM_ _O "o0) CO Discussion/Analysis^^c i TJCV E •o0)(00Q. ^IT-SEE ATTACHMENT 5 TO THE DECEMBER 6, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORTCurrently the PD standards require projects of 25 or more units to provide area for RV storage at 20square feet per unit. A project of 25 units would be required to provide 500 square feet of RV storagearea for the entire project, which is slightly more than a 2 car garage and would likely accommodateonly 1 or 2 RVs. This does not seem to provide a practical benefit for the entire development, and isspace that could be used to assist a project to achieve the required densities of the General Plan.Staff recommends applying the RV storage requirement to projects with 100 or more units. A projectwith 100 units would be required to provide 2,000 square feet of RV storage, which is a large enougharea to accommodate a number of RVs that would be beneficial to the overall project.Also, staff is recommending that the RV storage area requirement not apply to projects located withinthe RH land use designation. As discussed in row 38, above, the density of the RH designation is themost difficult to achieve when current standards are applied. Providing area to store RVs is not acritical standard to ensure high quality development in high density, multiple-family projects. Residentsof high density projects (like multiple, attached, three story condominiums) are not as likely to requireRV storage facilities as residents of single-family developments. In the RH designation the spacerequired for RV storage is area that is better utilized for the construction of dwellings (consistent withthe RH density range), and to provide recreation area.0 •4—* 0) '5cra? <D :j3.^ CO o ~ w co — *O* Q_1— pri Q-t^- C)0 0)CD 5.y Q (1) *^ ~t* O)-Q 110 a. LO The current PD standards require a minimum amount of enclosed storage space per dwelling unit. Inimplementing this requirement on previous PD projects, staff has interpreted "enclosed storage space"to include an enclosed garage. Staff proposes to add language to clarify this.Staff also proposes to clarify that when storage space is provided in a covered parking structure (i.e. astorage cabinet adjacent to a parking stall) it shall not impede the ability to utilize a parking stall (forvehicle parking).<D O> 2o to 'E^i_ Q. Qj SI CO0) •^ CO (/} <0& si— QJ O ra £*-. 3co o~-c 0*-• !!: ,>> CD CO fj O % CD The current PD standards require each project to have a master antenna or cable hookup, and refer toChapter 21 .53 for the regulations for antennas. Staff does not recall any recent development thatprovided a master antenna in place of cable television. If any antenna is proposed it is processedpursuant to standards contained in Chapter 21.53. This standard is obsolete and should be deleted.VCO-o m \ft co c jl> CO Q> "(5 0) Q S CO CO 9ino o_O CNO ino ON, I- 111 S Q Z HI HI O Q T- QL *0-5 O •* O CDN O.Table A, continued)f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapterw >1Ure E | CO eT oin CMcots<D J2. ts "re o % o c'1 •ocre wU) Q Ereu. o>c O k. £ (0T3t:re•ocre CO o </>o> O)cre O fO co *Ju 0) CO Discussion/Analysis.«c0>ET3C i •o0>(AOQ. 0 0. CO r- UJ s _ Q> 0 ,1, f %>_ O _gj a) O 3 "2E~§~ £([,0.2 '£ "c 6 co ~ "5 '« E 'o> £ ra5*j.2 '1 15 8 •- i fiti iff!w c.tioc •- w 92 Qj m r- <~i m — n\ V— «-Reformat for clarity and modify as follows:• Add sites that contain biological resources identified in the HMP as sitof 3,500 square feet is permitted; and• Delete two-family dwellings from the standards for small lot developmismall-lot subdivisions apply to projects developed with one dwelling utdwellings by definition are two attached units on the same lot. As pro|one lot (two-family dwellings) would be subject to the condominium st<of the PD chapter.By eliminating two-family dwellings from the standards for one-family dweindividual lots) the requirements for exclusive use area are no longer nec«is typically associated with condominium projects where multiple homeowownership of the property the dwellings are located on (not an issue wherseparate lots).-j_j L.COT3 1 co0> co ~Z 1 c:'E "coE 1 ^cco 45o ^ CO in Reformat to list maximum lot coverage for 1 -story homes before the requirement for 2-story home:(logical order). Also, staff recommends changing the maximum lot coverage for 2-story homes asfollows:Proposed Maximum Lot Coverage for2-Story HomesCurrent Maximum Lot Coverage for2-Story Homesi 1 CO Q} (0 <D 0> k. 2£?o to « od |£s•g OT « Q. "Ill 5«n-S cfir I 8in Projects w/ a min. lot area of5,000 square feet or greater:45% of net pad area (for alllots in the project)§S!9) °- .. w co M— Q.£ o-'ft ""-I ° 8 re ro a3 w ill 10 ^ w-o) a> o "0^5? — I 0 i% _ 1 £ *~ t> CNI -5 Staff has found that the current 40% lot coverage standard for lots 5,000 s.f. or greater is too restrThe lot coverage standard in the Planned Development regulations is limited to the "net pad area""net pad area" excludes slopes and other non-buildable area, and is therefore less than the entirearea (on lots with slopes, etc.), which results in a more restrictive lot coverage standard. Staffrecommends increasing the lot coverage ("net pad area" coverage) standard from 40% to 45% forstory homes on lots of 5,000 s.f. or greater.To simplify the lot coverage standards applicable to a single project, staff recommends that the lotcoverage standard for 2-story homes be consistent throughout the project and be based on the milot area in the project (rather than on a lot by lot basis as the current standard is).0) 2CD § JD E 1 XCO E "co •2 73 C •co "o T> CO JO *E "to o> c/> _l< < ino<a.o CMCD ino N, H ZHI 2a•z.UJ UJo Q T-o: •*o-sO in O coN D.Table A, continued>f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapteru mEE tie-Family Dwellings and Twin Homes on Small Lots (Section 21.45.070), continued 'O o (0 n cmc/5 5ut 0)O)c .cO CO co "o V)Discussion/Analysis0) ^^ 0) •o0)§Q. Oi ^2 ^ ^^i .2^ 1 1 cl .M0-S o - || |9 cr « '1 2 £ £ T3 0•; -»± 00£ 2 S.^2. II ll— 'C TJ 2* p 0 5 E.E 0) 3.g ro T-J •£ o 1 So £^ 5 c<n 0 \ (D ^z -rr^ -S Q. ^ 0 •§ 0 to c >>.aXI !_ O 'F — o ° -o S °*T o 0 ,2 -o 0 || |§ l|3 filci3 o ^ £ •- ™ ro .? ro ro -a w o ?300 — ~ IP |1_i J2 ro < T3 "c0 E0 '5 0 ^;5 5 "o E3 |c E' ^ro D oin •o ^.r* £r ^ *rN W Current PD standards require a minimum lot frontage of 35 feet with a provision to allow 25 feet ifadequate guest parking near the end of the cul-de-sac is provided.All projects must provide the minimum required visitor parking, which must also be located a minimLdistance from the dwellings. Since the project must provide and locate visitor parking per the PDstandards, each project is considered to provide "adequate" guest parking, and the location of suchparking will be reasonably accessible to the dwellings. If the location of the guest parking is within tlminimum required distance from the units, locating the guest parking "near" (a subjective term) the €of the cul-de-sac does not provide any additional benefit related to the width of the lot frontage.Staff recommends establishing the minimum lot frontage as 25 feet for lots located on cul-de-sacs osharply curved streets. The minimum lot width (measured 20 feet behind the front property line) willremain at 35 feet. This will result in more flexibility in site layout, and will not impact the availability (guest parking (since the project is required to provide and locate visitor parking per the PD standardoro $•? m u CM O ro§ 0) -oO) fl)m -*-iIs l« ^ jo £ 3 £. Q£ ..-r <o 'c ^ "D E£ 1 1" 5 ~- ra >»-C "i -r W £ 9-is fc «s32% uj 2 S ,_ in CD .^ §£ -^L-c: i_Move maximum building height standard from one row to another (new row D.1 1) within Table D ofPD chapter. The current PD standards specify the maximum building height for one-family or two-family dwellings on small lots is 30 feet (24 feet if roof pitch is less than 3:12). This is the same heigstandard permitted in the R-1 and R-2 zones. However, the PD height standard is more restrictive tcurrently allowed in the R-3, RD-M, and R-P zones (35 feet). Staff recommends that the PD heightstandards should not be more restrictive than the underlying zone, especially when non-planneddevelopment projects (i.e. standard single-family subdivisions and apartments) on neighboringproperties would be permitted to build to a higher height standard. Allowing PD projects (small lot ocondominium) to build to the height allowed by the underlying zone will ensure consistency with theheight of other buildings in the same zone.T3 *® •5 — CDT3 fZ g £ 0) O*-* 'CD N OT -C CD £ o>.Ecn.£ _>•• JB. IS o5 . 2 § & •° -| .EE ro TJ 3 E CD.i a>.|x -c E g- 1E ro Q. CD £ co O ^ CD — CD E.Si Q. roCt co co CNin CD *3 ^*The setback standards from a street or drive-aisle, whether from the front or street side of a lot, aresame. Combining the standards will eliminate redundancy, and reformatting the standards into twocategories (one for setbacks from a street, and one for setbacks from a drive-aisle) will provide clariand consistency with the formatting of other standards in the table.oro _.a 2 ro•*-* < *—0 .& C O = •+-" L_ ^*73 c *• n .t— — co =CO to _^ ^ CD >>-D 0 £ "w "^ -§ £ ° i(O c 0 CD CD-5 JS c/> c .> i3 CD § ^ ?«!%!ro ^ ^ CD *= *i >2 t 55 .*:o ^ -i CJ £=•§ g rofi ^ io" ^ a cCD 73 CD i_ CC C 'C O 3 ? •§ 8>.a .iE c a> S .£ O "co o Q- ? COin /r?7 CO CO < < 9mo o ino <ON LU Q•z.LU LU O Q T- OL *0-5 O CD O roN Q- /S3 o (Dcnco Table A, continued: Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter0 ^*reEE3V).070), continuedM«* r-M COt»0>w, (0*rfo "re V) co ina> oX cii •ocre (AO>_c ~0 Q j>. Ere11. i O ^o (0En c 5(0o (/)0)O)creJCo 1 ^0'•§0><0 Discussion/Analysis^c0)g•oc E •o Ia. C C^ ^ 0 -D .C t 0 TO - flj "^ .;•£ .- f— ^3 P 0)"- O f?Wi_>-g 0<° ~ o-0. g£ 5^ 8.S !8°0£8«ig. Is 1 -5 SS*£ |2 §£ S**l *2g,J2-Q is 0 *= O CO 0 o 5 S .2 -* w ro 2zl^ 800,2cu -g.2 2 5 ..-o $ <?£ 35 00^0)co •§ o- o « *• -g .Ea^i nil•p § .S ^ >» co ™ .2 The PD standards currently require a residence (including an attacheinterior side yard a minimum of 10% of the lot width or 5 feet minimresidence and attached garage located on a 60 foot wide lot wouldfrom an interior side yard. However, a detached garage (accessorysetback more than 5 feet from an interior side yard.The proposed modification would allow a slightly reduced interior sideon the rear half of a lot (the setback - 5 feet minimum - would not chwidth). The modification will provide additional flexibility in locating anof a lot. Any livable space above the garage will be required to mainresidence..«_<O x_C CO 0 COC 0 "o 02 £ "S c C/J "^ 0 CO "m 0 O•o — "* <1) ^ COo co 0 CO .1= ? r- to t£jr t^» "O -*-••— D Oy fl) Q. X *^-C/} (U O o> LO ^ 0C -C1 p§1MI it: "^ . "o "§2 "2 « > -a> CO ^— o co a.=_J "G Q.JU CO "5 0 =£t£ Ijl .i-S*- w .c - "55 "5 w !£ o"2 co >P -S"oC OCN "5 o)"^ IIIV) 0 cr ***i *^L COO if^ >• fl) ^J ^) H E '<n 0 V., •I" •X J3O 33— 0g </> M >- W 3^ ro cn O *"^ .— -o ^ • — j3 >, ||1 C5 Q 0 "w f£ o "x ^ ^ 0 CO c/>f~ - "O "c/> co*^— 0 "n 'C C CmC Jr — . O ^ O ^ OT oCD 0TD 0 w 0 o c CO •5 0 '55 Staff recommends adding language to clarify that the 0-foot setback"where the dwellings on each lot are attached).0 Eo c g.& ^oco-fi 0 co>s 0 ^0 £j ^^.p* 'CIco O ,_ CD I 3•1—1c0) C*o o ro,~•cT 0C0£ Q) O i cB ^20 -B s|Q. CO i- T?CO CO2r CO 0X «This clarifies that there is a difference between the setback required f(a street or drive-aisle and a rear property line located on the interior ofj_ CO ,0 i i_ .g ui "-•- O ij 05 £ 0 w t/3 CO T3 CU_ (-\ >. ° co 1£ t: •n ° lo3 "O S^ro "— .C £(/)0 "co = £ >-^•c^ 0 .•c O.JD O Q.'(0 CMCD .- o -g S ^ COwl- £^SS « d,5ll o-o£0 •>00s x: c: <-*ii ^*sS-^8 M_ 0 COo T~The current PD standards require a minimum rear yard setbackrecommends also specifying that the rear yard shall not be less thanfeet, which ensures a usable rear yard area. The added languagerequirements in other residential zones.t .o — "0co .0 (/) O Jd ^o ~oCO 0 "0 y CO %CD"O i • CO ^ >^ *- CO 0£ ^ "O -QO r~ • — (^-* *- £^.2 0 o t^ 'c^ro co *-• *-• .^* CO •TT (O m ^Q- mCO 2 roCD Intentionally left blank.cCO i "cocg'•^zc0 c /s3 OT >- < < PTO ino o CNo If)o< H-•z.LLJ 2Q•z. UJ UJo•z.< Q O oo•z. •*-^ 0)^ enO roN Q.Table A, continuedc Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chaptero re E ^V)e-Family Dwellings and Twin Homes on Small Lots (Section 21.45.070), continued |cO o«£to^re csV) 2v>0) O) (0.C 1 COco CO Discussion/Analysis |<-c0>E T3 C 0> E *o08Q. O Q_Staff recommends that all small-lot PD developments be subject to the same private recreation area 1requirement. The minimum lot size for a project with less than 10 units is the same as a project with |COCO , r 0EQ)*— Q) L~ 0)oCOQ.(/> ^g "roflic 1- sz"ro Q. . . "O oil more than 10 units. Therefore, the amount of private recreation space required on each lot should bethe same."O 73 CO (0o -oQ. CO CO1_ -4-tD_ co -Q CO c 13 CO *; 0 t 0 The current private rear yard recreation space requirement is one of the standards that has made itdifficult for some projects to achieve required density. The current standard of 25 ft. x 25 ft. for project'of 1-10 units is excessive and difficult to implement on small lots. Smaller projects are typically locateoon infill lots, which results in design challenges (due to limited area) when trying to provide 25 ft. x 25 ft.of private recreation area in a rear yard. The 25 ft. dimension is greater than the required rear yardsetback for both a PD project and a standard subdivision (7,500 sq. ft. lot size). The minimum rearyard setback for a PD project is 10 ft. min. (and need not exceed 20 ft.), and for a standard subdivision(based on a standard lot with the min. lot width of 60 ft.) is 12 ft. min. (and need not exceed 20 ft.).The proposed 400 sq. ft. per unit of private recreation space is slightly more than currently required forprojects of more than 10 units (current standard: 18x18 = 324 sq. ft.), and is somewhat less thanrequired for projects of 1-10 units (current standard: 25x25 = 625 sq. ft.). As a minimum standard, 400sq. ft. is sufficient to provide useable private recreation space (equivalent to a 2-car garage).To provide design flexibility in where the private recreation area is located, staff is recommending thatthe 400 sq. ft. be allowed to be located within the rear or side yards of a lot, and as more than oneprivate recreation area (rather than as currently limited strictly to the rear yard). The proposed min. 15ft. dimension of the private recreation space will ensure that it is functional space, even when located inthe side yard. The provision to locate private recreation space in the side yard, and the 15 ft. min. Jdimension requirement, will eliminate the need for a separate standard for alley loaded projects.Staff also recommends adding language to clarify that the private recreation space must be designedto be functional and easily accessible to the unit, and that it may not be located in the front yardsetback or include any driveways, parking, storage, or walkways (except those walkways that areclearly integral to the design of the recreation area).Note: The proposed amendment to the private recreation area standard will codify and replacePlanning Department Administrative Policy No. 40, which allows flexibility in locating the requiredrecreation area within the rear or side yards, and allows flexibility in the minimum 25 ft. x 25 ft.dimensions.L_ Q}f^ f— <!"• ^ § 0 •£ • '1 E c -2$T =» 'c. £ in 0 SE •- ^~O T3" w 'c CO "O TD </) "O 'c ro T— co ^3 ro§ >• TI >» .2, >•— . *— * r* £ *— ^* o* CD ^*° $ « J= S *= b.s c T^- J; cr « S o- -owcr Oioio Ooo-^- ."01010 joCMCN ET~^I o^"^"oxiS. <»rx£2- — xCi 'f~* in 0Q <•<"> •« t» = toa- ™ 0 "~ < "- 'o" (X LOco /f¥ CO CO _l< < ino oIIf)o N, h-zUJ Qz UJ < UJo <z a T-Ct "*0-5 O 0> O coN a.e A, continuedo Planned Development (PD) Chapter?iV E•o o *o ^^creEE 3 ngs and Twin Homes on Small Lots (Section 21.45.070), continued0) Q ^~^^ Ereli- euc O Oc. CO"ntin•ocre4-itoo4-1 to0)O)cre O 1 CO o 43O0)co Discussion/Analysis4-* O •oco < •D«(/)Oo °a. —\<t ,. 0 Jr x: o c-C tf 3 S 0 *- O1— m o- £ IE 0 '•=S 0 o * o) co„: S-.Q ° * CO 00 >- O - 3 ^«:> c « -I? "53 o> &a.2-°2.$gi £ 5H?=-Si s standards allow lattice-top patio covers within required private recreationsan open or lattice cover was intended to allow sun and light in the recnsred patio often functions as an outdoor recreational space (outdoor seatiit provides shade and protection from rain. Staff recommends that a soliiin the rec. space, provided it does not project into the space more thanhe majority of the recreation area is open. Staff also recommends addin<nies and decks also be permitted to project 6 feet into the rec. space.t language allowing for open or lattice-top patio covers within the privjloved from Table F (Accessory Use standards) to Table D."' lu — 33 «^-» ?> r- >- §!§!S!l l!•Scco.0.,.2 oo> S g u.-'S'iS 2ro a-QtE0Sc^^: ^w30><uE^-" i=~o .h= 0 - cu S ^ - R 5|il?fS S|h-2xco.a$73 <w E i ai.£ t> o co 9-**3 C ^0QJ C Q. m CO"- ro~° o 0•— w ._o.9i,f5 5M^ o 2 CO W Se.9J raCO c >> 0 '£ |^ CL = CO T>CO -Q 0 O "O -5•" c g. 5 ro 0O tn til.ii W ^~•g-Ss l*fo — rti «gS•a S^co5o*-< 0 0 coco CDCO 5 2 a>0CO O)c ^coQ.^.O.±i CO '> cuT3c -^ J5 1 co cu 0 -c•2-ar- *-•o o•is '§§JJ ^ Q. CO CU C -£ JS'iSfeOTJ0 CUa: b r-CD t_ 4-*w'> & •+-* 1^o_ co 2 c TJ0.9 §?•o 'c c =»O 0:<« o §E &.S 0 O |i 1*CO o Q. i_ ££ 0 CO -Q S?si -D £|!!«.28c c °Z(/} •*— * '> '5o£1 O)a. c .«2'-£-c co1- a. >, 1 0)-?c o'2. i «j m -8S CD^°- c =i- -^3 Oo w o 1'gs pc3"§t >t- •(-• •g =^^ = 1 c8 0 R= > oco 'c 0i_ T3 .ao *- _c 82 •i|^•£° § O ^ Q.u. _ O Q..E C5i«^5 5 oi Q) a .C 0 .ZZ ^^T3 0)0 0 5 Q o -D COCD >-CM .. -* O 0•^ I SoX0 TJ*: 0 ro^2 > o 2 standards require each unit to be provided with a 2-car garage. For additin, staff recommends allowing the 2 required garage spaces to be parages."'CTCT Q '« !sQ. 0 fO ~ T3 Vr~ ' ® tS mL_ « 01— 0 JS3 •:=> CO" 2 !«0 o.a-C 01- .£ to 2 O)c^L_co Q. . -^ (0 C 0 0 O)TJ COla__ 1- 1 o '3 T- O" 0 2 20 ra •C Q. "^ 0 -2<^ §^|5 2^O *^fc*J- ^co 2 T3 Q. "O 0 < ^2 O) CO "i 0 *- .c£-2^cT— 4-f 0 .— -o «f£r~ ' "^co-S w 5 ^5.^S Hows the 2 required resident parking spaces to be provided as 1 covereed, and any uncovered space may be located within the required frontj driveway). Staff recommends that any PD project within the RW zoneirking standards. (The RW Zone is limited to a very small geographic aie).ro is ^ 8.6g § 1 0 0° g | § o^ 3 *NW 5 fl> m => £g 0 C0§ CD -c c^ i••^ f\ *"^~ 1 .£ co*3 0 >> H E -<£.:£ '0 COco to '§ LlQ. O> £^15a cu i§£cu 0"- c0 0N0 -J •4-1 ^>O >s*O 0£ •*=<4— 4_i co c T3 !c 5i oN- CO CO _l< < tf)o O CNO IOO < ON 111 2Q UJ LUO Q tt 0 O -ON O)roQ-Table A, continued: Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter0 reE E3 CO •o0) oo o" 0 in Tf co 0>co 33 15 CO co (00> oX c2 •ocre G) Q IreLL. ic O o w re T3c 5 CO 2 (0 D)crer* O co c.0 "ooCO Discussion/Analysisd> 73c0> E •o0>sa Sa. _ in c £ p£ £t/> o ro g I! — (/> CNJ — -i it Cl) •— -i O rX"if! if 11 f!t -5 SB g « I £ " ro - g H c £ ^<Sl2^ ^; ls?~*i 21 SEE ATTACHMENT 5 TO THE DECEMBER 6, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION STThe current PD standards require a minimum 33% or 50% (depending on the numbethe units in a project to be setback 5 feet from the front house facade. Anol(depending on number of floor plans) of the units must be setback 30 feet from theand a maximum of 33% or 25% of the units are not permitted to project more than 6front house facade.The initial purpose of these requirements was to reduce the prominent appearance ithe street. However, the standards are very inflexible and result in limited optiondesigning dwellings on a site (especially small lots).City Council Policy 66 (Livable Neighborhoods) requires dwellings to be desigrresidence (not the garage) is the prominent feature in relation to the street. Policyvariety of garage configurations in a project (i.e. front entry, side entry, alley loadaddition, City Council Policy 44 (Neighborhood Architectural Design Guidelines)requirements that ensure dwellings are visually interesting, have sufficient building aiin scale with the lot size (e.g., minimum number of different floor plans, multiple buporches, front entries that are visible from the street, etc.).All Planned Development projects with one-family dwellings or twin homes on smallPolicies 44 and 66. Policies 44 and 66, as well as other existing standards (i.e. buicoverage, etc.) are sufficient to regulate the location of garages.TJc 0).a </>0)O)2CD 0) 8o 0 (O"c ai0 TJECO092 jo 3 Q) n% W O .C "^ *~* C 3 PQ) H- Q) 0) E CO >- < < o o O. O CN O If)O ON LU ^Q Z LU 111 O Q T-o: ^r 0-50^- Z CM ^ 0?k c"O coN a.Table A, continuedF Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter« E3 CO e-Family Dwellings and Twin Homes on Small Lots (Section 21.45.070), continued |c O !•. l_ re•O C &CO 2 CO0> cre O c "o0) CO Discussion/Analysis |"c i•oc0)E •aa>(0a 2a.Wording is proposed to be modified to eliminate redundancy and clarify intent.The current standards specify that no more than 20% of all project units may include a garage withdoors for 3 or more cars in-a-row. The standard includes a requirement for a plane change of 18inches between the 2-car and 1-car garages. Staff recommends the reference to the 18-inch planechange be deleted. The requirement is included in the City's Architectural Design Guidelines (CityCouncil Policy 44), which all small-lot PD projects are subject to. It is not necessary to repeat therequirement in the PD chapter.3-car garages that are located 20 feet or more behind the front of the house are exempt from the 20%restriction mentioned above. However, to be exempt, the garage must not exceed 40% of the width ofthe house frontage. On a small lot it would be difficult, if not infeasible, to design a house where a 3car garage did not exceed 40% of the house frontage. Staff recommends deleting the restriction to notexceed 40% of the house frontage, and allow 3-car garages if they are setback 20 feet from theforward most plane of the house (which will likely be a rare occurrence in a small lot PD).Staff also recommends that garages for 3 or more cars in-a-row not be permitted on lots less than5,000 square feet in any circumstance. The current standard states that "in special circumstances" 3-car garages are not permitted on lots less than 5,000 square feet. It is not clear what those "specialcircumstances" are, and the proposed amendment would clearly state that they are not permitted onlots less than 5,000 square feet.CD co £ S2oo T3 .C•t-f $ CO0O)CO coO) ,2 10 5E Q S. CO '§-.£0 ~L- CO ^ CDco b 0 E CN "Pasadena" driveways are designed with a grass strip in the middle. Such driveways are difficult tomaintain. Vehicles parked in driveways make it difficult to irrigate and damage the quality of the grasswith oil and other pollutants. Staff recommends that this requirement be deleted.CO 0 •= ="v m to 0 n- T3O CO to Q.CN = . i_ CO0 CO ^"™ -.11-11 c 00 c 0 iJi,± 0 O" 00 .0 0 3 f 5 CO£ .0, >>"m °c7 COc •- •£ .E co .> 01 .E -u CO ondominium Projects - Section 21.45.080 (currently Multiple Dwelling standards) |£ re•ocre CO2 V)0)encre O ^f .0 "o0> CO As discussed in row 1 , the development standards for "multiple dwellings" are being modified to appl-to "condominium projects" to enable the development of detached one-family dwellings on one lot.However, the standards that apply to "multiple dwellings" do not include some of the standardscurrently applicable to "one-family dwellings". Some of the standards that apply to one-family dwellingsdeveloped on individual lots are also appropriate to apply to two or more detached one-family dwellingson the same lot, such as architectural design guidelines (City Council Policy 44).The City's architectural design guidelines apply to one-family and two-family dwellings, but do not applyto multiple dwellings. Therefore, the standards for "condominium projects" are proposed to specify that"one-family and two-family dwellings" developed as condominiums must comply with the architecturaldesign guidelines. The current PD architectural requirements for multiple-family dwellings areproposed to be relocated from one row to another within Table E, and minor modifications areproposed to clarify the types of design elements required to be incorporated into the building design.CO O) "0c 5O) "O CO >» S! "ro •£ 3 O t> J5 Q) -f^ic c c«*i0 |E 00"°c £ o <20 «=• CO 0) CO 73 **T* Q) Q)E .E a.co 0-2 "O ^ fllJji fn W ^.h~ CO CO _l< < ino o 10o ON, h- UJ Q ZLU 01 O Q T-o: •*• 0-5 O CM Z CM ON O)co0-Table A, continued>f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter>rf reE 3 C/)>minium Projects - Section 21.45.080 (currently Multiple Dwelling standards), continued [w•o Coo £w •O re•oc 3V) o (00 re O ' co o 0>V)Discussion/Analysis |<_(c E•oc 0>E T34)(0Oa2a.The current PD standard specifies a maximum "lot" coverage of "60% on a project basis".Condominium projects may consist of more than one lot. Staff proposes to clarify that the maximum60% coverage is not on a "lot" basis, but is the maximum coverage allowed on the "total project netdevelopable acreage".0'6" Q. CO c0 T3 0 ^_O To 0 202.U E 1 j^ 10 Jto ro ^ O .£> m ^The current PD standards for "multiple dwellings" allow for a maximum building height of 35 feet (nr 'story limitation). As discussed in row 38, above, staff is recommending that some standards b^modified specifically when a project is located in the RH designation to better enable development toachieve the RH density range. Building height is one of the standards that architects have identified ashaving a significant impact to designing a project at higher densities. Higher density projects typicallyhave units with less floor area, and architects have indicated that smaller units are more marketable ifthey appear more open and spacious on the interior. Building height regulations are important to beingable to achieve this open and spacious design.Staff is recommending that the maximum building height for PD projects located in the RH land usedesignation be increased from 35 feet to 40 feet (if roof pitch is 3:12 or greater), and not to exceed 3stories (the 3-story limitation would also apply to buildings not in the RH designation that are restrictedto 35 feet in height). Buildings with a roof pitch less than 3:12 would be limited to 35 feet in height (ascurrently permitted). A 40 foot height limit will accommodate higher ceilings on each floor (i.e. 10 footceilings), and the ability to incorporate a greater variety of architectural features in the building design.A footnote is being added that specifies RH designated properties in the Beach Area Overlay Zone(BAOZ) will be limited to the height restrictions of the BAOZ (30 feet and 2 stories).c £ TO'> co> 0)V> is: rn CD 'FT O- ,/iO te\ CO k 00--0 -C<- c o•2 ro w "S) cf ro & •§ "O § |S "o 'w &•>- 0 »_..C "U O _O) £- C '0 CO = ™"5--2m ~rn (/J 2 « £•5 S.E-° o>2 co x '5 5 0 ro < £ £ CD See discussion in row 74. Staff recommends the setbacks from a street or drive-aisle for one-famih' Jand two-family dwellings developed as condominiums be the same as the setbacks required for onefamily dwellings developed on individual lots. With the exception of the setback from a street to theresidence, the same setbacks are required for multiple-family dwellings.•o co 0 -a U. £^.2 c co0 = *-.^ *• •* QJ Q) C Q) fft ._ (/} D) E O •— • O -O 3j CO *•!. >, co co~ -° .51! fc-V w co i ~° E •^ "co 2-a -•*- C CO CO TO P .* ->> T °-SvS rop .£ £ ro E CD aj **~ o CO —I u tO0) T3 O)-—C C C CO O O 15 0 i_ CJ — ^o co 'D 'c U. CO £1 T3 f^ ^SEE ATTACHMENT 5 TO THE DECEMBER 6, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORTRequiring an average setback has been difficult for staff to calculate and implement, and does notensure a minimum setback (an average of 15 feet could result in one building setback of 0 feet and onebuilding setback of 30 feet). It is also not clear if the average is based on separate buildings or a singlebuilding with varying building planes. Staff recommends establishing a minimum setback of 15 feet,not an average of 1 5 feet.m»~ £ jj, . *y*^ Q) 0 fll "to £CO(0 *— E "m"2 0 ^ m O T- CO (/) 'o> <"co cp E = |l C 'p dj Q) — O) _C J5 <0*^ t l— til g.3 0co E £ COr-- Chapter9^2<-• o1°gjco 0>•g 5 3 Q= TJ•S «caCO CO r-cp IDo CMOino <ON LU 2Q LLI1 Lit O 5 -- QL "to-s CD coZ CM ^ 0g D)O CON D- <£ .2 2II o> o>aSe5.jeTJ OO fi <0 •En TJ CO 55 S OT0>Ol ra SCO J2 FQ. Q CL "co £ o.0 CO arterial setbacks specihe requireCO£ I</> 0 1-0 fl> jg 11 II 0 O 0 (D (I) 0 "Ci— CO o c~ CO S EO oC L_ 0 « 0 0 OJD CO CM 200co O TJCO 0) S 30 (/>OT CO 0, 0 92 c ro 0 0 (0 .g w I— y>-•o o•o jo co "5)-53 w 0 S? O 'C*- co0 ois ro- •o 5-o S < V) o00 CMQ)1_^«>Om" v_x.a>|^.0alS •2oo0'-S2>ro (D_ i_-£ g ^^-owaj^Tj-KOfl) '? 3 ^ -g -2 w •§• g(Ui-p-^Pfwcio2!L;Kr"^^mr^(/>CO 0 o ~ • - 0) •- 35 ^: O^ it000 = ^j(/ 0 -2t'cxj5.— 0cj=CO COT3T30TJCO'O0(/5 a drive-V).i<:oCO-Q 0CO C Tg 5 E'~ 0 !/>Existing: 8 ft. fullylandscaped ("all floorsnot specified)•2 itHQ. J5 Coo CO 0"o 0T;'(/)0o: i _o 0 .</) o oi_z = 0 •jifi « (/> . O5 '>< ^ 001 00 fi ..S o ^ coto a) °a o•o ja 71 "O (/) D)a o s.S o coHi 5= D) 0 O)2COCD 00 0 edstt- l_ Cg-gsgas h- CO CO O) OC *•2f£ o s 1 3°-i= a)co w .a ll •*-• O *-• '^.<D = O —« -§ .0,o3 .^ co °- i 0 ^ 1 § t^ -2>"co "^s: co 0 O0 jg 0 OE n>•ifi.co 0 Q) a) CMOO 0> . 2^-5Q. c cr o ^=5 w d) ro o p * ill"5 C 0g-0 E£ | ® •sa^ E .i'oi ItS73 5 .ro co ro gs-^s !•§•*i^-i0roi £-^>;o-.2"w .E .ti 0 c o"'> CO (/)<_;1 o n o °-g>«t 118& 3?l.s.52 0 co 5 ;o co ro E•— T3 r> ^ o = J2 c c(00C m eetamipplureecommends that a minimum building separation of 1is consistent with the separation requirementsaructselopment requiren), and standardseen habitable-family eg separatioration betwlldind ngbuiisioot sepastandaa 10oo0raE3 E2 Sc*•• c0) c t5 0 co 8 .i £ «ifil Oc CD m o eo ^~Q. TO 0 r-OT i: .H O>•5 S-Q Q> 18c *- E CM0 c _O 0) dl CO OO 0 ^§) C t0 dwellings will still be subject to some of the standards of theCouncil Policy 44), which will ensure a high quality design. ChaptereQ.OO o> O ubo< Q_ CNO IT) O <ON LU 2Q LU 111O O T- O^ z *"O ro"N Q_ o>•o >® ®3 Q = TJ= § Sj <CL i 2lio eto TJV3 C I OU ^•^(0"2TO•ocre « 01 0> Q o>52U)Ere•o Ito o4^ 10oO) re O - •-to o'to .9>,CO O^ro ro £ V oCN E E w fl> *^ ro 1 C")CD . ro ,.: 21 •o| 2 ^ "ro o) o .2> Sg to VQ. —(U CN " 0". 00:5 MS^"ooro OT <NQ. g; ro -4-« '-ti t—C OT 00 C *~TJ 0) TJ'tO TJ 0' 0 ro•*= a> 0 a!' 0) £ 3P o -oro 0 01 w -Q 5 0 .S>o '5* to= 20< a. -a 74. The proposediniums are the same-car garages). SeeC Jr i.ro C>CN Q- en E I- rox S a ^^^0 0, 0 .E|! £-00 Q) > O ^ glSi one $ '^•S'vs ro^i- <o S^ Iro 0 in roLL. "O CM OJ oo TJ nits, aroomer unitdiowmiate 1See discussion indeveloped as condgarage or 2 separZone.E45 0co c0E0 O" CO0 O) o>-=C (!) Q. >. ll'to o 3 =< ro inoo d) 0 -- . .a 0 S *81* ~ - .o «?tsseedroosurveaeit,it,eose t27, aing remoreranitfod tforedtaprllillerva-iiiOneparkipapaTJ E 0 o>8.w 8Q.w o5 «S CN •> "O .sl| f*8 ^li |.«S!§§>W0ro » .>. 0 •£ roi O ro 0 w ro El 00 itoarbaeSro O O) .ro TJ ts0 ° ro£"§ to Q-TJ O ro ^c S -4—< ,.s.Ss CO CO IOo Q- O too N, I- 01 Q 01 1 UJO•z. z Q T-o: ^i-075 O m2 CM Z ^ O co5 N Q.Table A, continued>f Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapterw n | C/J iminium Projects - Section 21.45.080 (currently Multiple Dwelling standards), continuedw O 0 b. £ •o n•ac SCO 2v> D>cre Oi Tf C .0 "o0>(O Discussion/Analysis"c0 E•o a> E ^ Q>(0OQ. 0^Q_ <DsX5 CO to" <D 1 00)CO _ >_r— Oi *•p ?*t: o x 5 »>o co Q- !2•.S c w co CO -z; ~o0. CO ™ 0) = "o .9 a[ O .3L (TJ fl> W O 0 > n* Q. O -rj ° *"" m 0) S3 SICO tz > -Q) 5 8 Q.5 = «-°"SLCO -Q 0 -g*o "g '5 'E c co £T J5o (A 2_ i ^:i a -§ 1 1o -£ — cSI T3 ^ -o ~ ro £2 ,0 ro o_ 0 i "OT3 > CO 0 C < 875 § 8 0 !/> (DCO CC-KT3W SEE ATTACHMENT 5 TO THE DECEMBER 6, 2006 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORTThe current PD standards require more private recreation space per unit for projects with 1-10 unit(120 square feet) than for projects with more than 10 units (100 square foot patio or 60 square foebalcony).These standards were established when projects were permitted to build below the density range of thunderlying General Plan designation; and it was likely that a project with fewer units would be a atlesser density and have more area to provide private recreation space.However, all projects are now required to implement the density range of the underlying General Pladesignation. Therefore, each project (regardless of the number of units) will have similar constraints othe amount of area available to provide private recreation space. Staff recommends the currerstandard applicable to projects of more than 10 units be applicable to all projects. The current standardoes not specify a minimum dimension for patios and balconies. A minimum dimension of 8 feet iproposed for patios and a minimum dimension of 6 feet is proposed for balconies._c TJ *jj c CO <— y_ "O - O I'H.s co'£FE 0 Q. 3ro p R i/t o •— c*= E o 03 -£3 "O O g wE 8 j-j & °> C/JCO .= ~O •c "o> 4S Q. 5 ^(U "0 TO Q -~ (/) ^ f"\ *•* 1 = £ -1 Qi "co £ co ,_a> c_ .As discussed in row 38, above, staff is recommending that the amount of required recreation space bemodified specifically when a project is located in the RH designation to better enable development toachieve the RH density range.Allowing a high density project to provide more common recreation area in lieu of private recreatioispace for each unit (patio or balcony) will result in more flexibility in project design and placement cbuildings, which will assist in achieving the required density of the RH designation.O) ^ 1 1-2 JH C >-^ "o o -ccoo. 'il°"Sfc tl ~ -i=i ° § §••= 0> ,_ <DE £ cu 2o m Q- CDTJ Sj *-• -C 8 x: >2 "o rn O JU ^?-£ co.9J = | |-i •O C tf) (J Qn') .E?1^ <o co•S W 75 Q. D.CL (D W (/) co ^ "° o c c(D *r? O O 1=111< ;-j n) n) « "O TO ^- •— "TJ! fn ^— Ql fl} ^* TO * * CNO>Section 5for Residential Additions and Accessory Uses - Section 21.45.090(0 n•a 1(0 Qi MQ)CTCrex:O The current PD standards do not specify a provision for additions to buildings that are nonconformingdo to inadequate setbacks. Therefore, staff defers to Section 21 .48.090 of the Zoning Ordinance,which specifies criteria to alter buildings that are nonconforming because of inadequate yards. Theprovisions of Section 21 .48.090 require a greater setback than is required for some PD projects.Therefore, staff recommends a separate provision be specified in the PD standards that allowsadditions to nonconforming structures, provided the addition does not increase the existing floor areaby more than 40% and complies with the required setbacks and lot coverage of the PD chapter.if (O TJo) nj.£ c"° ^1•5 o ^-» »^ "o to*-. COc 0Q) •- 0 -^0) 0) — — c£ 1 >2 §c °o c :<G i> ^ n -^ •t! = u>a. co ^: CO Q) m < CO </> COO) CO CO < < LO O<Q. O egoino H LLI Q Z UJ UJo < Q T- O? CD CD 7ZO roN Q-Table A, continuedF Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter»fc.c1 re E E3 CO or Residential Additions and Accessory Uses - Section 21.45.090, continuedn-(/>T3 re•ocre CO o W0) O) re^—Oi m c_o "o0)CO Discussion/Analysis"cVE•oca> E •aov>oQ. & O) C m Table F of Section 21.45.090 currently lists the types of residential additions and accessory usesallowed for single-family (SF) and two-family (TF) dwellings, and the permit required (either a "buildipermit" or a "residential addition permit".The following are the types of additions/accessory uses that currently require a "building permit" or •"residential addition permit":Residential Addition PermitBuilding Permitexo <fi o 73 ro<ncu0) ro0 Attached/detached patio coversPorte cochereb -9ro Ero "c 2LL (/)<D Room additions and other habitable structui3z D) 'CD.G C 0) o o CO 0> o tfl 73 73 ro OT730).C "oo Guest houses*2 'E O) 173 73 O CO c .o :'~ 73ro "ro WroQ. 73 rom 80. iron_ 0) to ^ Q 0 CD J= P °•irector approval, and requires a public notice 1recessing many "residential addition permits",es minimal value and benefit, which does notiurces involved in the process. Staffs reviewaddition or accessory use complies with theing height, etc.), which is no more than the levid to the public notice. Those neighbors whopublic notice have questioned the purpose of 1ler or not the project complies with the standair accessory structure (for one-family dwellingsbuilding permit. This is consistent with then standard single-family development.A "residential addition permit" is subject to Planning Dall property owners within 100 feet of the site. After pstaff has identified the permit as a process that providjustify the amount of staff and applicant time and resc"residential addition permit" is limited to ensuring the <development standards (setbacks, lot coverage, buildof review for a building permit. Few neighbors resporhave responded in the past to a "residential addition"notice if staffs review of the project is limited to whetrStaff recommends that any proposal for an addition otwin-homes on small lots) be subject to approval of arequirements for additions and accessory structures iic"8lE -2s E53 .g wQ. g ro O) W Cc w o C 73 ro CU0) :73 CU — CD C 3 3 O ° 0 •«= =" ™ 2 .5ro u_£ C(D ^— Q} V *" "ro •c E UJ o w 5 > 5 oo w o) QL /i' ^ ro" 8 "1 *— i_ 73 3 0 >, 53.S^ 73 i - ro oF c ro E ro -E S.fi'1 ° O) CO CO < < 9ino O ino N>»xI- LU Q•z. UJ LJJ O Q T-o: ^ro-s O r- O coN Q-Table A, continuedF Amendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter^crreE| V)or Residential Additions and Accessory Uses - Section 21.45.090, continuedM- V)•gre•o CO 2 inCDc>cre O m c_o "oVCO Discussion/Analysis*^ 0> •oc V ^0)w0Q.2a. _ T3•- S 2_, (/) *•' ^ 0 -o S Q. CD >, °- 1 S •— CD 0) =M -°5 E 2 Table F is proposed to be reformatted for clarity. Also, some of the accessory uses cthe table are proposed to be listed under common broad categories, as follows:1 . A new broad category of "non-habitable detached accessory buildings/structuto be added to the list, which will replace the separate listings for:• Garages and workshops• Tool sheds, decks over 30 inches in height• Porte cocheres• Front yard arbors2. A new broad category of "habitable detached accessory buildings" is proposedthe list, which will replace the separate listings for:• Second dwelling units• Guest houses• Other habitable structures3. A new category of "additions to dwelling (attached)" will replace:• Room additionsto .CD oO) 0).J •*— ' w ,-co 5Q. °1=1 -t± oro o •— oo "c C w8CD(/}•o ^ ™ ITLL. UJ <o $ J3 O £% ro w E o •S %CO 73cc ro ino> E3 t2co w co.. O — Q J^ *~ * co w **•9? w "o o £ o £ =55 S ^ ^£ E* S§ '11 ^ S2-^w Table F currently requires patio covers (attached or detached) to be setback a minimithe front property line. The 20 foot setback requirement is greater than and conflicts 'standards specified in Table D (standards for one-family dwellings and twin-homes 01which requires a front yard setback of 10 feet minimum for a dwelling and front porchThe front yard setback for patio covers, which includes front porches, should be conssetback requirements specified for one-family dwellings on small lots (in Table D).O ?ro H 1- ^">£ 1°-o -2 .t "CD O" *^~CO ^3 E E c 2E t 's 2 E S> CO Oo> o ro .2 jC m O Q. coO) £ j3.scQ) (/) O 03 Q. CO 'g^ ~" ™O TJ w is "* *~ *~C. -ii 5^ — Q. ~u Q) O o Si •-'I J ll""o<-.>'^woos .-^ 1 1 E 5 5 &?E E5 or* co-The standards in Table F allow certain additions and accessory uses to a dwelling, siadministrative approval (i.e. building permit). Table F is intended to apply to single-faTwo-family dwellings are currently referenced in Table F because the current developfor single-family development also apply to two-family dwellings (existing Table D). hproposed, two-family dwellings will be subject to the development standards for "conebecause they consist of more than one dwelling on a lot. Staff is recommending thaTable F only apply to one-family dwellings or twin-homes on small lots (single-family <that additions to a condominium project (including two-family dwellings) be subject toamendment to the PD permit.w O) 1-a d? t CO >.'•§•= (0 ,2 'w -^ £ —^ ° "w cosisc-o >,CO c S CD J 8*m w yL_ '**"*' y\ OjU- 0 "tjt Z5 "55S> co c: E E S <o o ?C£ i: ro ^05 (/) &ro 2" coQ. E -1 The PD standards do not clearly state that additions or accessory uses to condominil(currently multiple-dwellings) are subject to approval of an amendment to the PD perrrecommends adding language to specify this.ro •o w w co E S'p'cu •Bo.0- 15 E?^3 fi*~t _. i_i— "'I <" 5 E£ *- o 5 c1 c •£ ^* O cr'CZ •"-ro 2 "&"o w § (D CO c ro3 ro 3 >. Co) fe roWJ Q iW ro m 2 ^ ^ 5~o o 5T<*-^ njro c. oo CO to h-9ino <Q. O ino a LJJ 2 Q ZLU LU O Qa: 0 ON 0)Table A, continuedAmendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter•»»o £•re EE 3 V)Requirements for Amendments to Permits - Section 21.45.100o*rf I W0) O)cre.c i to c_o ^y 0>V)Discussion/Analysis** 0) •oca> < "Zo>COoa 2 Q.The amendments to permits section is being reformatted for consistency with the new ordinanceformat. Also, minor text amendments are proposed for clarity.^•» roo^.£ •4— »V 0^^^.it? T3O T3 ro 1o £0ct o>O)The proposed language will ensure consistency with the General Plan policy that does not allowresidential development below the minimum of the density range.0.a*- 0o _cC *"*== oro r. •5 & " 1 =.-^§.2 §•0 ro 0 E £•a 3 .2"*- c <"ro t a>£ 'c -a>,'p c ^ t roro S av J—O ••— ' m >. L?2§ | 0 0 a50)^ ra ™"S CT a> S .Ec ^ ^. ro S-c1 — E 0•B $ "E < T3 3 O O « "2 >, ro %0> 3 CO 2? 0 rn -E E >• CO „. * r, C The current PD standards allow revisions to approved PD permits, subject to a minor or majoramendment. To qualify for as a minor amendment, the revision must meet certain criteria, includthat the revision does not create a change of more than 10% to the following (note: any revisioncomply with the minimum PD standards):• yards, setbacks, coverage or height (except that height reductions of more than 10% arepermitted)Staff recommends that "yards" and "setbacks" be replaced with "building floor area". Changes toand setbacks are a result of changes to buildings (i.e. floor area, coverage and height). The primconcern when reviewing a revision to a PD permit is structural/architectural changes that increas<building area, coverage, or height. Changes to yards and setbacks are a likely result of building ;or coverage changes. If building changes are limited to 10%, and the minimum required yard amsetback standards are maintained, it is not necessary to also require a minor amendment for chato yards and setbacks.<- o% -ES £ O) m CO C .0 i_ lo"2 -£tn= Is1 E §• > 'm Oiv +Z '(/> £ —-^ vPO (/) o~~CO T3 O •S m*~0 T3 Cu) c rom r~T3 IS £ £ W 0ro M— £„ O 0CO -~ C "O .52 m ^"* <">S> 0 -Q c s -C TJ 0m "'""' CD P8-Ei|*V S "J ^"5. ro 2^ 0 0 0) o EQ^ co .E ro ^ —o oC OTp £The current findings of approval for a minor amendment do not include any consideration ofarchitectural design. All PD projects are subject to approval of architecture design. Requiring a iamendment to be architecturally compatible with existing structures within the development ensuthe revision will not conflict with the overall architectural design of the project.1 >> r 2C 3 0 s; ?o £.= Q.T3 CflQ. 0 'Xro w 0 2 8.S co 2 '5 *-= Irollc w> ~ Sar SK *3 Q.m S? ro oJr -5 ?-"0 •o ST o 0< £ 8-S CMO ro ."2s«s The current PD standards do not clearly specify what types of project revisions require approval <major amendment. It is assumed that if the revision does not meet the requirements to qualify fominor amendment, then it requires a major amendment. Staff recommends clearly stating this tomisinterpretation.><c •*-•CO °2 c •2 ig*o o ro 0 £ o- coo > < < ino Q. O o ino<ON UJ S Q Z UJ UJoz< Q O coN Q.Table A, continuedAmendments to Planned Development (PD) Chapter!*•0£•ra E3 (/}of Existing Buildings to Planned Developments (i.e. condo conversions) - Section 21.45.110 |eo E0> oo fi J2cto £ '5 C7 $cc 2</>O)O) (0£o r^ co•*3o0) V)Discussion/Analysis |*^CQ) E ^C(D ^< ^0(/) Q. OL.Q.The current PD standards state that a request to convert an existing building to a planneddevelopment (i.e. condominium conversion) shall be subject to the development standards that were ineffect at the time the original project was approved or constructed. This has been very difficult toimplement. Most condominium conversion proposals consist of converting older existing apartmentsto condominiums. In most cases, it is not certain what standards were in effect at the time a projectwas originally built (the city does not have a clear record of all standards that have existed since thecity incorporated or the county's standards prior to incorporation).In addition to the difficulty in identifying what standards applied to a project, many older apartmentprojects do not come close to meeting the city's current standards for condominiums (recreation area,parking, architecture, etc.). Staff would recommend that if an applicant wants to convert an existingapartment building to condominiums that the project be required to meet the current PD standards,which may require the applicant to make modifications to the project.Apartments, especially older apartments, are an important source of lower cost housing (lower thanfor-sale units). Allowing apartments to be converted to condominiums is something that should beanalyzed carefully in each proposal. Providing a blanket exception to current standards encouragesthe conversion of apartments to condominiums. However, requiring existing apartment projects tomeet the current standards for condominiums: 1) may discourage the conversion of apartments tocondominiums, 2) will help to preserve an important source of lower cost housing, and 3) will ensurethat those apartments that are converted will be improved to current city standards..csiit-n t = 03 0-Q o en1"c?-o•S 0m <—V* '= l- tu 0-2w 0 Q. o 2.gn) -£._W j3 0 o </> Q'55 c 0- « P £> E £C Q.w_ 0 0 o " 3> </> 5|S•"550 -0 •:= •5^20- C Q.CD CO — C£ Q. CO M-oT—Within the Coastal Zone, Section 65590 of the California Government Code requires replacement ofunits occupied by low or moderate income families when those units are proposed to be converted ordemolished. A reference to this requirement is being added to ensure consistency with State law.cr~.*-»'>^c/> CD § •5 v> •*r nj0 8> w ci§E oCD «-.i= CD3 -0CT o 8>0 CD "Px c£ CD o E•" C <D CD m Co 5 o SON9? fo —o>u & "m TO 1J>2 Egro2o ~° =i m•o co o>< O £ ino The current requirements for notifying tenants of a proposed condominium conversion do not reflect allof the requirements of State law (Subdivision Map Act). Rather than reflect the State law requirementsin full text form, staff recommends referring to the specific law sections for tenant noticingrequirements. This will ensure consistency with State law.•oCD T3CQ) ECO CO °£ c °CO T3C CDCD (/) »8.3ic o co •£" Q- CD'o 2 3c co (f) o S-c>H o *= w '[/> 5 t: 0 rcS > £E S -2§8-S '5 T3 Co- o> oCD S 0S 0 a, 0 S-.Q-c 2 „I- a.2 CDo anges to PD Requirements - Sections 21.45.120 - 21.45.170 |JCO^ 0) 03 Co 4»»00) (0 The remaining sections of the PD chapter are proposed to be reformatted. Minor text amendmentsare proposed for clarification and to reference the Community Development Director (in addition to thePublic Works Director) as having authority to require the removal of a public nuisance.^j. '^cooi_ 2 O)c i O£-2 ~ocCO £2 0 T3 CDECO 'x2 L- Qc: H 1^o T — CO CO o ino o^O ino <ON LLJ 2 Q Ztu uuo Q T-o: ^r0*5OoCO 0a>roN Q. •z.O Table Bimmary of Amendments to Parking Chapter3 V)Section 1 - Changes to Section 21.44.010Discussion/Analysis*j Q)E*oc0) E< ^^WQ)(00Q. 2Q. 00)03 0) C_ro L_Oc Reformat for consistency with new ordinance format, incorporate the use of tables, and mmodifications for clarity.& coo £0O)CO O)cJ5 ^E o$ "coE ,0 *^—0o: -Section 2 - Changes to Section 21.44.020Placing the parking requirements in a table format is more user friendly.0 •Jo id: O 0 E c 0 to 0 "§ itf .i=0 3 J3 0 li '*~* o "co w E cr> £ SM— « n^ a 2. CM O u.O D) ~ .« « 3 "^ "3-00":Existing Section 21.44.050(a)(3) specifies that the parking required for multiple uses in aa lot shall be the sum of the parking required for each use. It is more appropriate to locatprovision in Section 21 .44.020, which specifies the number of spaces required for various2 5 o" Q CN§ •S ^ Si 2 0t 0 o CO 0 "0 880 Q. •m 0a: Q. CO *= 1 S TOco v.0) _ o s c 5 3 The current parking standards specify the required number of spaces for "single-family" a"apartments". These terms are not commonly used in other sections of the Zoning Ordin.recommends replacing "single-family" with "one-family dwelling" and "apartments" with "rrdwellings", which will ensure consistency with other sections of the code.0 °^ 3 "E_ oco N "c ,£OTS0 > IIE oj oj0 .<2 o •*-* CO C "O O ' —o i- ~S2,2 O - (/)C"o o '55 .£, 0 ^ ^ ra•— ^ _yu See row 69 of Table A, above. Also, the current parking standards specify the minimum <required for a 2-car and 1-car garage at the end of the chapter in Section 21 .44.1 30. Sta!recommends specifying the minimum dimensions requirements in Section 21.44.020 for cchange proposed to the garage dimension standards).o c x 't» 0 ° v> % o 01-55£ CM 2 $0 co 2. c?!8 ?°S ra co xCO 73 o 1J05 (u i d, !s "0 o>CO -5 (D M- V OTOCM N aco^"g 0 g-oc -Q ^ co '5 >.^ Scr co o .0 ^ E^ g 0 D)- 0 -•-• -.^ - C*-» "rr (D T-iTJI n) *~ LJCT3 S: O) _ £ > 2 E ^^ (T3 «4_ ^* O^ C-•c ~ ^ •—co E o .£(_) OJ O g in s^3 i '= 00.4= 2 J2Q. C The location standards for parking spaces required for second dwelling units are more aplocated in proposed Table C of Section 21.44.060, which specifies the location requiremeparking in residential zones.£ o•o 3*, •£ •— o -§ i-q § l3i '€ ^ q Q. O ^f |||| ro j2 CO "c |lflS^^ COO O> *O nj '•*I3 C 0 2- O > o~ .-« ^ -o E .= to "O co -J£o c 0 roo o o Q."o5 y 2 \_o: w w£ CD 0 >N C ra -g c 6 ^ 2 "c5 rn 2 jE ^* '4— ^~ f "O ^~ rf-< f- •"*•^co ^jp^roE §'0 o _ — .=. - — -C °The current parking standards for "apartments" apply to two-family or multiple-family dweldeveloped as apartments (parking requirements for condominiums are specified under thfor "planned developments"). A two-family apartment (one or more bedrooms in each unirequired to be provided with 2 spaces per unit (not required to be covered).Staff recommends that a two-family apartment (duplex) be required to have 2 garage spafamily apartment project is typically a lower density development in comparison to a multiapartment project (3 or more units in a building). Therefore, a two-family dwelling projecttypically have more area to provide garage parking for each unit, which is preferable aestuncovered parking or parking located under a carport (uncovered/carport parking is morehigher density multiple-family apartments).0 in ^ CO CO w ro1~- .2 g-|>§> o>i %%% CO (0 "0 D) O) >, i£l £•!•?-a > 0>>~8 §'c "a L_ |1*1 11 •S-0 D-JS w 0 ^ 0 WliS 0 S. mo: co co - .92 "o CDCO I SICO "c Em 8-^ 20 *^ -?'£0 3 C i-o fl> £ co*• 0O) Oc ca a.^ -D E0 O '3 ^ Q) (y] u. S O) 3I8— • ^- (j "S c §.CC o- co oo c/) ino O CNO ON ID Q ZLLJ 01 O Q T-cc <^- 0-5 5; CD^ enO coN Q-Table B, continuedummary of Amendments to Parking ChapterV) -ion 2 - Changes to Section 21.44.020, continuedo0>co Discussion/Analysis4-i 0>E•oc 0> E V n Q 0. T^ 0 fli ~m ?? >•»Uf (0 O -^ - £ ° E c^S-l iro-° o-.e- 5 •§ o E <JT> ^ ^ o °- Q 0 The current parking standards for apartments (multiple-family dwellings) do mrequired parking to be covered. Requiring 1 space per unit to be covered willfeature for tenants, and will benefit the overall quality of the project. The propspace per unit is consistent with existing requirements for Planned Developmcondominiums).*" _QCD CD '5 CD 42O" QL CCD CO CD - m E "Tn* ' "C"c ^r Q. JP. 'E CD E 3 ct l_ tTO CD 0 Q. Q. 2 CD in "O ' 0 0(/> O -Q If! ? 0 "<2~a •— c ~^~3 CO= cr oE £=545 CN 3i 0 w Q_ ~^~ O— "*""* t+£ ~~ */-\ -*•.-•-* ~O ? E p T— ^ *—*— ^ 0 o J5 0 ou. £ a. o a> >^ I 42 en cij .E Q. i_*= CD3 O) Q- ^ CD 'w p > Q -Q 5'5S Whether developed as an apartment or condominium, the parking need genedwelling is the same. Therefore, staff recommends establishing a consistentrequirement. See row 27 of Table A, above, for discussion regarding the pro)standard.=^ 0E -S ® ^Q. . "5 CDE-^rf ^3 Ml CD .O C c~8 03_ *T" •5-^0 *- "^" 0cn42 coc c o~ 0 Q. 5 "C Q. i_ *i{ O) Jli 5 co~ m 'to ^"^ «^ cz•^ "> co 5> CO Q. Q.>* cz o !§ = o ^3 o 5 '55 0 o *^ c/>3 •— 0O ^^ v— t~ ^t\" c* g" ro Q. . 5 ° o c ^E^S)^5 *^ 5^N w S 'Q. o 2 -5 ^? o:"o m a) •— <u-^-Q^o oro a)"5)_C^O ^.WQ[O)^ -^^< ^'C •*^ *^ ? "*^ (/) CD O fl) tO "*~* CQi4_ -»^ <y >» ^ <D •*— ^ ^) C ^^ /i* t/5 c" c™ w "^ ^> * ii "~~QJ Vy ^- *— *J* • ^ f~ ^^ ^ C" f \*^ *^J O QJ u^ Q/ ^> ~^j ^^ ^> -^ J"S.c w^ro"§'i ^"^ I.E °I"P 0w§)|j0 — '1 "°~The parking requirements for planned developments are listed in two differenOrdinance (Planned Developments chapter and Parking chapter). Staff recorrequirements be listed in one section of the code to avoid possible conflicts aiThe parking standards specified in the PD chapter and the Parking chapter aithere are a few minor inconsistencies between the two chapters. The inconsiof whether or not the required number of spaces must be covered or within amore restrictive in requiring parking for one- and two-family dwellings to be l&Staff recommends maintaining the existing parking standards of the PD chaplexception:• The Parking chapter allows the 2 required parking spaces for a PD inprovided as 1 covered and 1 uncovered (for one-, two-, or multiple-faany uncovered space may be located within the front yard setback.o Staff recommends adding this provision to the PD chapter foi(The RW Zone is limited to a very small geographic area with-— • cj/J .« c <5 ._0 "O P O P 0 m 0o.g-0 b o> — co (0 Q y * "^ > °- w o S nS. o 0 jo fe 0. °^t<0^05 g'oj.c^E CO -^ -g *-• "O CJ m o C ^CO — -»-* Q 0 CO ^ & c 0 | 0 "Ill-sl irxi CD CD U) ^ ^E «_ ^» Q^ _^ *^T! -^ *TT LJ_CU 0) 03 -^ £Q. JZ S^ W C/) ,i2 •*-» ° S "= "c c .Ed) en ^ Q) o «)0 C E jr. 0 -gc s Q.4!^ c ^ c0) 1= O ?E ~ CO CD 0 Q. 0 "° o "2 "5. "55 u. g 2 •- co 2o: 42 -S S E "K t> - 0 Q -j^- "° 9r tj "" O 'ST1 •o c 2 20^1 CD ro"^ CD -g 0 O c? CD"As discussed in row 2 of Table C, below, the parking standards within the BA1amended to be consisted with the parking requirements specified in the Parkiprojects), and consistent with the parking requirements specified in the PD chTherefore, it is not necessary to reference different standards in the BAOZ.Q) 42 o CO•o >« m COCD i; 4S O enen mc c 1 < 3 0 CDO CD IS**— .c2 -"S (U_c «•*~' O) *"^0 .E N Sis, CN C/) C/3 < < 9ino o IT)o<a 111 QzIU UJ O 0-5CD tN-Z. <r>=; 0^. enO roN 0.Table B, continuedummary of Amendments to Parking ChapterV)ion 2 - Changes to Section 21.44.020, continued+4o0) (0 | Discussion/Analysis4-*J2 VE•o i •o0)8ao The current parking standards specify parking requirements for the following industrial uses:• Research and Development (1 space/250 square feet of gross floor area)• Manufacturing (1 space/400 square feet of gross floor area)• Warehouse (1 space/1 ,000 square feet of gross floor area)o 0 £>o «= •—•*-' '7\ ^- Cu OT OJ .3 OTfl) n . O m The current standards do not specify which parking standard to apply when a developer propos'construct an industrial building with no specified use ("spec"). Staff recommends that the mostrestrictive parking standard for industrial uses (1 space/250 square feet) be required when no s|industrial use is proposed. This will ensure that future uses are provided with adequate parkingHowever, if a developer chooses to specify that the "spec" buildings will be restricted to manufaiwarehouse uses, staff recommends the following provision be added to the parking standards (<footnote to the proposed parking standard for "spec" industrial buildings):0) & w IIa--:;in *^Oo _m m "35 "to O 3 -o(0 "O mQ-.g «= ^~ "° § *& ^-~-W c/) "^ "i- ' — •5 "2 8> c e 3 3 S> .y 0) !_ £ .E O Q.^i O c/J to ^ o Q. W C ro o P -0 D) 0) T3 £- -C< o 5 O)cs i£ 1 • Projects proposing a "spec" industrial building may provide parking at manufacturing orwarehouse standards, provided a deed restriction is recorded on the property indicatingthese uses on the property will be retained and no other type of use creating a need foradditional parking will be permitted, unless more parking area is provided to meet city pstandards.Note: The proposed amendment is consistent the provisions specified in Planning DepartmentAdministrative Policy No. 14 (this amendment will codify and replace the admin, policy).CO T— CO CO < < f^"o ino <CLO ino <ON ULI Q ZLU < UJ Oz< Q T-oi "i- 0-5CD co O coN CL Table B, continuedummary of Amendments to Parking ChapterCO ion 2 - Changes to Section 21.44.020, continued-4-rfO 0)CO Discussion/Analysis*•* Q> •oC0 < •oVw0Q.2a. ?4-l 1 ^o-£ § 1•- o to e «, o £ -2 <nCf> 3 C £ •£ £ 3 0 = 0> £ CO.£ ST •- « 0 co w c 3 °. a. "• <o ~ pc co = .«2 ro £' P ex o> tt ro £Some of the older existing shopping centers in the city were constructed prior to the currestandard for "retail shopping centers", and do not have the number of parking spaces currThose shopping centers are considered to be "legally non-conforming". The City's regulaconforming uses or buildings allow the continuation of the non-conformity, provided thereto the use or building that intensifies or expands the non-conformity.A shopping center is comprised of various uses, which can change when one use leavescenter and another use occupies the same space. The parking standard for retail shoppii(1/200) was established as a balance between the parking requirements for less intensiveretail (1/300), and more intensive uses, such as restaurants (1/100). It has been staff's piconsider a change of use in a shopping center as an intensification or expansion of a shoparking non-conformity (provided the use is permitted in the underlying zone), because thstandard was established to apply to any use permitted in the zone (any use that is permiwould not generate the need for additional parking).Staff recommends adding a footnote to the parking standard for retail shopping centers thprovision for under-parked shopping centers.Note: The proposed amendment is consistent the provisions specified in Planning DeparAdministrative Policy No. 30 (this amendment will codify and replace the admin, policy).(Dr* i£ is = <=-§ o fl^l i ££ 1.S.S2 ££•-§"§ fi £ co •§ g 5 -S £g **E 8 z ^ 1 £ 3 -o a 1</> <D o oi>!§|t * ro ro m ?ro -55 co J2 ,S -^ °- " -° .2 •£ 5P,co ro >. c co 2:££ ro <o CLTO 2 S2 ^ o>ro o SUl-Eggo c o g- *-• >»_i g N §-=5 o •S ° 0>£ T3 c8 °>.£ w ro o>i= .E >.-T3 co 'wro Q- ^T co ."2 E, -o §•-§ ^ Z Q.•a £ c ro 2 x< w> ^ a. a. co •t T~Placing the parking requirements in a table format is more user friendly.TO Cro CON'w 8roQ.00 O)c*v•ca £~c/> ro"O Ca t 3£ ro <» "30) *"£ ro^ o i-sJr W & a>V 9>OL ro 10 <?(«co ro"-'CO . °> ra 0) COc ro c co .Sol » ^j= co 32 .* co0 .a ro o p> •« to ro £The current standards for parking space size allow a parking space to include a 2.5 foot carea where the front of a vehicle overhangs a curb or walkway). To prevent landscape sefrom deteriorating due to fluids dripping from vehicles onto landscaping, staff recommendlanguage that specifies no parking overhang is allowed into any required landscape setbNote: The proposed amendment is consistent the provisions specified in Planning DeparAdministrative Policy No. 20 (this amendment will codify and replace the admin, policy)., . Oc = COro a. w o 8-SO iiasw ^ 0)0, -£ '= S-? ro o "o.E £ CD Q. Cco ro•§€ "^ .-^ o co ro >« ^r- *—5 ro " ^ CO "J^4— _*^ u•5 ^ ro co -3 SQ- " 0CO .E !/> CD D> _C O.:= 4-1 -£ -Dro c ^Q. ro c_ - CO = "lro c S-t co Q The Planned Developments chapter currently specifies minimum size requirements for PCspaces. Staff recommends adding the same standards to the Parking chapter for consistclarify that the size standards apply to parallel spaces that are not part of a planned develi0>0 *r "C= 0 T3 1 > «Q. (/> £ >T (ft > * 1 o>a 1 -i'" ¥ « «§ v2 1?i2 -2 Q) .i.. SiSl *.£ w I ro i o l^c: % 'CO 1 y f.If,f s^£ i?- §>« § r w J»5^£c: &^ro E|E|§.E ^ $ i i 11s" 1|8 l5-liil|S- I ^ i .i -5 if W 0)ro .g . . . •o -£"5 ro< Q. r^- C/3 >- < < ino O CM ino O tiI-z111 Q 111 LU O < Q -^ OH *o-s O ^a- O roN Q-Table B, continuedummary of Amendments to Parking ChapterV)Section 3 - Changes to Section 21.44.050Discussion/Analysisoposed Amendment0. ^* ~ Q} II! Pfl ^~ d) Ifl M ^C/) '^z tn tn J-> TO c~^ 0> .lli Wl tJ — Q "2 2 | ™ S '"S S C O) >i» «c o ~™* 3*/\ Q^ *^ . -The Parking chapter currently has a separate section for compact parking :proposal to reformat the parking chapter, several existing sections are pro[relocating the standards into other sections. Locating similar standards infriendly.The standards for compact parking spaces are more appropriately locatedspecifies standards for parking spaces and areas. Proposed Table B of S<standards related to parking spaces and areas (i.e. size, width of drive-aisietc). The proposed relocation of the compact parking standards does not istandards.c/>^ ?\ CDm Cr? "^*jr~ i^ s-^ O)^ £ "J2 "o cL- ro *- o 1 §•03 (_) <i) fo* OT -^ O•O CM •~' •2 0 ^ £ "c CM 0 t 03 S'-S °E$&&a CO ^ i _ D>Qj -^~ f— •> rti .— (U T~ fe */\ T3Q) ±= > .W •—-C " t/) X £•^ _: <D <1> .^ ° 1 1 5 1 (5 '^ c 'c "o ™ ^ "5 =0 n >2 o .E O).£ £ O) £ "O >- -5 3 03 The current minimum width requirements for drive-aisles vary depending tlparking spaces (i.e. 30° or 40° parking = 14 foot min. drive-aisle width, 60°aisle width, and 90° parking = 24 foot min. drive-aisle width). The minimun30°, 40°, or 60° parking apply to one-way traffic.To ensure adequate space for two-way traffic, staff recommends adding lastandards are for one-way traffic, arid drive-aisles for two-way traffic mustcn;>QJ > f 6 c? ro 5'-^ « 0 Q. To w -o000 ^r ~ ~^> "o o.^ £|'| ^ o> [w £ "w cp l_ ^J O)C"03 03 .£ t5 O 3 £ "~ ""^"^ "^3 C^» Qj "^ ^leQ. S 03 CO Q.4= O) OJ _0 C/> ^ OJ ^cn.ti _ roc g ^ c1 -a > 8 rois^i^> T3 ~O* 2 > o 2E 0-2 c oj ^^0~ 8 §^^^02 3 0 cJ)J2 lE^fS5S w •J' -*-1 ? ?w oj «0 . £ 2 CL c This requirement is outdated (it was likely established when parking for on<was not required to be located in a garage). Currently, all one-family dwell2-car garage, and as proposed by this amendment, two-family dwellings m2-car garage. Multiple-family dwellings are not required to provide garageto require parking for multiple-family dwellings to be located where they cagarage when no garage is required.^ .-a>. , 0e <" moj c S? 0 ° -2 S) 'o -^-.a oj nt requirement that spe<ot provided in a garage-family dwellings) mustlater be covered by a gt in the RW zone).0 C _0 >. g- ri ° *3 E x0 ro 3 ^ S0 Q. p — • — • £ w ^ To 2J ^ -8 '""o "3 Q S.5 S-K o• CM ^ ra?0 C » f'-s85 1°-^0 — OT 0 cn w -a cc 0 c o•r; T3 0 •— "S3 |t3 03 o c <"Q. C C W0 'i_ 8 ® £S £ § "5 03 !t= C w "g -2'w§^>wl The regulations for parking in residential zones are located in various sectiAs stated in row 1 8 of this table, part of the proposal to reformat the parkinsimilar standards in one section to make the standards more user friendly,all standards applicable to parking for one-, two-,and multiple-family dwellilParking chapter (21.44.060).O 0r J= w £ 0 T3 c Oc 0 o HO (/> *? -C _ •8 1 « ^ 1OT t -9 * 0 ce location requiremenile-family dwellings are [n Section 21. 44. 050 (si)) to Section 21. 44.060,:ions for parking in residS..9-2-HJ2 ra|-g| | !5 "o oj s-z OT 03 CO .O ii^ 0 '~ 2? SjJ5 H^iiSft T_ CM .ail o * w000 •* m ^^^'o S 8 ?C 0 -i3O 03 C'JU ^ OJ Jiis See discussion in row 18 of this table. One standard currently specified inproposed to be deleted; the standard requires trees and shrubs to be planiSection 20.16.180. That section of code no longer exists. Requirements fshrubs are currently specified in the City's Landscape Manual.O) o).EC Q '\^ OJ 03•£ o ±-.a -s | o roO cnd-X •i°°s-°° &U?-o M- „_: .§c^ £§.9 i?P |^S£ 2 "^ • flj O ^~ r~ffl *•"^-; r~ QJ 0 0 c" ^*-• tL- -^ Qj .2 ro g^ g- o: ro "o o: CMCM See discussion in row 18 of this table.cSo c •^ 03O C —0 0 CO•oco t % oj c ro § *- 0 C /•n ndards for developmenparking areas from currJired improvement andto Section 21. 44.050 (C.2 ^ cr-jj-^. 1 8£ra| 0 §§ ^1 CO 0 R ^ .t jo !l 5 §. §• Q; E CM ^0 OH COCM CO CO If)o o CM 9ino <ON LU :>Q ZLJJ LJJ Q Q T-a: "*o-sCD IDZ co5; 0)S enO TON CL S"a.re Table B, continuedummary of Amendments to Parking ChCO TJ0 _C£5co0 o"ino 5 T"cs ,0'•7ooCOo+•» V)0> D) re O CO coXG) CO .2'53_>> re cussion/An.2o | Proposed Amendment— 1 <D a cof5 c?!~ c <D ^3 . — -CCO W TJ **O CD CD W ^§rol C N </> CD Q i ,n Cwl — WE £0: o |0 •- '-5 8Tj o ro o.a . 3 e: K?£ 2 ro£*=£W CO CO i= r£ '</> 0)•75 ... Q) OIK 0> r5 C2.5 H gw c Jio s w "°> s cO 3 ? 1 =3 TJ t en2-2 £w <N S g. U .C 0 £ £ TJ.2« £ >..s"5 S C JQ 00 ro co-^3 0 CO 75 w a; T> |£ll^g. 8 3 £ o 3 CD ,n O.S?See discussion in row 18 of this table. Csigns within commercial/office parking arSign Ordinance (Chapter 2 1.41) specifiesParking chapter are outdated and are su|requirements for signs in Section 21.44.Ctft I*V*S ^r- C 0) O ~0 N W Relocate the standards for commercial or offiparking areas located in the R-3, R-P or R-Tfrom current Section 21.44.090 (Parking area3, R-P and R-T zones) to Section 21.44.050(General Requirements).•*rCM i •c -5•o c - 0' CD S> «-b! ro o S"> £ E~ « -2 .2 '§ -^_** ITS -4-f s"™" g-2 ro~ £ o> £ g,ro.E co t? c - ?5§ 2J o w *_ "c oCD o ro ^O Q.ro £ m •n (/) TO f-c/> =»5 o 01 C m 0•E •§ g o)-g-° c w a-S|«u. (/) JS J-£E.E 2.w co ro CDT3 TJ E Wco ro TJ co? «§.= -5 C'CDS^iic— . C .^ = -i. Q.^«> 9> o •=As proposed, Section 21.44.050 specifie:aisles, location, landscaping, maintenancdirectly related to standards for the develappropriate to locate the standards for "jcstandards are proposed.CD oc ii Relocate the standards for "joint use" of parkfacilities from Section 21.44.050 (GeneralRequirements) to a separate section specificstandards for "joint use" (proposed Section21.44.080).inCM 2ro (0Ero•Q S"55 "(/).0) "o >2 O)c *roCL co E _ 's</)CDO)CroC™o o See discussion in row 25 of this table. Nproposed.TJCD(/>o Ris 9-Relocate the standards for "common parkingfacilities" from Section 21.44.050 (GeneralRequirements) to a separate section specificstandards for "common parking facilities" (prcSection 21. 44.090).(OCM TJ 5c CD .2ro JQ t3 82 % ro"§£Q. c row '=» co0) 0- Q. % 2 Si* c «ro o ro 2-'ts-E-si^ ^^Sro ~ ^ •g5 0 -2H ow __^S CD "CD" m.c o •!=*- c roco ro 'cCD C Q- JE CD gO *r^ r> PIin o o^•i E 5 ft.*- 8«CM -a E As stated in row 25 of this table, Sectionareas (i.e. size, drive-aisles, location, Ianindicated on a site plan for a building peroc "*"* ^~**.ro "STg^.r 2 Relocate the requirement that specifies theinformation to be included on a parking areafrom Section 21.44.050 (General Requiremela separate section (proposed Section 21.44.'r^ CM (/) 22TJ S roo> * M •5 % «o-«» oCD -Cs: *- o> CD .E .E ro o) ~m»>.£ I«i£T»5 ro 0 N °-£"- "S *-of:.|° TJ rj- ro C CD CLro •- wUJ m" roi c i_0:5 » <f ££i CD CDK x: ^^ ^H S>£0-2c en ro z ro o) ••« ro ro5 o>wT3 CO CO 53 c J2 1.1 i 05 5 1Q.TJ P This requirement is outdated. Dwellingsbe provided with 2 parking spaces locatewill be subject to the same location requiidetached accessory building).</) •»->CO 00 CD >Jr m S" °ro 3 c Delete the requirement that specifies parkingwithin the R-A, R-E and R-1 zones shall be sto the same restrictions governing the locatioaccessory buildings on a lot.00CM CO CO o IOo<Q. O CNO ON 111 ^Q•z.LU UJ O Q r-o: -f0*5 O CD O coN D-Table B, continuedtmrnary of Amendments to Parking Chapter3 CO Section 4 - Changes to Section 21.44.060Discussion/Analysis^ E cCD ^ •DCOCOQ Q.Ofc. Q. W (/>O) . — ~O C 0 0) m The current parking standards specify that required parking for one-, two-, and multiple-family dwellimust be located on the same lot or site as the dwellings. Pursuant to other standards in the code (i.required setbacks for garages, restrictions on improvements within front yard setbacks, etc.), parkinnot permitted within a required front yard setback. For clarity, staff recommends specifying in theParking chapter that required parking spaces for all dwelling types may not be located in the front yjsetback.•p.ro "cTo Q C Q\ 0 j-r-o s= |f 2 ^•o "2o 2 •5 80-.2 L_ CD O) ~ 0•£ c CO =Q. CO "co co £ CO ^. £? -^ 'o = f Q- 5 0CO -o co o>CN 0 (t> i .£ .„ ro As stated in row 29 of this table, required parking for residential dwellings must be located on the sslot or site as the dwellings. For one- and two-family dwellings the required parking must be locatedgarage, which in most cases will be attached to the dwelling. Parking for multiple-family dwellings isnot required to be in a garage; and therefore, may be located anywhere on the same site as thedwellings. To ensure that the location of the parking spaces for multiple-family dwellings are withinreasonable distance from the units they are intended to serve, staff recommends specifying that thespaces be no farther than 150 feet from the units (consistent with the existing PD requirement formultiple-family condominiums).Note: The proposed amendment is consistent the provisions specified in Planning DepartmentAdministrative Policy No. 10 (this amendment will codify and replace the admin, policy).O, "O :! ° E ro -S 2Q- 0 c TJ "m u,S> o-- '5- « ?*fw TO 0 "oQ) CO 0 «- c?*'+-• == Ero 0 o£ 5£•u "° •"-• Jrr ^"» /ii0 := ,<U E E0 '50^ ST&S „; 3 £ £CO £•* rt) fll ? ^ 0 w oCO 0 . H Q.See row 30 of this table. Visitor parking is only required for multiple-family dwellings (apartments),proposed 300 foot distance is consistent with the proposal for visitor parking associated with a multifamily condominium project (see row 35 of Table A for planned development standards)."O .» "co ** 2 o "" •5J§ jj "Q — ^ £]|'<2'3 co *-• l"ai 10 j= 3 £ "55 2;"o 5 '*-'0 TJ p w"-^ °•" E ^ I-v It: 0-2S "Q.O0 .y-oEfco0 c c '3 ^ ro £T«8 "" i- O) 2 co .£ ° oi "5 ro o 0< Q. C CO ,_ CO _0 CO H—o CO1 00 CO o §CN Q) ^^w i^- o ^ "*~* C0 0 E'-S0 0 .h: CO §•£0 e S 01.2 c •"m 'C? O o ^~~ ^^ 5^50 ±i •^J- 0) CN ro c So = .2-200050o: -o co CNCO _gj H CO •B CN I 0 0 CO oCN 5 L. £J **~ r~CO Oc -j=o o •'55 o> 2 ECuO OJ **"""C" (/J -i£ "oro —CL.ro E 'c o0 0 CD•D sqc: co ^rCO 0 •^-<-• c • **-* ro r~0 T3 o"!i C asro CO o0 % g -^ ^ CO0 -2 y <2 £2 COCO , a: c o)2 This provision is currently permitted within the RD-M zone, as specified in Section 21.24.060 of theM Zone chapter. Because the zero foot setback provision for underground parking is not specified ithe parking chapter or any other zone, the strict interpretation of the code would require anunderground parking structure to maintain the same setbacks as required for a dwelling. If a parkinstructure is fully underground, a zero foot setback will not result in any visual impact, or encroach inany required yard space (above ground). Staff recommends the zero foot setback for subterraneanparking be permitted in all residential zones.'*~^> Z. (/) C ** W* Q CO ^ CO ? IE! CO 0 3 i_-Q *i O O*3 " L_ •*—0 3 O)*-CO CO *"• CL *" 0 "0 ^ M- ** 3 0 O ^ •^*-*C 0 ^-c, 0 -O 0 0)N "> 0 Q.to e Q.CO | Q-E « ^ O* (j c '— CO — O "L£ >»"^ ro £ = '> 0 j| ro2 § to „°- 2 0-gro 0 .— ro -o S -£ fi"o 3 ro 0 < CO Q. CO ^CO 0 £1 S CO 'o CN 2 00CO E 2 "T"l I— f^ro to 1?1o • O)0^ro c co -B •J w'c o0 *-•o o'to °2 0 ^- *^ T™* jB CN ^5 S0 .2-2 o0 0 C£ CO 10CO /""A CO CO < < ino o ON LLJ D Z UJ UJoZ< Q T- o? CD r--Z n Z 0 O roN Q- 0) re O 0)c !£ S «O n Table B, continuof Amendments to 1&re E 3 CO •o 3C Ou oCD O 5 ^~langes to Section 2'^~o ^fco ft CO _w w^—re ^f ~co 'wv> o(0 Q Proposed Amendmento!_"a) ^- r\_C CO •=| V | -2 0 Ero ro 45 3 ro *± O) m" 0 PIt- V) ^2Q. CO ~ 0| $•> c 01co o 0 .E 0- Q-.gl o .a c •§ "ro 2 ° ^ r m 0 'F^ *— C 0 C ^_ v «*—2111*- T3 o ^5 ° ^^ | CD E i ro I!*!~D ^ T—C *^— ' ^? CO "^ /n +B -- S c: co0 OJ Q -5 SilS ssed in row 5 of thisparking spaces for o. The proposed dimefora 1-car garage as3 -o co -o0 CU CU 0.52 .!= o>.i=~o 3 co is < §"§)£Add a dimension standard for a 1-car garageprovided for one-family or two-family dwellings.coCO C"» fllJr .— QO *~ " J^ N a>CO ™~ ^'^3 (0 Cp~ t^3 CO0) c x:•000 'co ^ o0 to z S: — c 17 |l| fi\ Q- ___ 2 > 0cw E P ® CO 5.y. ^ 8x: .0 >, > "S "3g) > "^ -c cu ro5 x: 0 ^•5'C- 'o •&* g00 —Q. CD .0W o r- ^ w 0 •o P mCD ' — —co x: -2o a> 2 Q- 3 m P 0 Q. Q.X: o .^~^of Section 21. 44.060Sections 21. 44.060(1senger vehicles, RVsstandards is proposem ?ro ?0 5 Q-~5 co . i/jro 'x 9 'x1- UJ :=- 0 S Relocate existing Sections 21.44.060(1) throughto proposed Table E of Section 21.44.060.|S. CO ^^" 2 T-CM O) O ^^3 COC) v»es to Sections 21 .4'O) rex: O ID C_o "o0>CO 0 XI .CO +-i "otoCM •a ro COCM 1 00CO XI •4-t 5 Replace existing Section 21.44.080 (requiredimprovement and maintenance of parking area)new Section 21 .44.080 (joint use of off-streetparking facilities).oo CO .3J CO!c "o COCN T3 ro CN o 00CO LOro Replace existing Section 21.44.090 (parking arein R-3, R-P and R-T zones) with new Section21.44.090 (common parking facilities).O)co 0 -Q S !E "o CM T3 ro CMCM CO1 00CO 0 g> IsJO Tf o ^O CM ii si^_t Q} CD O) $ 'x a; .CD ^^ " — "* CD ^ CO(_) O) — J5 .E "• & tiro o .0 15 00 I 00CO Delete Section 21.44.110 (compact parking).,_ ^ 0 JD COx: "o inCO T3 ro CO CO COI 00CO Delete Sections 21.44.120 (tandem parking -substandard) and 21.44.130 (required garagestandards in residential zones).CN 113 CO CO ino o ON LJU 2D LJJ LLJ 0 Q T-o: "*•0*5 O ooZ co O roN Q- h.o Zone (BAOZ) chapl>,n~ 0) O re 0 £ o>< J2 .=re o>-8m 2 mendments< *fr-O &re EE3 CO 2Q.re£ O Ih. 0 (/> o "oo(0 75 o4-t (00)0> re•Co T- _o ^u« 0,0) x:x: **•*-» T-I |1 i,»0 <=•c oS N OT l7 'W QCn /ir8 ^ <D O 3 N w-J§6 = 0) 5 S "0 Q.ipter is very minor anresidential zone charor- 0 Q ;sJ? c18^ III 0 ° g1 i-n <" •-i'aJ-S So.™ro ro °-E -C T3E o c£-0 ro 2-gQT3 C D-o> > O C<ut/5'wc 8 .0 ro c ••-* 0 P*ti C r^£ T— O(0o e>jCO *rCM .0 '&UoCO o ^^wa>o> re O Section 2 - co CO ino CLo 10o ZUJ2 Q ZUJ UJO Z< Q O 05 Z M =7 0)?i O)O TON 0-Parking requirements for dwellings in the BAOZ are currently specified in three different chapters of the ZoningOrdinance (Planned Developments chapter, Parking chapter, and BAOZ chapter).• The BAOZ chapter requires all dwellings (including one-family dwellings) must be provided with 2 parkingspaces, one of which must be covered (studio units are required to have 1 .5 spaces per unit, one covered). Nogarage is currently required.• The Parking chapter specifies the parking requirements for dwellings in the BAOZ shall be the same asrequired for planned developments.• The PD chapter requires one- and two-family dwellings to have 2 garage spaces; and multiple-family dwellingsmust have at least one garage space and one covered or uncovered space per unit (studio units are required tchave 1 .5 spaces per unit, one covered).All three chapters require 2 parking spaces per dwelling unit (except for studio units). The primary differencebetween the standards is whether or not the required number of spaces must be covered or within a garage. ThePD chapter and Parking chapter are more restrictive in requiring the 2 parking spaces for one- and two-familydwellings to be located within a garage. Staff recommends that the BAOZ standards be modified to require 2garage spaces for one- and two-family dwellings. This will ensure that one-family and two-family dwellings in theBAOZ are built to the same standards as dwellings in other zones of the city.There is a high demand for on-street parking within the BAOZ, due to the parking generated by visitors to the beach,and residents. The current BAOZ parking standards require visitor parking for all dwellings, and the visitor parkingspaces must be provided on-site (not on the street). This standard was established to address the high demand foron-street parking near the beach. Providing resident parking within a garage will ensure adequate off-street parkingfor residents and their visitors, and will ensure that resident parking is screened from view.The current BAOZ parking standards are the same as those required by the Parking chapter for multiple-familydwellings (apartments). The PD chapter requires that one of the required 2 parking spaces be within a garage (formultiple-family condominiums). Staff recommends that the parking standards for multiple-family dwellings in theBAOZ be the same as required by the Parking chapter for apartments (no change to current BAOZ standards); butthat multiple-family condominiums be subject to the PD parking standards (see row 87 of Table A).As a result of the proposed changes, the parking standards applicable to the BAOZ will be the same as thosespecified in the Parking chapter (for non-PD projects), and in the Planned Developments chapter (for PD projects).Both the Parking and PD chapters are proposed to include the BAOZ requirement to locate visitor parking on-site(not on a street).tt\JQ) C"5"— i_ 31 £2L|_ **•» ffi 0) T5 ** •—•° 8 £•>0 Q.II & O-2 w T3 0 -0 N CO £ 0 VO "2 c -~-.Q < 03 ™ o> 8CD -a 0. -5^ 0) m -0 TO S-£ -S c -C £-*" (u w C o) i- ^~- w— f- at e~\ T3in .£ -2 f? ^0).* Q.Q- 03C is 03 — T>:= JS .C CO C"53 ° "c JS5 ® o> ^ li !.«-OJ JX -£ 9- C ^.!= "( 03 .0 o ? 3 <y Q_ (U S '§ O^£ „, > 73 "C0) *X <1> <D -o ma: 2£Q ro o. CM Table C, continuedry of Amendments to Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ) chapternEE3 (0 Section 2 -Changes to Section 21.82.060, continued |Discussion/Analysis |•4-*C 0) E•oc0) < •o 0>%a. Q OL US' CO CO < < ino Q.O ino a UJ Q~z.UJ LU O Q T-01 T 0-5O oz -*7 CU O o?N Q- _0 &tn £»*—o C\l > 2 .c •Q 0 (A 3oU> to(/>aot:Q. 0) £ .^^* ro"o '§ 0O)ro O)cro 0(/)o Q.2 Q. .C 1- u_r»Add language to clarify that, except for theparking standards specified in the BAOZchapter, the parking standards of theParking chapter shall apply to dwellings inthe BAOZ; and that the parking standards f<planned development projects shall besubject to the parking standards of thePlanned Developments chapterCO 0>o.aro CQ" _0 •2 1 >o 0*~1" T3cco 0) ro "o r--CM 2 0 0CO 0)Modify the required number of visitor parkinspaces to be consistent with the visitorparking standard proposed for the PlannedDevelopments chapter and Parking chapter* £ ^f C 0) <D >.«£</> roc . <D -g _ ro2i- O CM m > 0 O ** .£ c §) P 3C ^O -!2 'a) -°> w0 ro uT •1 -^ 0 _CTJ o oj -J2L. c 75 E "- Q.£ o^^ cuc > O 0'55 Q > T50 0) ^ ^f^ .<2 J5 £ Q- D) 0 "§1P ro w "° c -2 E -oc ^ 8 0Q.0 g m o) co £ ro Modify the current provision to allow 20% olrequired visitor parking to be located withindriveway (located in front of a garage that i?setback 20 feet from the front property line)on a substandard lot.in 0 0_aCO 0 J3ro "o CDCO 200CO Delete the current requirement for aminimum 5 foot building setback from allopen parking areas.CD c^50 Q.•o ro3 J3 o °S Ntr° ro 0 u ** o».S CO "DD. C0 J2 .C W •- E . 0 CO ^ ^CD *->Q. a)^2 § C (/) 0 ^, •5 ro 2 0 O) Q) .C c fl o .52to ^ 0 ~" E x-i. CO Ow f £ S ."ti .w ^j 05 ill « 8 J t^ "o c.£ 0j- QQ E p S om ro o III is?1— o. ro Delete the current requirement to screenopen parking areas of 5 or more spaces.- CO CO _J< < o o o Iino I H uu Q•z. UJ LLJ O Qo:0 •^ 0 Oc?N Q-Table C, continuedry of Amendments to Beach Area Overlay Zone (BAOZ) chapter(0 EE3 (O Section 3 - Changes to Section 21.82.070Q -. r-| Discussion/Analysis^rf ETJ 0>E *§Q.2^ *- U» 3= •Sfig 0"£ t Q) 0 OT 0 E "K o oJ - '« '§ S^ §™ 0 3= 0> 0 *- C0 cn ro —f-< p~ Qj fl^ CO .C ^ C m •loSS.> C C TO>>'c ro -c£* t ^_. (»The City's General Plan is the policy document that establishes the allowed densiresidential land use designations. When the General Plan was updated in 1994, ithe density ranges. The BAOZ standards were established in 1985, and were nol1994 General Plan update. Therefore, the density ranges specified in the BAOZ <the General Plan.0 CO 0 >> «» 3 cu °"2 ro 0 -^ JC O O)C £ .22 ra *^ if SiE ~ l| 0 ic^»In addition to the inconsistent density ranges, the BAOZ chapter specifies that de^the low end of the density range, unless the Planning Commission or City Counciljustified under the provisions of the General Plan.„ CO CDoo o ,-<=in —• 1-(D 0 r- "m ** '— •Q *5 2 "D:g CO *- 0 ^ CO £ E 0)4= -o -° ^r-'w § O ^ O o E *; j-j 0 -Q | .$-~ c o f— (/) (/} •-— ^^The General Plan was amended in 2004 to incorporate the requirements of Goveiwhich specifies that the city shall not permit residential development below the dedetermine the City's Housing Element is consistent with housing element law (unlremaining sites in the city are adequate to accommodate the city's share of the reCity's current Housing Element uses the Growth Management Control Point denscompliance with housing element law.in0 'o isjg.o w m O 0 ifs f CN jooo •£ T-' 0 c 0g .!= tj cr 0 0 CO ^ "0 '«0 0Q -o CO 0O) O) 111c rro M— ff (/) ._ 0303 /^ O o 0 "c 0 "o 0 § -0 UJ >;£ |> *^» S to?• O 73 The City is now required to implement the Growth Management Control Point denare made. Therefore, the BAOZ standard to limit residential development to the hconflicts with current General Plan policies to comply with State law and meet Hoiobjectives.00 Planning Commission Minutes October 18,2006 Page 6 EXHIBIT 5 4. ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS - A request for a recommendation to adopt a Negative Declaration, and recommendation of approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to (1) amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation, and (2) amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 4 and stated that Principal Planner Gary Barberio assisted by Principal Planner Chris DeCerbo and Associate Planner Jennifer Jesser would make the Staff presentation. Chairperson Montgomery opened the Public Hearing on Item 4. Mr. Barberio gave a presentation and stated he, Mr. DeCerbo, and Ms. Jesser would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Whitton asked if it is Staff's preference to locate the recreation areas on the side of the houses. Ms. Jesser stated that Staff attempted to offer some flexibility in this standard by allowing options in the positioning of the recreation areas. This would allow the required minimum square footage to be located either in the rear of side yard, or both, rather than only in the rear yard as currently required. Commissioner Whitton asked if this would be optional placement. Ms. Jesser confirmed that this is one option. Mr. DeCerbo added that it would be possible to create a side yard design off a family room. Commissioner Whitton asked if the tandem garages are large enough to hold three standard size automobiles. Ms. Jesser stated that the tandem garage would accommodate two automobiles. Commissioner Dominguez asked if the tandem garage would be of sufficient size to contain two full-size automobiles. Ms. Jesser confirmed that it would. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there were any further questions of Staff; seeing none, he opened public testimony. Scott Molloy, Building Industry Association, thanked the Commission and Staff for their hard work and stated that the Building Industry Association fully supports the effort. Mr. Molloy stated that he supports the proposed reductions to the visitor parking requirement, but suggested Staff include a provision to ensure adequate visitor parking of one space per four units lacking driveways. Mr. Molloy questioned the need for a recreational parking area and stated that it seems to be the same as visitor parking. In smaller projects in particular, the residents should be encouraged to walk to the recreational areas rather than drive, and providing parking at the recreation areas doesn't reinforce this intention. Mr. Molloy stated that he does not support any requirement for RV storage and added that it is an amenity that does not fit the need of most buyers. It would be reasonable to offer developers the option to provide it, but not require it. Mr. Molloy suggested an increase in the lot coverage for multi-family developments from 0.6 to 0.65 or 0.7 and the proposed minimum setback requirement reduced to less than 15 feet. He encouraged the City to allow the use of the tandem parking design and suggested it be used for all multi-family projects without restriction to the number of units allowed. Mr. Molloy recommended the City develop a set of design requirements for tandem parking so that it would be an effective tool. Mr. Molloy stated that he encourages the City to adopt a minimum parking requirement ratio of 1.5 per one bedroom and studio units in an effort to reduce overparking projects and encourage residents to adopt a more urban lifestyle. Commissioner Whitton asked why the letter presented by the Building Industry Association for consideration by the Planning Commission was presented on October 18, 2006. Mr. Molloy stated that he submitted the draft letter two weeks ago and was awaiting all comments prior to the final draft. lit Planning Commission Minutes October 18, 2006 Page 7 Commissioner Baker asked if the proposed changes had been circulated to developers within the Building Industry Association. Mr. Molloy stated that he had distributed all proposed changes including the rationale about one month prior to this meeting and everyone had a chance to comment. Gary Barberio added Staff has received comments from the Building Industry Association and has incorporated a number of their suggestions into the draft proposal submitted, but the issues presented in the letter submitted by the Building Industry Association represent outstanding items. Mr. DeCerbo stated at the onset of this process there were a variety of issues to review from parking and open space to setback requirements and visitor parking. Everything was open to comment; Staff requested input from the Building Industry Association and incorporated those suggestions into the draft before the Commission. The results are liberal recommendations that change the flexibility of the zoning code and are documented by the analysis presented. Staff isn't necessarily comfortable with eliminating all RV parking or allowing all visitor parking to be counted in 20-foot driveways for all size projects. These are drastic changes and Staff is not willing to recommend all of the changes that the Building Industry Association suggests. This is a composite effort taking all the standards into consideration and making adjustments to several of them, not wholesale revisions. Staff has no particular outstanding issues should the Commission wish to incorporate suggestions from the Building Industry Association into the Code amendments. Commissioner Segall asked if there were any face-to-face sessions between Mr. Molloy and Staff. Mr. Molloy stated he spoke with Ms. Jesser on the telephone for approximately 11/z hours after fully reviewing the matrix and all the proposed changes. Mr. Molloy stated that he is not recommending all visitor parking be addressed through driveways, instead used as an optional tool to provide visitor parking to units without driveways. The units with a minimum 20-foot driveway would meet their requirement for visitor parking, and the units without driveways would be providing visitor parking onsite. Commissioner Cardosa asked Mr. Molloy to elaborate on the position the Building Industry Association has taken with regard to the RV parking requirement. Mr. Molloy stated that RV parking is not something that buyers are asking for. It uses up a lot of space, and only a select few buyers actually benefit from it and yet the entire complex, through HOA fees, has to pay for its maintenance. RV parking is a luxury item that is not supported by a broad-based need. Certainly, if a developer chooses to offer this option, then the City would provide standards for size and appearance, etc., but RV parking should be addressed as an off-site storage issue rather than a required condition of a development. Commissioner Dominguez stated that he concurred with Mr. Molloy and asked if there are enough public RV storage facilities available to fill the need. Mr. Molloy stated that he had not researched public RV storage availability. The Building Industry Association reviewed the issue from the perspective of the average buyer's needs. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there were any further questions of Mr. Molloy. Mike Howes, Howes Weiler and Associates, 5927 Balflour Court, Suite 202, Carlsbad, stated he has been working with the Planned Development Ordinance in Carlsbad for over 25 years, has been involved with the plan revision process on four previous occasions, and appreciates the opportunity to participate. Mr. Howes stated he feels this is one of the most comprehensive overhauls he has seen and offers his support of the proposed revisions. Mr. Howes stated he was afforded the opportunity to offer input once or twice in person and in several telephone conversations with members of Staff. Mr. Howes added that he believes the proposed revisions facilitate the development of higher density multi-family projects. He added in his personal experience the existing standards of the Planned Development Ordinance make the development of multi-family projects in RH and RMH general plan densities very difficult. Mr. Howes stated he recommends the elimination of required RV storage in the Planned Development Ordinance. He added he feels it makes sense in the larger planned developments, but not in the smaller projects. Mr. Howes stated he has conducted his own informal investigation of various sized developments. He has found the question of who will use the limited space and the subsidy provided by all residents make the RV storage issue inequitable to the project overall. Mr. Howes stated that he does not support the elimination of the requirement of RV storage areas in the larger master planned developments. Planning Commission Minutes October 18, 2006 Page 8 Commissioner Baker applauded the diligence demonstrated by Mr. Howes and stated that she values his input. She asked Mr. Howes if RV Storage is the only matter he has trouble with and if the remaining proposed revisions are suitable to him. Mr. Howes stated that he does believe that the proposed revisions will make a significant improvement to the Planned Development Ordinance. Jamie Stark, Stark Architecture and Planning, 2045 Kettner, San Diego, stated that he is in favor of the proposed revisions and thanked Staff for inviting the design community into the process. He added he feels Staff has targeted key elements that allow for better design of high-density multi-family projects. In his experience, the current ordinance makes it extremely difficult to produce 20 units per acre in a multi- family development using conventional construction. Mr. Stark stated he feels that the proposed amendments taken in combination will alleviate that problem. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there were any questions. Seeing none, he thanked Mr. Stark and asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on Item 4; seeing none, Chairperson Montgomery closed public testimony. Commissioner Segall stated that he is having a problem with the process. During the Sign Ordinance and Planned Development Ordinance review of 2001, there were problems due to lack of public outreach to the development community and to others who could be impacted by any proposed changes. He stated in this case he believes there was not an interactive dialogue between Staff and the development community to obtain enough direct input. Commissioner Segall added the Building Industry Association represents a large number of developers and has presented a four-page letter offering input into the revisions, but he has not had enough time to review that letter. Commissioner Segall cited previous experience with CL Zone ordinance revisions and the input that was obtained from the Chamber of Commerce. Commissioner Segall added he would like to see participation from the Chamber of Commerce during the current ordinance revision and a collaborative effort between all parties. He stated he is not satisfied that all the outstanding issues have been thoroughly addressed and would like to continue Item 4 to a later date, allowing time for a public workshop. He added he would like to see an active effort by Staff to engage more people in discussion with regard to any ordinance changes. Commissioner Dominguez asked if Staff feels the review conducted by affected parties has been sufficient and has reached a certain plateau of acceptability. He added he feels this is a complex process that will require fine-tuning in the future. Commissioner Dominguez stated there are a lot of debatable changes proposed; some he finds agreeable. He added the Commission has the capacity to move forward with these revisions if some assurance can be given by Staff that the review has been adequate. Mr. Barberio referred to the outreach efforts he described in the overview presented at the introduction of Item 4. He stated Staff has corresponded with the Building Industry Association and the letter before the Commission represents the remaining outstanding issues. The Building Industry Association is concerned with only a handful of the over 150 proposed changes. Staff took those concerns under consideration and went as far as they were comfortable with those items. He added more time won't necessarily result in Staff's concurrence with the Building Industry Association's position. The parties may agree to disagree and the final choice will rest with the decision makers. Mr. Barberio stated Staff is comfortable with their recommendation and the level of community outreach. Thirty to forty consultant, engineering, architectural, and planning firms were contacted for input into the proposed changes. Specifically, Staff met with Mike Howes and Jamie Stark who currently represent at least two developers who are applying the Planned Development Ordinance to current projects. Mr. Stark has participated in many planned developments in the community that have resulted in nicely designed projects under the existing code and is acutely aware of the limitations of the current code. Mr. Barberio added Staff has met with representatives from Brookfield Homes and McMillin and members of their architectural team, one being Kirk McKinley who was very involved in the Policy 44 discussions regarding the architectural design and review standards. Mr. Barberio stated Mr. McKinley and Mr. Stark's firms perform a significant amount of the multi-family design work in San Diego County, including Carlsbad. Mr. Barberio concluded by stating that the outreach conducted by Staff can be improved; there is always room for improvement. More discussion wouldn't necessarily result in a different product, but Staff is certainly willing to explore further opportunities for dialogue. He added there are no time constraints in moving this forward. Staff could extend an invitation of participation to the Chamber of Commerce. Many firms that were contacted are members of the Chamber of Commerce. Bob Ladwig reviewed the proposed changes and would be someone the Chamber would look to for input. Planning Commission Minutes October 18, 2006 Page 9 Commissioner Whitton stated he is satisfied with the recommendation given by Staff as it stands. He added he feels the public outreach conducted was adequate and appropriate. The Chamber of Commerce doesn't necessarily need to be involved. Commissioner Whitton stated he agrees with the position of Commissioner Dominguez with regard to the issue of RV storage. He added he is in favor of and supports the recommendations made by Staff. Commissioner Heineman asked if these amendments are adopted, how difficult will it be to make changes if they are found to be necessary and what procedure would be required. Mr. Barberio stated that amending the zoning code would not be a quick process. There are many components to take into account, including public outreach, public noticing, presentation to the Planning Commission, City Council review, and examination by the California Coastal Commission. A comprehensive review of the proposed ordinance could be recommended after approximately one year to assess its effectiveness. Commissioner Whitton asked how long it would take to amend a few items found to need fine-tuning as opposed to a complete revision. Mr. Barberio stated that amending a few items would be quicker than a complete overhaul, but anything would require examination by Planning Commission, City Council, and the California Coastal Commission and would require Staff work and possibly an environmental review and could not be completed in less than six to nine months. Commissioner Dominguez asked if City Council would receive these amendments in a couple of months after any necessary adjustments and if Council would have a chance to conduct a review at that time. Mr. Barberio confirmed the statement and time frame, adding that Staff would begin preparing the Agenda Bill for City Council after the Planning Commission takes action. He added given the time of year and the holiday season cycle, the City Council probably wouldn't see the Agenda Bill until after the beginning of the year. Commissioner Dominguez asked if the California Coastal Commission would receive the item after Council action. Mr. Barberio confirmed this and added the California Coastal Commission would probably take six to nine months to move to hearing phase. Mr. Barberio suggested Staff could provide the Commission with a detailed response to the letter presented by the Building Industry Association. He added Staff could also conduct additional outreach to the community prior to proceeding with the proposed amendments. Commissioner Whitton stated he feels Staff has done enough and suggested that the Commission move forward. Commissioner Segall stated he feels the Chamber of Commerce and the Building Industry Association need to be collectively involved in the development of the amendments. Previous experience with the revision of the Planned Development and Sign Ordinance's in 2001 demonstrated the reluctance of some of the developers to become involved. Many suggested due to current project involvement they wanted to maintain a distance from the discussion. He added that offering a more neutral platform for dialogue would stimulate more participation from the development community. Commissioner Whitton stated the outreach conducted by Staff gave a sufficient opportunity for participation. Those who chose not to contribute did so of their own accord. Commissioner Dominguez urged Staff to provide a comprehensive review and response to the concerns outlined in the submission from the Building Industry Association. He added there is no urgency to move on this matter and suggests continuing the matter. Chairperson Montgomery stated Mr. Molloy spoke to the Commission with regard to 5 or 6 items contained within the letter presented by the Building Industry Association, but there are others included that were not addressed tonight. He added he would like Staff to revisit the issue of RV storage and availability of public RV storage facilities. Commissioner Baker stated her agreement with the elimination of required RV storage. She asked if setbacks could be incorporated into private recreation requirements. Additionally, on the large multi-family developments, the proposal states that the recreation areas are located central to all of the units. Commissioner Baker asked if it would make more sense to consider placement from a landform 121 Planning Commission Minutes October 18, 2006 Page 10 consideration rather than in a central location. Commissioner Baker asked if it was necessary to have community recreation in the Beach Overlay Zone. She stated that the idea of residing on the coast is to enjoy the beach as a recreation area and would like consideration given to the elimination of this requirement. Additionally, Commissioner Baker asked if there were any locations, beside older developments, where front yards are located on major arterials. Mr. Barberio stated there are some newer projects on older streets such as Carlsbad Boulevard and La Costa Avenue that contain front yards. Commissioner Heineman stated he has experience with the issue of RV storage and feels it is easily managed. He added he would like the issue re-examined. Commissioner Cardosa commended Staff for a skilled due diligence package. He added he would like to see the list presented from the Building Industry Association reviewed and cautioned against a hasty decision. Chairperson Montgomery stated he is in favor of further consideration of the RV storage issue and would like further investigation of the off-site resources available. Mr. Barberio stated the current RV storage standard currently requires RV parking at a rate of 20 square feet per unit for projects with 25 or more units. The standard was changed from 10 dwelling units in 2001. The proposal presented by Staff recommends the standard be increased to 100 or more dwelling units and RV parking not be required for projects being developed within the RH designation and use. Commissioner Segall asked if it would be possible to create something like an inclusionary buy-in feature where off-site parking could be provided as a part of the development. Commissioner Dominguez concurred with Commissioner Segall and added he would like identification of currently available off-site RV parking. Chairperson Montgomery suggested consideration could be given to the issue of including driveway visitor parking in the provision. He added it would be prudent to review each item carefully in order to avoid the time-consuming process of making changes at a later date, particularly with respect to submission to the California Coastal Commission. Mr. Barberio stated that the California Coastal Commission has three options available when an item is presented for review. They can deny the changes, approve them as proposed, or approve with modifications. In the third case, Staff would need to make the modifications suggested to the proposal and resubmit adding additional time to the process. Chairperson Montgomery stated there is a majority of Commissioners who would like to continue the matter until further outreach and research can be completed. He asked Mr. Barberio what action Staff would consider taking at this point. Mr. Barberio stated Staff would follow the Commission's wishes. He added a meeting with the Building Industry Association in an attempt to reach a resolution to the outstanding issues presented in their letter would be indicated. Additionally, Staff would present a report detailing reasons why any remaining issues could not be met. In terms of additional outreach, Staff will accommodate the Commission's wishes. Staff has conducted an outreach program and received little feedback. A letter could be sent to the Chamber of Commerce, and that might produce additional input that could enhance Staff's recommendation. Mr. Barberio stated he would like to return this issue to the Commission prior to year's end, but cautions this time of year is not conducive to performing an effective outreach program. Chairperson Montgomery stated he would like to see this matter before the end of the year. It appears Staff is well-versed on this issue and could provide additional input on the 14 items presented by Mr. Molloy. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there were any further questions of Staff; seeing none, he requested a motion to continue. Mr. Neu stated a continuance on this item to December 6, 2006, would be favorable to Staff and if at that time Staff was unprepared to move forward, a request to continue the matter further would be made. Planning Commission Minutes October 18, 2006 Page 11 MOTION ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Baker, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission continue Item 4 to the December 6, 2006, meeting. VOTE: 7-0 AYES: Chairperson Montgomery, Commissioners Baker, Cardosa, Dominguez, Heineman, Segall, and Whitton NOES: None PLANNING COMMISSION COMMENTS Commissioner Baker stated the City Council did not appoint a replacement for Commissioner Heineman and continued the item to November 7, 2006. ASSISTANT PLANNING DIRECTOR COMMENTS Mr. Neu stated the City Council did in fact continue the matter of Planning Commission appointments to November 7, 2006. Two seats on the Commission are on the agenda; Commissioner Dominguez is up for re-appointment and Commissioner Heineman is termed out. Chairperson Montgomery asked Mr. Neu about any outstanding or projects for approval. Mr. Neu stated the Encina Wastewater Authority Expansion has been on the Agenda for the last two Council meetings. Concern was expressed with regard to odor and noise, and conditions were proposed for Council's consideration at the last City Council meeting. Discussion between the applicant's legal representative and the City Attorney with regard to the conditions is pending. CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS None ADJOURNMENT MOTION By proper motion, the regular meeting of the Planning Commission of October 18, 2006, was adjourned at 8:03 PM. DON NEU Acting Planning Director Michelle Gregory Minutes Clerk iS3 Planning Commission Minutes December 6,2006 Page 4 1. ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS - A request for a recommendation to adopt a Negative Declaration, and recommendation of approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to: (1) amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Area Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters of the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Land Use designation, and; (2) amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 1 and stated that Principal Planner Gary Barberio would make the Staff presentation assisted by Principal Planner Chris DeCerbo and Associate Planner Jennifer Jesser. Chairperson Montgomery opened the Public Hearing on Item 1. Mr. Barberio gave a presentation and stated they would be available to answer any questions. Chairperson Montgomery asked if the Commission had any questions of Staff. Commissioner Segall asked for further explanation regarding the RV storage requirement in RH and RMH zone designations. Mr. Barberio stated the original recommendation proposed no RV storage requirement in the highest density RH designation of 15 to 23 dwelling units to the acre. He stated Staff now recommends extending this to the RMH designation of 8 to 15 dwelling units to the acre as well. Setting aside Recreational Vehicle (RV) storage space is a standard that is very difficult to meet in these higher density developments. Mr. Barberio added input from Scott Molloy at the Building Industry Association (BIA) was considered in making this determination. Commissioner Segall stated some of the Master Plans, including the Carrillo Ranch development, allow the Homeowners Association (HOA) to rent out RV parking spaces to individuals located outside of the development. He asked what could be done in a situation where RV parking was at capacity and the HOA had rented out some of those spaces to noncommunity members and then a current resident could not obtain access to RV parking within their own community. Ms. Jesser stated the Carrillo Ranch HOA had not been contacted directly, but their Master Plan does state that when residents of the master plan are not fully utilizing the RV storage area they have the option to rent them out to nonresidents. Mr. Barberio added the current zoning requirement for master plans is silent on this issue. The specific master plan for Carrillo Ranch indicates this option is available to the HOA. He stated the City does not regulate this practice. Commissioner Dominguez stated the highest RV storage utilization rates presented were from the Carrillo Ranch development. He added the sample group of developments provided to the Commission demonstrated an across-the-board under-utilization of the existing RV storage spaces and stated he supports this proposition. Mr. Barberio stated the Carrillo Ranch development is one of the largest examples presented and contains many units with a high demand, but that could be attributed to rental of the surplus spaces. Commissioner Whitton asked if the City's General Plan allows or disallows an HOA to rent out excess RV parking units. Mr. Barberio stated the current Planned Development standard requires developments of greater than 25 units provide for RV storage at the rate of 20 square feet per unit. He added in terms of whether or not the residents of the community or residents Planning Commission Minutes December6,2006 Pages from outside the community can be charged for the use of those spaces is not addressed within the Municipal Code. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there were any further questions of Staff. Chairperson Montgomery asked if any members of the audience wished to speak on Item 1 and opened public testimony. Scott Molloy, 9201 Spectrum Center Blvd., Suite 110, San Diego, stated most recommendations made by the BIA had been resolved. He added he wished to clarify that the items addressed by the BIA were recommendations, not concerns. Mr. Molloy stated he would like to address the question of the need for RV Storage. He added it can be appreciated in a large master planned community that is in the range of 300 to 400 units, but in the vast majority of projects, the RV parking is under-utilized. Mr. Molloy stated the BIA recommends the threshold be increased to 300 units or only include the requirement in master planned communities. He added the BIA supports the Staff recommendation of eliminating the RV storage requirement in the multi-family product type. Mr. Molloy stated tandem parking has been found to be a valuable tool in housing projects throughout the region and other parts of the state. He added the effectiveness of the tandem parking area is increased by proper design and assurance that the individual HOA regulate the occupants to ensure the spaces are being used as intended. Mr. Molloy stated the BIA would like to see an increased use of this tool, particularly in the multi-family product. Staff has recommended allowing the use of tandem parking in the RH land use designation. The BIA would like to see an increase up to 50 or 75 percent. Mr. Molloy added the BIA supports the establishment of clear standards designed to manage the implementation of tandem parking within the multi-family developments and curtail abuses that have been seen in other areas. Commissioner Whitton asked what types of abuses of tandem parking have been seen. Mr. Molloy stated if the spaces are not designed properly, the occupants will use the front space for storage rather than parking. He added enforcement is easily obtained through HOA regulations. Commissioner Segall asked how enforcement would be implemented. Mr. Molloy stated the City would set standards for the use of tandem parking within the development and the HOA would absorb the responsibility for enforcement. Commissioner Segall asked if the tandem garage is a single-car garage door. Mr. Molloy stated it typically is. Commissioner Segall asked what the width of door is and stated he foresees a problem with an 8-foot door. Mr. Molloy stated he is unsure what the Zoning Ordinance states with regard to garage door width, but believes it is silent. He added the BIA has conducted some research and has found a mixed response with some of the developers offering 9-foot door widths. Mr. Molloy stated other developers have begun a more aggressive disclosure policy to ensure the buyer is aware the garage doors are only 8-foot in width and may not fit larger vehicles. He added the position of the BIA is to allow the builder the option of offering a 9- foot wide garage door, but not require it. Commissioner Baker asked if the BIA has any practical evidence of workability of the tandem garages. Mr. Molloy stated he had received some feedback from builders, but added he has not prepared any analysis. He stated he could accomplish this and return with a report. Commissioner Baker stated that a report wouldn't be necessary, but she has reservations about the practical use of the tandem garage design. Commissioner Segall stated the HOA would enforce the parking standard requiring cars within the development to be garaged overnight. He added with the current tandem garage design the Planning Commission Minutes December 6,2006 Page 6 width of the garage door would be 8 feet and the occupant may have a large vehicle that does not fit into the garage. Commissioner Segall asked what would be done in this scenario. Mr. Molloy stated this would be a dilemma that would best be addressed when the specific subject of garage door width is before the Commission for discussion. Commissioner Dominguez stated he drives a large vehicle and has found it sufficient to flip one of the side-view mirrors back in order to gain access to the garage. He added if the BIA is advocating a position for tandem garage design, more scientific research and surveys should be conducted with the consumer in mind. Mr. Molloy stated there is an inherent challenge to integrating the marketing side of the industry with the code and regulation side. He added the BIA understands the concerns presented regarding the garage door issue and accepts responsibility for adjusting to the preferences of the buyer. Commissioner Whitton stated he suggests the BIA review the double-car garage door size as well. Chairperson Montgomery asked if any other members of the audience wished to address the Commission. Seeing none, he closed public testimony. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there were any questions of Staff. Commissioner Segall asked if the Zone Code Amendment before the Commission tonight would be the appropriate place to require 9-foot garage doors on single-car garages. Acting Planning Director Don Neu stated the issue of garage door width is scheduled to come before the Commission on January 17. He added it is the preference of Staff to postpone any discussion until all information is collected for presentation. Mr. Neu stated if a majority of the Commission expressed a desire for a change in this area, it would be necessary to present it to City Council and potentially address the issue in the Planned Development Ordinance. If not, it will primarily be in the parking chapter. Commissioner Segall asked if the Planning Commission decided to move forward in this direction, would it be necessary to revisit the entire process or would the Commission be capable of retrieving this particular issue and including it with the Zone Code Amendment currently before the Commission. Mr. Neu stated the current development standard relating to garage width includes only the interior dimensions. In the event that Staff is given direction to address a minimum garage width for a single door, Staff would be required to prepare additional Zone Code Amendments and an Environmental Review. Mr. Neu added Staff is not in a position to incorporate this type of change into the Zone Code Amendment currently before the Commission. It would be necessary to conduct a separate study because Staff has not reviewed the issue of garage door width as part of the current process. Mr. Neu added this ordinance is silent on the issue of garage door width; it would be addressed through the parking chapter. Commissioner Dominguez asked for clarification regarding the front yard setback recommendations for multi-family developments presented by Staff. Mr. Barberio stated the current standard in the Planned Development Ordinance is a 15-foot average from a public or private street with no minimum setback as long as the average of 15 feet is met. He added that setback averages are very difficult to calculate and in the initial review of this subject, Staff's goal was to eliminate averaging and set up a minimum. Mr. Barberio stated the original recommendation was a 15-foot minimum standard. In further review, considering the underlying residential zones, Staff revised the recommendation to a 10-foot minimum setback requirement. Commissioner Dominguez asked if the 15-foot average setback requirement was originally established to provide more architectural flexibility. Mr. Barberio stated that averaging could accomplish that goal, but there are also ways to manipulate that requirement. Architectural Planning Commission Minutes December 6,2006 Page 7 guidelines and requirements are contained in the Planned Development Ordinance as a safeguard. A certain number of plains on each elevation and articulation are required to ensure architectural variations. Staff is very comfortable with this recommendation and believes it is consistent with the underlying zones and small lot recommendations. Mr. Barberio stated this recommendation allows for additional flexibility in achieving density. Commissioner Segall stated Staff's original recommendation was a 15-foot average setback requirement; the BIA recommended 12-foot minimum, and Staff is currently recommending 10- foot minimum setback requirement. He asked how these proposed changes would affect Romeria, a project located on La Costa Avenue that was previously reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Barberio stated the Romeria project had several issues, one of which was the La Costa Avenue arterial setback. The currently proposed changes will have no impact to that component of the proposed Romeria project. Commissioner Segall asked if the proposed changes have any effect to major arterial roadways. Mr. Barberio stated the setback requirements affect all streets, but when developing on major arterials, an additional requirement is in place. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there is an allowance or differentiation that occurs when there is a garage or an issue with parking in the right-of-way. Mr. Barberio stated the 10-foot setback requirement pertains to the residence. When a street-facing garage door is proposed, the required setback is 20 feet to the garage. Mr. Barberio stated he would like to clarify the matter of tandem parking and added the current Planned Development standard does not allow any tandem parking. The issue was raised with the architectural design team working on the Robertson Ranch development who presented several design scenarios. The question posed was of how to achieve the 15 to 23 dwelling units per acre density range of the RH land use designation. The feedback Staff received assisted in the decision to set the recommendation at 25 percent of an entire project within the RH land use designation. Mr. Barberio stated in terms of the dimension requirements of the tandem parking garages, they are set at 12 feet by 40 feet and no standard is set for the width of the door. Commissioner Baker asked what the dimension requirements are currently set at for a double- car garage. Mr. Barberio stated the interior dimension is 20 feet by 20 feet. Commissioner Baker asked if the tandem garage design saves space. Mr. Barberio stated it does save development area and offers the developer flexibility. He added Kirk McKinley, who has extensive experience with the tandem garage design in higher density, multi-family developments, offered input during the review period. Mr. Barberio added the recommended standard is something Staff is comfortable with in terms of size, dimension, and percentage. Commissioner Baker stated the configuration of a 20-foot-by-20-foot double-car garage appears to be a more economical use of space than a 12-foot-by-40-foot tandem garage. Mr. Barberio stated it is the width of the tandem garage that provides the space-saving efficiency. He offered the example of an attached townhouse product where the garages are located on the first floor with the living space located above. In this scenario, less design footprint would be utilized by the tandem garage than with the double-car garage. Commissioner Baker stated she believes it is an interesting concept, but expressed concerns about the day-to-day use of the tandem design. Mr. Barberio stated 15 to 23 dwelling units per acre is not considered extremely high density. He added if the HOA enforces the regulations and the occupants cooperate, the tandem garage design can be an effective tool. There are situations where it is not a workable situation and for that reason Staff has limited the recommendation to 25 percent of the entire development. Planning Commission Minutes December 6,2006 Page 8 Commissioner Baker stated concern about the tandem garage design forcing excess parking onto the city streets in areas where parking is at a premium. Mr. Barberio stated that is a legitimate concern, particularly in the beach areas where lots are smaller. He added the coastal developments have fewer units and a project with eight units would only be allowed two units with a tandem garage design. Commissioner Whitton stated some units located off Pontiac at the south end of Tamarack have tandem parking and it appears to be working well. Commissioner Segall asked if an occupant would have enough room to open the car door in the proposed 12-foot-wide tandem garage. He added it appears to be a tunnel design, which would limit storage and access by the occupant. Mr. Barberio stated that a typical 20-foot double-car garage with a 16-foot-wide door provides 8 feet for each automobile with an additional 4 feet of access space, two feet on either side of the garage. He added this is the measure Staff used in determining the recommended standard. Ms. Jesser added that her personal experience is that a 10-foot-wide interior garage provides enough room to access an automobile. Commissioner Segall asked if she has any storage in her garage. Ms. Jesser stated her garage contains storage at the back end. Mr. Barberio added the Planned Development standard requires private storage within the development that could be located either in the garage or in another location. Mr. Neu stated the parking space width requirement in open parking spaces is 8 feet. Typically, spaces are 8 to 9 feet in width and that will offer a point of reference for the proposed tandem garage width. Chairperson Montgomery stated his understanding that most vehicles are a maximum of 7 feet in width and it's the mirrors that add the extra dimension. Chairperson Montgomery asked if there were any further questions of Staff. Commissioner Dominguez commented he would like to revisit this subject in three to five years to review the tandem garage standard and determine its effectiveness. Mr. Neu stated it has been four years since the last revision to the Zoning Code Ordinance and it is anticipated future adjustments will occur. Commissioner Whitton commended Staff on a thorough examination of the proposed changes and for giving an outstanding presentation. He added he is appreciative of the participation by Scott Molloy and his suggestions. Commissioner Baker stated her appreciation of Staff's diligent efforts in reaching out to the building community. She added the tandem parking issue is one she would like to see monitored for its effectiveness in practical use. Commissioner Baker stated the concept of the HOA being responsible for the enforcement and monitoring is one she favors. Commissioner Segall thanked Staff for their thorough public outreach with regard to the proposed changes. Chairperson Montgomery applauded Staff for their investigation into the availability of public RV storage facilities in the area. He added he concurs with Staff on the tandem parking recommendation, stating it is an effective tool. Planning Commission Minutes December 6, 2006 Page 9 ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Baker, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6140 recommending adoption of a Negative Declaration and adopt Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6141 and 6142 recommending approval of ZCA 05-02 and LCPA 05-07 based on the findings contained therein. VOTE: 6-0 AYES: Chairperson Montgomery, Commissioners Baker, Dominguez, Heineman, Segall, and Whitton NOES: None ABSENT: Commissioner Cardosa FEB. 20.2007 4:58PM 9201 Spectrum Center Blvd., Suite 110 San Diego, CA 92123-1407 P 85 8.450.1221 F 858.552.1445 www.biasandiego.org PRESIDENT Scott Brusseau Newport National Corporation VICE PRESIDENT Paul Barnes Shea Homes TREASURER / SECRETARY Andrew Murphy American Property Enterprises IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT Horace Hogan II Brehm Communities CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Paul A. Tryon AFFILIATES California Building Industry Association National Association of Home Builders National Association of Industrial and Office Properties ). 08//—P, T 0 2007 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY CLERK'S OFFICE February 20, 2007 Honorable Bud Lewis Mayor City of Carlsbad 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive Carlsbad, CA 92008 RE: Amendments to Planned Development Regulations Dear Mayor Lewis and members of the City Council The Building Industry Association of San Diego County supports the update of the city's Planned Development regulations and we commend the city for their proactive approach as the city transitions to more infill and multi-family development. We have met with staff to discuss the proposed amendments and we have reached resolution on all but a couple of our recommendations. Following are two recommendations on parking for further consideration by the council. One of the biggest planning constraints multifamily and infill development faces is parking. We encourage a more balanced approach to parking regulations that places more emphasis on housing and less on cars. We believe the proposed amendments have taken a significant step in that direction and we support the proposed amendments to the visitor and resident parking requirements. We offer two considerations for further reducing the burden that parking requirements place on projects: > Eliminate the RV Storage Parking Requirement for all projects. RV storage is more of a luxury amenity that may benefit only a few residents. RV storage areas can also conflict with the harmony of the project's architectural design and layout. > Permit the use of tandem parking for all multifamily projects. Tandem parking is an excellent tool for addressing parking demand through better planning and design principles. DUILDINC INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION OF JAN DIECO COUNTY FEB. 20. 200? 4:58PM NO, 0877 P. 3 Thank you for this opportunity to provide recommendations on the Planned Development Regulation amendments. These regulations are an important step toward implementing better project design and planning principles and providing more entry-level homeownership opportunities. Very truly yours, Scott C. Mi! Public PoMcvAdvocate Cc: Gary Barberio, Principal Planner, City of Carlsbad The Coast News Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of San Diego County. Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to The Coast News, P.O. Box 232-550, Encinitas, CA 92023 (760) 436-9737 Proof of Publication STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss. 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 principal clerk of the printer of The Coast News, a newspaper printed and published weekly and which news- paper has been adjudged a newspaper of general circulation for the cities of Del Mar, Solana Beach, Encinitas/Cardiff, Carlsbad, Oceanside, San Marcos/Vista and the County Judicial District by the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego (8/4/94, #677114, B2393, P396); and that the notice, of which the annexed is a print- ed copy, has been published in, each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: February. 9th. 2007 I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed at Encinitas, County of Sarj-Diego, State of California on the$h dj&6#February, 2007. <r~~._/^J Clerk of the Printer Space above for County Clerk's Filing Stamp NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, 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 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 20, 2007, to consider adoption of a Negative Declaration and approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters to the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth •Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Use designation, and amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. 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 February 16,2007. If you have any questions, please call Gary Barberio in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4606. If you challenge the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendments and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing.**^fc CASE FILE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS CASE NAME: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL ,, CN 3999, Feb. 9, 2007 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010& 2011 C.C.P.) STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp Proof of Publication of Formerly known as the Bio Times-Advocate and which been adjudicated newsp circulation by the Superior C< San Diego, State of Califor Oceanside and the City c Decree number 171349, for Diego, that the notice of whi printed copy (set in type nonpariel), has been publish and entire issue of said newsp supplement thereof on the foil February 10th I certify (or declare) under pe the foregoing is true and corre Dated at SAN MARCOS Califo This 12th, Day of February, 200 ' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you 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 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 20,2007, to consider adoption of a Negative Declaration and approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program • Amendment to amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters to the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with, the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Use designation, and amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies., 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 February 16,2007. If you have any questions, please call Gary Barberio in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4606. If you challenge the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendments and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment in court, ypjj 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's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 920Q£, at-or prior to the public hearing. ' a CASE FILE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS CASE NAME: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 • " PUBLISH: CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL February 10,2007 Signature Jane Allshouse NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you 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 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 20, 2007, to consider adop- tion of a Negative Declaration and approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters to the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Use designation, and amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. 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 February 16, 2007. If you have any questions, please call Gary Barberio in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4606. If you challenge the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendments and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS CASE NAME: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 PUBLISH: February 10,2007 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Cham- bers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, February 20, 2007, to consider adoption of a Negative Declaration and approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters to the Zoning Ordi- nance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Manage- ment Control Point of the underlying General Plan Use designation, and amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambi- guities and correct inconsistencies. 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 February 16, 2007. If you have any questions, please call Gary Barberio in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4606. If you challenge the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendments and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspon- dence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS CASE NAME: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 PUBLISH: February 10,2007 CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL Jam and Smudge Free Printing Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY AVERY® 5160® CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST 6225 EL CAMINO REAL CARLSBAD CA 92011 SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DIST STE 250 255 PICO AVE SAN MARCOS CA 92069 ENCINITAS SCHOOL DIST 101 RANCHO SANTA FE RD ENCINITAS CA 92024 SAN DIEGUITO SCHOOL DIST 701 ENCINITAS BLVD ENCINITAS CA 92024 LEUCADIA WASTE WATER DIST TIM JOCHEN 1960 LA COSTA AVE CARLSBAD CA 92009 OLIVENHAIN WATER DIST 1966OLIVENHAINRD ENCINITAS CA 92024 CITY OF ENCINITAS 505 S VULCAN AVE ENCINITAS CA 92024 CITY OF SAN MARCOS 1 CIVIC CENTER DR SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949 CITY OF OCEANSIDE 300 NORTH COAST HWY OCEANSIDE CA 92054 CITY OF VISTA 600 EUCALYPTUS AVE VISTA CA 92084 VALLECITOS WATER DIST 201 VALLECITOS DE ORO SAN MARCOS CA 92069 I.P.U.A. SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND URBAN STUDIES SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505 CALIF DEPT OF FISH & GAME 4949 VIEWRIDGE AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92123 REGIONAL WATER QUALITY STE 100 9174 SKY PARK CT SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340 SD COUNTY PLANNING STEB 5201 RUFFIN RD SAN DIEGO CA 92123 LAFCO 1600 PACIFIC HWY SAN DIEGO CA 92101 AIR POLLUTION CNTRL DIST 9150 CHESAPEAKE DR SAN DIEGO CA 92123 SANDAG STE 800 401 B STREET SAN DIEGO CA 92101 U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE 6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD CARLSBAD CA 92011 CA COASTAL COMMISSION STE 103 7575 METROPOLITAN DR SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402 ATTN TEDANASIS SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT AUTHORITY PO BOX 82776 SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776 SCOTT MALLOY - BIASD STE 110 9201 SPECTRUM CENTER BLVD SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1407 CITY OF CARLSBAD PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING DEPT CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 5934 PRIESTLEY DR CARLSBAD CA 92008 CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT PLANNER GARY BARBERIO/CHRIS DECERBO/JENNIFER JESSER CITY OF CARLSBAD RECREATION MIKE HOWES STE 202 5927 BALFOUR CT CARLSBAD CA 92008 01/31/2007 ®09is AM3AV-O9-008-1 ®091S apidej eBeipes e ia eBejjnoqjiue uojssajdiu) Jam and Smudge Free Printing Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® PETER DRINKWATER DIR OF AIRPORTS COUNTY OF SD DEPT OF PW - AIRPORT DIV 1960 JOE CROSSONDR ELCAJON CA 929290-1236 www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY AVERY® 5160® 01/31/2007 10896 VO OlNEIWdOVS ooixoaod ayvoa lOHiNoo S3oynos3u AH3AV-O9-008-1 ®091S eSeqDas e ja eBejjnoqiiue Jam and Smudge Free Printing Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS 2800 COTTAGE WAY SACRAMENTO CA 95825 www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY BUSINESS, TRANS & HSG AGENCY STE2450 980 NINTH ST SACRAMENTO CA 95814 AVERY® 5160® CA COASTAL COMMISSION STE103 S^ 7575 MPTOPOLITAN DR SAffDIEGOCA 921084402/-: CANNEL ISLANDS NATL PARK SUPERINTENDENT'S OFFICE 1901 SPINNAKER DR SAN GUENA VENTURA CA 93001 505 S VULpAfiAVE ENCJNltAS CA 92024 COASTAL CONSERVANCY STE1100 1330 BROADWAY OAKLAND CA 94612 COUNTY OF SD SUPERVISOR RM335 1600 PACIFIC SAN DIEGO ca 92101 DEPT OF DEFENSE LOS ANGELES DISTENG PO BOX 2711 LOS ANGELES CA 90053 DEPT OF ENERGY STE 350 901 MARKET ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103 DEPT OF ENERGY STE 400 611 RYAN PLZDR ARLINGTON TX 760114005 DEPT OF FISH & GAME ENV SERV DIV PO BOX 944246 SACRAMENTO CA 942442460 DEPT OF FOOD & AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL RESOURSES RM100 1220 NST SACRAMENTO CA 95814 DEPT OF FORESTRY ENV COORD PO BOX 944246 SACRAMENTO CA 942442460 DEPT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEV REG ADMIN 450 GOLDEN GATE AVE SAN FRANCISCO CA 94102 DEPT OF JUSTICE DEPTOFATTYGEN RM700 110 WEST AST SAN DIEGO CA 92101 DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION RM 5504 1120 NST SACRAMENTO CA 95814 FED AVIATION ADMIN WESTERN REG PO BOX 92007 LOS ANGELES CA MARINE RESOURCES REG DR & G ENV SERVICES SPR STEJ 4665 LAMPSON AVE LOSALAMITOSCA 907205139 OFF OF PLANNING & RESEARCH OFF OF LOCAL GOV ARRAIRS PO BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO CA 958123044 i LAI E DEPT SD COUNTY PLANNING & STE B-5 5201 RUFF1N RD fDIEGOCA 92123 SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERV & DEV COM STE 2600 50 CALIFORNIA ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 941114704 SDGE 8315 CENTURY PARK CT SAN DIEGO CA 92123 SANDAG EXEC DIRECTOR STE 800 1STINTLPLZ401BST SAN DIEGO CA 92101 STATE LANDS COMMISSION STE 1005 100 HOWE AVE SACRAMENTO CA 958258202 STATE LANDS COMMISSION STE100S 100 HOWE AVE SAN DIEGO CA 92123 US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEER STE 702 333 MARKET ST SAN FRANCISCO CA 941052197 US BUREAU OF LAND MGMT STERMW 2800 COTTAGE WY SACRAMENTO CA 95825 US BUREAU OF RECLAMATION MID PACIFIC REG 2800 COTTAGE WY SACRAMENTO CA 95825 US FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICES 2800 COTTAGE WAY STE W-2605 SACRAMENTO CA 958251888 USDA RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT 4169 430 G ST DAVIS CA 95616 ®<ms ©AU3AV AM3AV-OD-008-1 IIJOV/JSAP^AAAAAA ®09LS lueqeB a\ zas;|jin NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you 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 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, {DATE}, to consider adoption of a Negative Declaration and approval of a Zone Code Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to amend standards of the Planned Development (CMC 21.45), Parking (CMC 21.44) and Beach Overlay Zone (CMC 21.82) Chapters to the Zoning Ordinance to facilitate the development of high quality residential projects consistent with the minimum density and the Growth Management Control Point of the underlying General Plan Use designation, and amend the Planned Development Ordinance to clarify ambiguities and correct inconsistencies. 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 Gary Barberio in the Planning Department at (760) 602-4606. If you challenge the Negative Declaration, Zone Code Amendments and/or Local Coastal Program Amendment in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT REGULATION AMENDMENTS CASE NAME: ZCA 05-02/LCPA 05-07 PUBLISH: {DATE} CITY OF CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL 1/8 PAGE AD IN TWO PAPERS 1Planned Development Planned Development Ordinance AmendmentsOrdinance AmendmentsZCA 05ZCA 05--02/LCPA 0502/LCPA 05--0707 2Primary Purpose• Amend development standards in:–Planned Development Chapter– Parking Chapter–Beach Area Overlay Zone • Facilitate high quality residential development consistent with the density ranges of the General Plan.• City Council Goal 3Residential Density Legislation• Government Code Section 65863 (1/2003)• 2004 General Plan Amendment - GPA 03-13 (9/2004) 4Residential Land Use DesignationsDensity RangesGMCP Density • RL 0 - 1.5 du/ac 1 du/ac• RLM 0 - 4 du/ac 3.2 du/ac• RM 4 - 8 du/ac 6 du/ac• RMH 8 - 15 du/ac 11.5 du/ac• RH 15 - 23 du/ac 19 du/ac 5Residential Density History• The current development standards contained in the Planned Development, Parking and Beach Area Overlay Zones make it difficult to achieve minimum General Plan densities. 6Habitat Management Plan• Restricts development to as little as 25% of a project site – Unit yield (density) of the total site must be “clustered” on the 25% developable area.– Existing standards are not flexible enough to achieve the density potential of a site when units are clustered on a smaller area. 7Habitat Management Plan: DUsDUsOpen SpaceOpen SpaceOpen Space 8Planned Development Ordinance Update• Last comprehensive PD update – 2001– Further refinements– Resolve ambiguities and inconsistencies 9Title 21 Chapters Proposed for Change:• Planned Development (Chapter 21.45)• Parking (Chapter 21.44)• Beach Area Overlay (Chapter 21.82) 10Proposed Amendments• Agenda Bill describes all proposed changes– City Council Ordinance (Agenda Bill Exhibit 1, pages 3-34) – Strike-out & underline version (Agenda Bill pages 88-130)– Analysis tables (Agenda Bill pages 82-87 & 137-177) 11Proposed Amendments• No single proposed change is individually significant• All changes, implemented cumulatively, will provide more flexibility 12Proposed Amendments• What will proposed changes accomplish?– Enable projects to achieve required minimum densities– Provide more flexibility in meeting standards– Maintain high quality project design– Resolve existing ambiguities & inconsistencies– Incorporate 12 Planning Dept. Policies into Zoning Ord. (Planned Development & Parking Chapters) 13Proposed Amendments• Modified standards for PD projects in RH– Community recreation space– Height limit (no change to permitted # of stories)–Tandem parking• Visitor parking• Drive-aisle width• Drive-aisle & street setbacks• Ability to build detached condominiums• Private recreation space• Building separation (multiple family)• RV storage 14Public Outreach• Development Community– March ’06: review/comment period– Various discussions & meetings•BIA– Discussions with Scott Molloy (BIA Public Policy Advocate)– Oct. ’06: met with Scott Molloy– Nov. ’06: presentation to Legislative Committee• Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce– November ’06: presentation to C of C•CEQA Review• City Website 15Planning Commission• Planning Commission– October 18, 2006– December 6, 2006•Unanimous recommendation for approval 16Coastal Commission• California Coastal Commission– Submit application in late April 2007– 6 to 9 months (minimum) to hearing 17Recommendation• That the City Council:–INTRODUCE Ordinance No. NS-834, APPROVINGZCA 05-02; and–ADOPTResolution No. 2007-036, ADOPTINGa Negative Declaration and APPROVINGLCPA 05-07 18Amendment to Visitor Parking StandardNumber of Visitor Parking Spaces RequiredEXISTINGPROPOSED1 – 10 units1 space/every 2 units(.50 space/unit)Projects with 10 or fewer units.30 space/unit11 or more units5 spaces for the 1st10 units + 1 space/every 4 units above 10 (.25 space/unit above 10)Projects with 11 or more units.25 space/unit 19Amendment to Visitor Parking Standard# of Units12345678910152030405075100# Visitor Parking Spaces RequiredBased on CURRENTstandard 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 7 8 10 13 15 22 28# Visitor Parking Spaces RequiredBased on PROPOSEDstandard111222 3 33 3 4 5 810131925Reduction in # of spaces required00-10-1-1-1-1-2-2 -3 -3 -2 -3 -2 -3 -3 20Credit for Visitor Parking in 20-Foot Driveway (BAOZ)PROJECT EXAMPLE10dwelling units (5 units with minimum 20-foot driveways)On-street parking allowed on all streets adjacent to & within project site3 visitor parking spaces required.25 visitor parking space credit for each 20-foot driveway .25 x 5 = 1.25 (always round down) = 1 parking space credit1 visitor parking space counted within a driveway2 visitor parking spaces required to be provided on-site 21Amount of Required Community Recreational Space (for Projects in the RH General Plan Designation)PROJECT EXAMPLE:15 dwelling units on a site designated RHEXISTINGRequired Community Recreational SpacePROPOSEDRequired Community Recreational Space200 square feet/unit 150 square feet/unit(200 x 15) = 3,000 square feetof community recreational area(150 x 15) = 2,250 square feetof community recreational area 22Building Height StandardsZONEMAXIMUM HEIGHT STANDARDSTORY LIMIT35 feet (min. 3:12 roof pitch)2 stories (3 stories if lot is 20,000 s.f. or greater)24 feet (less than 3:12 roof pitch)35 feet35 feet35 feet 35 feet35 feet (min. 5:12 roof pitch)45 feet, if dwellings are located over a parking structure (min. 5:12 roof pitch)R-1 & R-22 storiesR-3 No specified story limitationRD-M No specified story limitationR-W No specified story limitationR-P No specified story limitationNo specified story limitationV-RNo specified story limitation 23Required Private Recreation Area for Multiple-Family CondominiumsEXISTING REQUIRED PRIVATE RECREATION AREA FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGSPROPOSEDREQUIRED PRIVATE RECREATION AREA FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGSProjects with 1 – 10 dwelling unitsProjects with more than 10 dwelling unitsAny Size ProjectProjects within the RH land use designationPatio Balcony Patio BalconyPatio, Porch, or Balcony15’ x 15’(225 s.f.)120 s.f.(no min. dimension)10’ x 10’(100 s.f.)6’ x 10’(60 s.f.)6’ min. dimension(60 s.f. min.)May opt to provide an addition 75 s.f./ unit of common recreation area in lieu of required private recreation area. 24Residential Parking StandardsPARKING CHAPTEROne-Family DwellingsTwo-Family Dwellings (Apartments)Multiple-Family Dwellings (Apartments)ExistingProposedExistingProposedExisting ProposedStudio or 1B Units1.5 spaces/ unitStudio or 1B Units1.5 spaces/unitStudio or 1B Units1.5 spaces/ unit(1 covered)2B+ units2 spaces/ unit2B+ units2 spaces/unit2B+ units2 spaces/ unit(1 covered)Any size unit2 spaces/unit:•2-car garage (20x20); or•2 1-car garages (12x20)2-Car Garage(20x20)2 spaces/unit:•2-car garage (20x20); or•2 1-car garages (12x20) 251.5 spaces/ unit(1 covered)Studio or1B Units1.5 spaces/ unit (1 covered)Studio units2 spaces/ unit:• 2-car garage (20x20); or• 1-car garage (12x20) & 1 covered or uncovered space; or•2 1-car garages (12x20)2B+ units2 spaces/ unit:• 2-car garage; or• 1-car garage & 1 covered or uncovered space1B+ units2 spaces/unit:•2-car garage (20x20); or•2 1-car garages (12x20)2-Car Garage(20x20)2 spaces/unit:•2-car garage (20x20); or•2 1-car garages (12x20)2-Car Garage(20x20)ProposedExisting ProposedExistingProposedExistingMultiple-Family Dwellings (Condominiums)Two-Family Dwellings (Condominiums)One-Family DwellingsPLANNED DEVELOPMENT CHAPTERResidential Parking Standards 265’5’8’8’24’Drive-Aisle(No on-street parking)GarageGarageResidenceResidenceEXISTING REQUIRED DRIVE-AISLE WIDTH AND EXISTING REQUIRED SETBACKS FROM A DRIVE-AISLE(FOR A ONE-FAMILY DWELLING ORTWIN-HOME ON A SMALL LOT)Setback for 2ndfloor above garage is the same as required for residence (8’)Setback for 2ndfloor above garage is the same as required for residence (8’)34’3’3’5’5’20’Drive-Aisle(No on-street parking)GarageGarageResidenceResidencePROPOSED DRIVE-AISLE WIDTH AND PROPOSED SETBACKS FROM A DRIVE-AISLE(FOR A ONE-FAMILY DWELLING OR TWIN-HOME ON A SMALL LOT)Setback for 2ndfloor above garage is the same as required for residence (5’)Setback for 2ndfloor above garage is the same as required for residence (5’)26’ 27PROJECTSITEAdjacentLotAdjacentLotLot LotPublic or Private StreetVisitor parking located along the abutting side and portion of an existing public/private street that is contiguous to the project boundary.VISITOR PARKING ON ABUTTING SIDE OF CONTIGUOUS STREET(Outside of Beach Area Overlay Zone) 2810’Residence60’90’6’ 6’12’OPTION 1aExisting Standard*(garage located on front half of lot) 60’ 60’90’2-CarGarage20’x20’Residence5’5’6’10’12’12’12’0’Residence2-Car Garage20’x20’(direct entry)6’20% of lot width10% of lot width20% of lot width20’10’Public/Private StreetOne interior side yard setback may be 0’, provided the other side yard setback is 20% of the lot width.Second story living space above garage – same setbacks as required for residence20% of lot widthOPTION 1bProposed Standard (garage located on rear half of lot)OPTION 2Existing Standard*ParkwaySidewalk* The existing front yard setback standard of 12 feet average (10 feet minimum) is proposed to be changed to 10 feet minimum.10% of lot widthInterior side yard and rear yard setbacks need not exceed 5 feet to a garage located on rear half of a lot1-Car Garage12’x20’(direct entry)1-Car Garage12’x20’(side entry)20’SETBACK/GARAGE OPTIONS FOR ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS ON SMALL LOTS 29REQUIRED SIDE YARD SETBACKS FOR 2-STORY DWELLINGS50’10’20% of lot width10’20’PROPOSED Required side yard setback for 2-story dwellings on lots less than 60’ in width10% of lot width(5’ minimum)ResidenceGarage5’ 5’50’10’7.5’20% of lot width5’10’20’EXISTING Required side yard setback for 2-story dwellings on lots less than 60’ in width25% of lot width(combined total)(5’ minimum)ResidenceGarageResidence60’6’ 6’12’EXISTING & PROPOSED(No Change Proposed)Required side yard setback for 2-story dwellings on lots with a minimum width of 60’Garage10% of lot width20’10’20% of lot width 30100’37.5’ 37.5’100’Residence10’10’10’7.5’ResidenceGarage20% of lot width20’10’Public/Private StreetSETBACKS FOR TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS (existing standard*)7.5’Garage20% of lot width0’10’ minimum10’ minimumParkwaySidewalk* The existing front yard setback standard of 12 feet average (10 feet minimum) is proposed to be changed to 10 feet minimum. 3110’5’10’ResidenceGarage10’EXISTINGREQUIRED PRIVATE REAR YARDRECREATION AREA(10 or fewer units – 25’ x 25’ = 625 s.f.)(Restricted to a rear yard)10’25’ x 25’5’5’18’ x 18’20’20’Garage5’EXISTINGREQUIRED PRIVATE REAR YARDRECREATION AREA(More than 10 units – 18’ x 18’ = 324 s.f.)(Restricted to a rear yard)Residence5’ 5’10’8’GarageResidence5’Public/Private StreetDrive-Aisle (Alley)Public/Private Street15’ x 15’EXISTINGREQUIRED PRIVATE RECREATION AREA(Alley loaded project– 15’ x 15’ = 225 s.f.)(Restricted to a side yard)5’EXISTING REQUIRED PRIVATE RECREATION AREA(FOR ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS) 3210’Garage Residence5’5’10’5’10’10’Residence Garage10’15’ x 15’15’ x 15’10’5’15’ x 27’20’20’20’Garage5’Example BPROPOSEDPRIVATE RECREATION AREA(400 SF – 15’ minimum dimension)(May not be located in the required front yard setback area)Rec. area provided in two 15’ x 15’ areas = 450 SF of rec. areaExample APROPOSEDPRIVATE RECREATION AREA(400 SF Min. – 15’ min. dimension)(May not be located in the required front yard setback area)Rec. area provided in one 15’ x 27’ area = 405 SF of rec. area5’15’ x 27’Rec. area provided in one 15’ x 27’ area = 405 SF of rec. areaExample CPROPOSEDPRIVATE RECREATION AREA(400 SF Min. – 15’ min. dimension)(May not be located in the required front yard setback area)Residence5’Public/Private Street5’10’10’20’GarageResidenceExample DPROPOSEDPRIVATE RECREATION AREA(400 SF Min. – 15’ min. dimension)(May not be located in the required front yard setback area)Rec. area provided in one 15’ x 27’ area = 405 SF of rec. area15’ x 27’PROPOSED PRIVATE RECREATION AREA STANDARD(FOR ONE-FAMILY DWELLINGS AND TWIN-HOMES ON SMALL LOTS) 3310’Garage Residence5’5’10’5’10’10’Residence Garage10’10’5’20’20’20’Garage5’5’Residence5’Required private recreation areaSolid patio cover, deck, or balcony – as proposed, would be allowed to project a maximum of 6 feet into a required private recreation area6’ maximum projection 6’ maximum projection 6’ maximum projection 6-FOOT PROJECTION INTO REQUIRED RECREATION AREAS(FOR SOLID PATIO COVERS, DECKS OR BALCONIES) 345’8’24’Drive-Aisle(No on-street parking)GarageResidenceEXISTING REQUIRED DRIVE-AISLE WIDTH AND EXISTING REQUIRED SETBACKS FROM A DRIVE-AISLE(FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS)Residence Residence ResidenceGarage Garage Garage8’8’5’Setback for 2nd& 3rd floors above garage is the same as required for residence (8’) 355’20’Drive-Aisle(No on-street parking)GarageResidencePROPOSED DRIVE-AISLE WIDTH AND PROPOSED SETBACKS FROM A DRIVE-AISLE(FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS)Residence ResidenceResidenceGarage Garage Garage5’5’3’0’ setback (from a drive-aisle only) for 2nd& 3rdfloors that are directly above a garage3’ 3624’5’8’1stFloor2ndFloor3rdFloorRESIDENCEGARAGE5’8’3rdFloor2ndFloor1stFloorRESIDENCEEXISTING REQUIRED DRIVE-AISLE WIDTH AND EXISTING REQUIRED SETBACKS FROM A DRIVE-AISLE(FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS)DRIVE-AISLE34’ 3720’3’5’1stFloor2ndFloor3rdFloorRESIDENCEGARAGE3’5’3rdFloor2ndFloor1stFloorRESIDENCEPROPOSED DRIVE-AISLE WIDTH AND PROPOSED SETBACKS FROM A DRIVE-AISLE AND PUBLIC/PRIVATE STREET(FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS)0’ setback (from a drive-aisle only) for 2nd& 3rdfloors thatare directly above a garagePUBLIC/PRIVATE STREET PARKWAY SIDEWALK PUBLIC/PRIVATE STREETPARKWAYSIDEWALK 10’10’26’DRIVE-AISLE 381stFloor2ndFloor3rdFloorRESIDENCE3rdFloor2nd Floor1stFloorRESIDENCEPROPOSED BUILDING SEPARATION AND SETBACKS FROM A PUBLIC/PRIVATE STREET(FOR MULTIPLE FAMILY DWELLINGS)GarageGarage20’10’10’20’10’SIDEWALKSIDEWALKPARKWAYPARKWAYPUBLIC/PRIVATESTREETPUBLIC/PRIVATE STREET 39Street Setback per Planned Development Requirements(10 ft. for one & two family dwellings/15 ft. for multi-family dwellings)Setbacks from interior side and rear perimeter property lines (not adjacent to a street) are subject to the setbacks required by the underlying zonePROJECTSITEAdjacentLotAdjacentLotLot LotPublic or Private Street 4020’x20’2-Car Garage12’x40’2-carTandemGarageResidence20’x20’2-Car Garage20’x20’2-Car Garage20’x20’2-Car Garage20’x20’2-Car Garage20’x20’2-Car Garage12’x40’2-carTandemGarageDrive-Aisle25% of the units in a project (RH) may have tandem garages8 units x 25% = 2 units with tandem garagesUnit 1 Unit 2 Unit 3 Unit 4Unit 5 Unit 6 Unit 7 Unit 8PROPOSED TANDEM GARAGE PARKING WITHIN THE RH GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION 4120’ 20’20’20’24’24’24’ 24’24’24’24’24’7’7’7’7’Drive-AisleEntranceDrive-AisleEntranceDrive-AisleDrive-AisleDrive-AislePARALLELL PARKING DIMENSIONS