HomeMy WebLinkAbout2012-11-27; City Council; 21057; Village Minimum Densities MP 12-01 LCPA 95-10(C)CITY OF CARLSBAD - AGENDA BILL 12
AB# 21.057 VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C)
DEPT. DIRECTOR
MTG. 11/27/12 VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) CITY ATTORNEY
DEPT. CED
VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C)
CITY MANAGER
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
That the City Council hold a public hearing and ADOPT Resolution No. 2012-261 APPROVING
amendments to the Village Master Plan and Design Manual (MP 12-01) and to the City of Carisbad Local
Coastal Program (LCPA 95-10(C)), based upon the findings contained therein.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
Project Planning
Commission
City
Council Coastal Commission
MP 12-01 RA X
LCPA 95-10(0 RA X ^ **
RA = Recommended approval
X = Final city decision-making authority
• = Requires Coastal Commission approval
** = LCPA 95-10(C) will not become effective until approved by Coastal Commission. Since the Village
Master Plan and Design Manual is the Local Coastal Program for the Village area, proposed
amendments affecting those portions of the Village area within the Coastal Zone will not become
effective until approved by the Coastal Commission.
The city proposes these amendments to implement Program 2.1 of the existing adopted Housing Element
(2005-2012). The program calls for the city to increase the minimum densities for each of the land use
districts of the Village Master Plan and Design Manual as follows:
Village Land Use Districts
Minimum Density (du/ac)* Maximum Density (du/ac)
Village Land Use Districts
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
1-4 15 28 35 No change
5-9 15 18 23 No change
*du/ac = dwelling units/acre
Implementation of the program is necessary to comply with state law. State law requires cities to facilitate
and encourage development of a variety of housing for all income levels. In Carlsbad and other jurisdictions,
this is accomplished in part by raising minimum densities. Earlier this year, the city took similar action for
many properties outside the Village area as well, approving a minimum density increase for medium-high
(RMH) and most high density (RH) residentially-designated properties.
DEPARTMENT CONTACTS: Scott Donnell 760-602-4618 scott.donnell@carlsbadca.QOv
FOR CITY CLERKS USE ONLY.
COUNCIL ACTION: APPROVED CONTINUED TO DATE SPECIFIC •
DENIED CONTINUED TO DATE UNKNOWN •
CONTINUED • RETURNED TO STAFF •
WITHDRAWN • OTHER-SEE MINUTES •
AMENDED •
Page 2
The increase in minimum densities is proposed to help facilitate housing for lower-income persons. However,
approval of the minimum density increase in the Village would still permit housing construction for any income
group. Approval would also not result in any housing construction; instead, it simply establishes a new
minimum density.
On September 5, 2012, the Planning Commission recommended project approval, voting 5-1-1
(Commissioner Arnold opposed and Commissioner Siekmann absent). One speaker gave public testimony.
The Planning Commission staff report and minutes are attached.
Many commissioners and the speaker expressed concern about the ability of projects to meet the proposed
minimum densities, particularly mixed use projects in land use districts 1-4. In these districts, the minimum
density would increase from 15 to 28 du/ac. In reply, staff noted existing Village Master Plan and Design
Manual provisions that (1) allow development standards to be modified if necessary to meet minimum
densities (Exhibit 3) and (2) permit density reduction below the required minimum subject to findings. This
latter provision, revised to reflect the new proposed minimum densities, is included as part of the adopted
Planning Commission Resolution (Exhibit 2). Additionally, proposed changes encourage the consolidation of
parcels; consolidation may increase development feasibility.
To further address the concerns stated and consistent with the adopted Housing Element, staff recommends
insertion of additional text to clarify that the minimum density for mixed use projects shall be calculated based
on fifty percent of a project's developable area. An attachment to the City Council resolution shows the
proposed insertion (Attachment A to Exhibit 1). Because the additional text simply clarifies how to determine
the minimum density for mixed use projects, it does not constitute a substantial modification of the
amendments previously considered by the Planning Commission. Therefore, it does not require review by the
Planning Commission before the City Council takes action consistent with Zoning Ordinance Section
21.52.050 B.2.
At the meeting, one commissioner also felt density numbers had been arbitrarily assigned in the Village. Staff
does not concur with this concern and notes the proposed minimum densities are within the density ranges
already in place. Further, of the two minimum densities proposed (18 and 28 du/ac), the higher minimum
density is proposed only in the districts that already have the higher maximum density. Those districts with a
higher maximum density are concentrated in the core of the Village. In summary, staff is proposing no
change to the established Village density scheme.
An email to the Planning Commission, sent after the September 5 Planning Commission hearing, is also
attached for the City Council's consideration.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The recommended actions require normal city costs to file an environmental notice with the County Clerk and
process the Local Coastal Program Amendment through the Coastal Commission.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
Staff has analyzed the project. No potentially significant impacts would result with the implementation of the
amendments that were not previously examined and evaluated in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration
(MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the 2005-2010 Housing Element (CPA
03-02), dated December 22, 2009. The MND comprehensively evaluated potential environmental effects of
housing facilitated by Housing Element program implementation.
The attached Planning Commission resolution finds the project within the scope of the previously adopted
MND and MMRP. The recommended City Council resolution incorporates this finding.
Page 3
EXHIBITS:
1. City Council Resolution No. 2012-261 (MP 12-01 and LCPA 95-10(C))
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6905
3. Village Master Plan and Design Manual excerpt, "Universal Standards - Development Standards
Modifications"
4. Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 5, 2012
5. Planning Commission meeting minutes dated September 5, 2012
6. September 11, 2012, email to Planning Commission from Pauline Wrotkowski.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
The City Council of the City of Carisbad, Califomia, does hereby resolve as
EXHIBIT 1
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2012-261
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO
3 THE TEXT OF THE VILLAGE MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN
MANUAL AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM TO IMPLEMENT
4 PART OF PROGRAM 2.1 (ADEQUATE SITES) OF THE 2005-
2010 HOUSING ELEMENT BY INCREASING THE MINIMUM
5 DENSITIES OF ALL LAND USE DISTRICTS IDENTIFIED IN THE
VILLAGE MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN MANUAL.
6 CASE NAME: VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
CASE NO.: MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(0
7
8 follows:
9 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Code, the Planning
10 Commission did, on September 5, 2012, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law
11 to consider MP 12-01 and LCPA 95-10(0) as referenced in Planning Commission Resolution
12 No. 6905; and
1^ WHEREAS, the Village Master Plan and Design Manual (Master Plan) also
14 serves as the Local Coastal Program for Village Area properties within the Coastal Zone; and
1^ WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution
1^ No. 6905 and recommended to the City Council approval of MP 12-01 and LCPA 95-10(0); and
1^ WHEREAS, subsequent to the Planning Commission meeting, additional wording
has been proposed to the Master Plan text amendments recommended for approval by the
Planning Commission to clarify how density is to be calculated for mixed use projects; and
WHEREAS, mixed use projects, which often feature ground floor retail uses and
upper floor residential uses, are encouraged in the Village by the Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, the additional wording responds to concems expressed at the
Planning Commission meeting that proposed minimum densities may be difficult to meet,
particulariy for mixed use projects in Master Plan land use districts 1-4; and
WHEREAS, the additional wording, which proposes that the minimum density for
mixed use projects shall be calculated based on fifty percent of a project's developable area, is
consistent with the calculations utilized in the adopted 2005-2012 Housing Element to determine
1 Govemment Code Section 65863, does not reduce or permit the reduction of residential density
2 on any parcel to a density beiow that which was utilized by the state Department of Housing and
3 Community Development in determining compliance with housing element law; and
4 WHEREAS, because the additional wording only clarifies how to determine
5 density for mixed use projects consistent with the adopted 2005-2012 housing element, it does
6 not constitute a substantial modification of the amendments previously considered by the
7 Planning Commission; therefore, it does not require review by the Planning Commission before
8 the City Council takes action according to Zoning Ordinance Section 21.52.050 B.2.; and
9 WHEREAS, the additional wording is shown on Attachment "A" dated October 5,
10 2012, and attached hereto; and
11 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carisbad, on the 27th day of
12 November, 2012, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider said amendments to the Master
1^ Plan and Local Coastal Program; and
14 WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
1^ and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors
1^ relating to the Master Plan and Local Coastal Program amendments.
1'7 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City
1 Q
* ° of Carisbad as follows:
19
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
20
2. That the recommendations of the Planning Commission for the approval
21 of MP 12-01 and LCPA 95-10(0) are adopted and approved, except as modified by the
additional clarifying wording shown on Attachment "A" attached hereto, and that the findings of
22 the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 6905 on file with
the City Cleric and incorporated herein by reference are the findings of the City Council.
23
3. That the approval of LCPA 95-10(0) shall not become effective within the
24 Coastal Zone until it is approved by the Califomia Coastal Commission and the Califomia
Coastal Commission's approval becomes effective.
25
4. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council.
The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carisbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial
Review," shall apply:
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 ////
"NOTICE TO INTERESTED PARTIES'
The fime within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is
govemed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been
made applicable in the City of Carisbad by Carisbad Municipal Code
Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in
the appropriate court not later than the nineteenth day following the date
on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the
decision becomes final a request for the record of the deposit in an
amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such
record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is
extended to not later than the thirtieth day foliowing the date on which the
record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attomey
of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the
record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Clerk, City of
Carisbad, 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad, CA. 92008."
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
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting ofthe City Council
of the City of Carisbad on the 27th day of November, 2012, by the following vote to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
Council Members Kulchin, Blackbum, Douglas
None
ABSENT: Council Members Hall, Packard
MATT HALL, Mayor
ATTEST:
LORe^N^^m/d)OD. cm Cletk
Karen R. Kundtz, Assistant City Clerk
(SEAL)
^^^^^^^
7
Attachment A to City Council Resolution Approving MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C)
October 5, 2012
Amendment to the Carlsbad Village Master Plan and Design Manual
• Underline and Gtrikoout text indicates changes recommended for approval by
Planning Commission Resolution 6905.
• Double underline and bold text indicates additional changes recommended for
approval proposed subsequent to adoption of Planning Commission Resolution
6905. Changes affect only the first paragraph below.
Proposed changes affect the Universal Standards section of Chapter 3, Development Standards,
by amending existing "Residential Density" provisions and adding a new "Lot Consolidation"
section as follows:
Residential Density
The properties within the Village Area do not have a residential density assigned to them for Growth
Management Program compliance purposes. Therefore, the minimum and maximum densities for
development that includes residential within the Village Area are set forth herein. For Land Use
Districts 1-4 ofthe Village Area, the minimum densit\- shall he 28 dwelling units per acre andjhe
maximum density permitted for a de\-elopmont that includcG residential shall be 35 dwelling units per
acre. For Land Use Districts 5-9, the minimum densitY shall be18 dwelliim units per acre andihe
maximum density t^r a dovelopmont that includoa residential shall be 23 dwelling units per acre. The
minimum density tbr all land use districts with dovolopment that includes residential in the Village
A r.>o rhnU hn 1S Hiv.>llina uniti. per u m Fnr mixed use projects in all land use districts, the
minimum densitv shall be calculated based on fiftv percent of the developable area.
A density bonus may be granted in accordance with Chapter 21.86 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to
exceed the maximum densitigsy noted above. A density increase may also be granted, on a case-by-
case basis, for the purposes of providing affordable housing for low and/or moderate income
households and/or when an applicant can provide acceptable evidence to the City Council that the
density increase is necessary in order for the development to qualify for silver level or higher LEED
Certification, or a comparable green building rating, and assist in maintaining the financial feasibility
of the development and/or when the City Council determines that a project has significant public
benefit or assists in meeting the goals and objectives set forth within the Village Master Plan.
To approve a density above the maximums set forth herein, the following findings must be made by
the City Council:
1. That the project will provide sufficient additional public facilities for the density in excess of
the maximum permitted to ensure that the adequacy of the City's public facilities plans will
not be adversely impacted.
2. That there have been sufficient developments approved in the quadrant gjensiliei^elow their
maximum densities Cirowth Management Conlrol Wnnis so the approval will not result in
exceeding the quadrant limit.
Attachment A to City Council Resolution Approving MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C)
October 5, 2012
3. That all necessary public facilities will be constructed, or are guaranteed to be constructed,
concurrently with the need for them created by this development and in compliance with the
adopted city standards.
The minimum residential density for the Village shall be 4^18 or 28 dwelling units per acre, as noted
above. Pursuant to Califomia Govemment Code Section 65863, the city utilized tiiese minimum
densities23 dwelling unitf5 to an acre in the Village for purposes of determining the adequacy of sites
to provide for affordable housing in its 2005-2010 Housing Element. As a result, to approve a
development that includes residential density below either minimum23 dwelling units per acre, the
following findings must be made by the City Council:
1. The reduction is consistent with the adopted General Plan, including the Housing Element.
2. The remaining sites identified in the housing element are adequate to accommodate the city's
share of the regional housing need pursuant to Govemment Code Section 65584.
In future Housing Elements, the density may be revised as appropriate and this section of the Village
Master Plan and Design Manual shall be revised by reference accordingly. In no case shall the
residential density be below the minimum of 15 dwelling units per acre.
^Pursuant to City Council Policy No. 43, Aall housing located in the Village Area qualifies for, and
requires^ an allocation of excess units fi'om the Proposition E "Excess Dwelling" Unit Bank. The
criteria for withdrawing units from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank are contained in City Council
PoiicvNo. 43.
Lot Consolidation
Because there are generally very small lots within the Village Area, it is often difficult to develop
them in a financially feasible manner without lot consolidation. As a general policy, the City
encourages lot consolidation within the Village Area and will assist developers, builders, and property
owners to identiiy potential sites for consolidation as needed.
EXHIBIT 2
^ PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 6905
^ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
3 CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING (1)
APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE VILLAGE
4 MASTER PLAN AND DESIGN MANUAL TO RAISE THE
MINIMUM DENSITIES OF ALL LAND USE DISTRICTS IN
THE CARLSBAD VILLAGE AREA AND TO ADD A
5 STATEMENT ENCOURAGING LOT CONSOLIDATION PER
2005-2010 HOUSING ELEMENT PROGRAM 2.1 AND (2)
7 THAT THE AMENDMENT IS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PREVIOUSLY
8 ADOPTED FOR THE 2005-2010 HOUSING ELEMENT.
CASE NAME: VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
CASE NO: MP 12-01/LCPA 95-lO(C)
5
9
10
11
12
WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad has filed a verified application to amend the
Village Master Plan and Design Manual that constitutes a request for a Master Plan
Amendment and a Local Coastal Program Amendment as shown on Exhibit "A" dated
14 September 5, 2012, attached hereto, as provided in Zoning Ordinance Secfion 21.35.150 and
15 Public Resources Code Section 30514 and Secfion 13551 of Califomia Code of Regulafions Title
14, Division 5.5, respectively; and
17
WHEREAS, the Village Master Plan and Design Manual and the ordinances
18
that implement it serve as the Local Coastal Plan for the Village segment of the Carlsbad
2Q Local Coastal Program and also regulate land use for properties outside the Coastal Zone
21 that are within the boundaries of the Village Area; and
22 WHEREAS, said verified application implements a part of Program 2.1,
Adequate Sites, of the City of Carlsbad 2005-2010 Housing Element (extended through
2012) that calls for the city to raise the minimum residential densities for all land use
districts of the Village Area and encourage lot consolidation; and
WHEREAS, state housing law, as expressed in Government Code Section
23
24
25
26
27
23 65583(c), requires cities to remove governmental constraints and identify sites to facilitate
and encourage the development of a variety of housing for all income levels; and
8
9
10
11
12
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on September 5, 2012, hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony
and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors
5 relating to the Master Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment; and
7 WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six-week public review period
for any amendment to the Local Coastal Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
13 B) At the end of the State-mandated six-week review period for LCPA 95-10(C),
starting on July 20, 2012, and ending on August 31, 2012, staff shall present to
14 the City Council a summary of the comments received.
1^ C) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES - MP
12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) based on the following findings: 16
17
18
Findings;
I. The project to amend the Village Master Plan and Design Manual meets the
1^ requirements of and is in conformity with the policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act in
2Q that the amendment raises minimum residential densities for all Village land use
districts and encourages lot consolidation, proposes no development or new land
21 uses, and does not change or conflict with Coastal Act requirements, such as
protection of biological resources and public views, with which development in the
22 coastal zone must comply.
23 2. The project does not require changes to and is consistent with the implementing
2^ ordinances of the Village segment, including Zoning Ordinance chapters 21.35,
21.41 and 21.81, which contain permit requirements, review procedures, and sign
25 standards.
26 3. The project is consistent with General Plan Land Use Element Residential Goal A.l
to provide a variety of housing types and density ranges to meet the diverse
27 economic requirements of residents, among other things; the amendment is also
2g consistent with a General Plan Land Use Element Village Goal A.4 to encourage a
variety of complimentary uses, including residences, to enhance the Village as a
place to live.
PC RESO NO. 6905 -2-
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4. The project is required to bring the Village Master Plan and Design Manual into
consistency with the General Plan Housing Element Program 2.1, which establishes
objectives of amending the Village Master Plan and Design Manual to raise
minimum residential densities of all Village land use districts and encourage lot
consolidation.
5. By establishing minimum densities and encouraging lot consolidation consistent
with Housing Element Program 2.1, the project complies with Government Code
Section 65583(c), which requires cities to remove governmental constraints and
identify sites to facilitate and encourage the development of a variefy of housing for
all income levels.
6. The project furthers Housing Element Goal 3, which encourages sufficient new,
affordable housing opportunities to meet the needs of current and future lower
income households throughout Carlsbad.
7. The project is consistent with Village Master Plan and Design Manual goals and
objectives to establish the Village as a qualify living environment (Goal 1) and
stimulate new development (Goal 3) through increasing the number, qualify,
diversify and affordabilify of housing within the Village (Objective 1.8), increasing
the intensify of development (Objective 3.3) and recognizing the unique small lot
conditions within the Village Area (Objective 3.1).
8. The Planning Commission has determined that:
a. The project is a subsequent activity of the 2005-2010 Housing Element, for which a
Mitigated Negative Declaration (CPA 03-02, SCH #2006051076) was previously
adopted;
b. The project is consistent with the 2005-2010 Housing Element cited above;
c. The project has no new significant environmental effect not analyzed as significant in
the prior Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
d. None of the circumstances requiring a Subsequent EIR, Mitigated Negative
Declaration or Negative Declaration under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 exist.
9. LCPA 95-10(C) shall not be effective within the Coastal Zone until approved by the
California Coastal Commission and until such approval becomes effective.
PC RESO NO. 6905
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission of the City ofCarlsbad, held on September 5,2012, by the following vote, to wit
AYES: Chairperson Schumacher, Commissioner Black, Commissioner
L'Heureux, Commissioner Nygaard, and Commissioner Scully
NOES: Commissioner Amold
ABSENT: Commissioner Siekmann
ABSTAIN:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
11 MICHAEL SCHUMACHER, Chairperson
^2 CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
13
14
15
16
ATTEST:
DON NEU
17 City Planner
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 6905 -4-
Exhibit 3
Village Master Plan & Design Manual standard modification for density (emphasis added)
Univ^Biis^l StHfici^rds
These standards are applicable to all development in the Village Area.
Development Standard Modifications
Modifications to the development standards may be permitted by the City Coxmdl in all land use districts
of the Village Area for developments where the applicant can provide acceptable evidence that a
requested development standard modification is 1) necessary to provide housing affordable to low and/or
moderate income households, and/or 2) necessary in order for the development to qualify for silver level
or higher LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) Certification, or a comparable green
building rating, and to maintain the financial feasibility of the development with such certification.
Development standard modifications may also be pemiitted by the City Council if 1) the
applicant can provide acceptable evidence that application of the development standards will
preclude the construction of a residential development at densities at ot above the minimum set
forth for the applicable land use district^ or 2) for projects that have a significant public benefit as
determined by the City Council or that assist the Council in meeting the goals and objectives set forth
within the Village Master Plan and Design Manual.
Through Village Review permit approvals, modifications may include, but are not limited to:
1. Density
2. Parking standards
3. Building setbacks
4. Height
5. Open space
General Plan
All Village development projects must be consistent with aU General Plan policies, goals, and action
programs.
I
Residential Density
The properties within the Village Area do not have a residential density assigned to them for Growth
Management Program compliance purposes. Therefore, the minimum and maximum densities for
development that includes residential within the Village Area are set forth herein. For Land Use Districts
1-4 of the Village Area, the maximum density permitted for a development that includes residential shall
be 35 dwelling units per acre. For Land Use Districts 5-9, the maximum density for a development that
includes residential shall be 23 dwelling units per acre. The minimum density for all land use districts with
development that includes residential in the Village Area shall be 15 dwelling units per acre.
A density bonus may be granted in accordance with Chapter 21.86 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to
exceed the maximum density noted above. A density increase may also be granted, on a case-by-case
basis, for the purposes of providing affordable housing for low and/or moderate income households
and/or when an applicant can provide acceptable evidence to the City Council that the density increase is
necessary in order for the development to qualify for silver level or higher LEED Certification, or a
98
City ofCarlsbad Village Master Plan and Design Manual
Ihe City of Garlsbad Planning Division ^ EXHIBIT 4
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 0
Application complete date: N/A
P.C. AGENDA OF: September 5, 2012 Project Planner: Scott Donnell
Project Engineer: N/A
SUBJECT: MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(0 - VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES - A request
to recommend (1) approval of an amendment to the Village Master Plan and
Design Manual to implement part of Program 2.1 of the 2005-2010 Housing
Element, and (2) that the amendment is within the scope of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration previously adopted for the 2005-2010 Housing Element.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Conmiission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 6905
RECOMMENDING that MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) is within the scope of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration previously adopted for the 2005-2010 Housing Element (GPA 03-02) and
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) based on the findings
contained therein.
II. INTRODUCTION
The city proposes to implement the part of Program 2.1 of tiie existing adopted Housing Element
regarding tiie Village Master Plan and Design Manual. The proposed amendment would raise
minimum residential densities and encourage lot consolidation. The amendment is needed to
help the city meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) for the current 2005-2012
housing cycle by facilitating residential development. RHNA is an estimate of housing needed to
accommodate growth projected by income distribution, which is determined for four income
categories: very low, low (together, "lower") moderate, and above moderate.
While the city does not have to construct housing to meet its RHNA need, it must provide
opportunities to enable this housing to be built. Those opportunities include designating land or
areas of the city at densities the state considers appropriate for different income groups. Higher
densities, for example, can contribute to home affordability. Implementation of Program 2.1
would raise the minimum densities in all Village land use districts; the proposed minimums
could facilitate the construction of housing affordable to persons of lower incomes.
In addition, recognizing tiiat the predominance of small lots in the Village Area may be an
obstacle to development, Program 2.1 implementation would also be achieved by the proposed
addition of a statement supporting lot consolidation.
Attached is a map of the Village Review Area, its nine land use districts, and the boundary ofthe
Coastal Zone.
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C)
September 5, 2012
PAGE 2
VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
Adopted by the city in 2009, the current Housing Element was certified by the state in March
2010. The Housing Element addresses Carlsbad housing needs through the end of this year. An
updated Housing Element for the 2013 - 2020 housing cycle will be proposed for adoption as
part of the General Plan update in early 2013.
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The project would implement two of three actions Program 2.1 identifies tiie city is to take
regarding the Village Area:
1. Raise minimum densities
2. Encourage lot consolidation
The third action, to permit standards modifications to ensure projects can meet the minimum
densities, was accomplished by a previous amendment.
Regarding raising minimum densities. Program 2.1 states the following:
The City shall process amendments to the Village Redevelopment Master Plan
and Design Manual and/or other planning documents as necessary to establish, for
residential projects and mixed use projects with residential components within the
Village Redevelopment Area, minimum densities equal to 80% of the maximum
of the density range. For land use districts 1 - 4 (density range of 15 - 35 units per
acre), as specified in the Carlsbad Village Redevelopment Master Plan and
Design Manual, 80% shall be 28 units per acre. For land use districts 5 - 9
(density range of 15 - 23 units per acre), 80% shall be 18 units per acre.
The proposed new minimimi densities would be within the existing density range and would not
change existing maximum densities, as the table below shows.
Village Land
Use Districts
Minimum Density (du/ac)* Maximimi Density (du/ac) Village Land
Use Districts Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
1-4 15 28 35 No change
5-9 15 18 23 No change
*du/ac = dwelling units/acre
Generally, Land Use Districts 5-9 have a lower proposed minimum density and a lower existing
maximum density as they are more residentially focused, tend to transition to single-family home
neighborhoods, and are outside the core of the Village Area where commercial use is
emphasized. The commercial core extends between Carlsbad Boulevard and Interstate 5 and
generally along Grand Avenue and Carlsbad Village Drive.
Program 2.1 also calls for the city to encourage the merging pf small parcels. Based on research
performed for the adopted Housing Element, the average parcel size in the Village Area is 0.40
acre. Accordingly, Program 2.1 states:
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) - VILLAGE MESFIMUM DENSITIES
Septembers, 2012
PAGE 3
The City will encourage the consolidation of small parcels in order to facilitate
larger-scale developments. Specifically, the City will make available an
inventory of vacant and underutilized properties to interested developers, market
infill and redevelopment opportunities throughout tiie City, particularly in the
Village Redevelopment Area and proposed Barrio Area, and meet with
developers to identify and discuss potential project sites.
To fulfill this part of Program 2.1, the city has already completed the inventory described, and
that inventory and an accompanying map may be foxmd in the adopted Housing Element
Appendix F. Further, the city's Housing and Neighborhood Services Department maintains a
monthly "Real Estate Hot Sheet" that lists properties that are available for lease and for sale
within the Village Area. (Please note that provisions to encourage lot consolidation in the Barrio
Area are subject to separate approval and are not discussed here.) Finally, the proposed
amendment would add a statement tiiat the city encourages consolidation within the Village Area
and offer its assistance in identifying potential properties to merge. The basis for this assistance
would be the information found in Appendix F.
All proposed changes, whether to raise minimum densities or encourage the merging of
properties, are contained in the "Universal Standards" section, Development Standards chapter,
of the Village Master Plan and Design Manual. The changes proposed are shown on the
underline and strikeout exhibit to tiie attached Planning Commission resolution. The addition of
a statement encouraging lot consolidation would follow the "Residential Density" provisions
proposed for amendment.
IV. ANALYSIS
A. General Plan
The General Plan contains a fi-amework of land use and housing goals, objectives, policies and
programs. Table A below summarizes how the proposed amendment complies with relevant
parts of this policy fi-amework.
ELEMENT STANDARD PROJECT COMPLY?
Land Use
(Residential
Goal A. 1)
A City which provides for a
variety of housing types and
density ranges to meet the
diverse economic and social
requirements of residents, yet
still ensure a cohesive urban
form with careful regard for
compatibility while retaining
the present predominance of
single family residences.
Proposed minimum densities of
18 and 28 du/ac are appropriate
for the Village Area, which
features a mix of uses,
including high density housing
and commercial services, in an
urban setting served by transit.
Proposed densities promote
housing affordable to lower
income households.
Yes
/7
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) - VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
Septembers, 2012
PAGE 4
TABLE A - SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS CONTINUED
ELEMENT STANDARD PROJECT COMPLY?
Land Use
(Residential
Goal A. 1)
A City which provides for a
variety of housing types and
density ranges to meet tiie
diverse economic and social
requirements of residents, yet
still ensure a cohesive urban
form with careful regard for
compatibility while retaining
the present predominance of
single family residences.
Proposed minimum densities of
18 and 28 du/ac are appropriate
for the Village Area, which
features a mix of uses, including
high density housing and
commercial services, in an urban
setting served by transit.
Proposed densities promote
housing affordable to lower
income households.
Yes
Land Use
(Village Goal
A.4)
A City that encourages a
variety of complimentary uses
such as a combination of
residential and commercial
uses to generate pedestrian
activity and create a lively,
interesting social environment
and a profitable business
setting.
The proposal does not change
the uses permitted or
provisionally permitted in the
Village. The higher minimum
densities proposed may yield
increased pedestrian traffic and
demand for commercial services.
Yes
Land Use
(Village
Policy/Action
Program C.4)
Promote inclusion of housing
opportunities in the Village as
part of a mixed-use concept.
The proposal does not conflict
with the policy to encourage
mixed- use developments. As
described in Housing Element
Section 3, several Village Area
mixed-use projects recently
approved or built have densities
(15 to 23 du/ac) similar to the
proposed minimum densities.
Yes
Housing
(Goal 3)
Sufficient new, affordable
housing opportunities in all
quadrants of the city to meet
the needs of current lower and
moderate income households
and those with special needs,
and. a fair share proportion of
future lower and moderate
income households.
The Housing Element and state
Housing and Community
Development Department
identify the proposed densities as
appropriate for helping to meet
housing needs for lower income
households.
Yes
B. Village Master Plan and Design Manual
Master Plan and Design Manual Amendment
Table B below summarizes how the proposed amendment complies with relevant goals and
objectives of tiie Village Master Plan and Design Manual.
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C)
September 5, 2012
PAGE 5
V ILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
GOAL OBJECTTV^E PROJECT COMPLY?
Establish Carlsbad
Village as a quality
shopping, working,
and living
environment. (Goal 1)
Increase the number,
quality, diversity and
affordability of housing
units within the Village.
(Objective 1.8)
Proposed minimum densities of
18 and 28 du/ac promote
housing affordable to lower and
moderate income households.
Yes
Stimulate property
improvements and
new developments in
the Village. (Goal 3)
Establish and modify
development standards
as necessary and
appropriate which
recognize the imique
small lot conditions
within the Village.
(Objective 3.1)
Consistent with this objective,
the Master Plan and Design
Manual already permits
standards modifications as
necessary to, among other
things, meet minimum
densities. Recommended
amendment wording to
encourage lot consolidation
recognizes these small lot
conditions.
Yes
Stimulate property
improvements and
new developments in
the Village. (Goal 3) Increase the intensity of
development within the
Village. (Objective 3.3)
The project would permit
higher minimum densities.
Yes
Stimulate property
improvements and
new developments in
the Village. (Goal 3)
Provide greater certainty
as to acceptable land
uses and development
intensities. (Objective
3.5)
The amendment helps meet this
policy by providing more
specific density ranges (that
vary among districts) and
encouraging property mergers.
Yes
Local Coastal Program Amendment
The Local Coastal Program policies, which implement on a local level tiie state Coastal Act,
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. Because of tiie Village Area's urban nature and location away from the
coast line, many of these subjects do not apply.
The Village Master Plan and Design Manual serves as the Local Coastal Program in the Village
area. Altiidugh the amendment would revise minimum densities within existing density ranges
and encourage lot consolidation, it would otherwise not change land use or development
standards and would be consistent witii Coastal Act requirements. Additionally, the amendment
would not conflict with any coastal zone regulation, land use designation or policy with which
development must comply.
Furthermore, the proposed amendment would not exempt development from a Coastal
Development Permit that is not otherwise exempt. A Coastal Development Permit will still be
required for applicable development and discretionary review would ensure that the proposed
development is consistent with the policies of tiie Local Coastal Program. By processing this
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) - VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
Septembers, 2012
PAGE 6
Local Coastal Program Amendment, consistency between tiie Village Master Plan and Design
Manual and Local Coastal Program would be maintained.
C. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
The Village Review Area is outside the Airport Influence Area of the McClellan-Palomar
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Therefore, a consistency analysis is unnecessary.
D. Growth Management
As with all development in Carlsbad, housing constructed in tiie Village Area would need to
comply witii Grovs^h Management standards. In 2007, tiie City Council approved tiie current
density ranges for the Village Area (15-23 du/ac for Land Use Districts 1-4 and 15-35 du/ac for
Land Use Districts 5-9). Previously, the maximum permitted density in the Village Area was 23
du/ac. The 2007 approval was based on analysis that the 937 additional units that could result
from new and higher density ranges would remain consistent witii growth projections and that no
significant improvements would be required to public infrastructure. (This analysis considered a
maximum density of 45 du/ac in Land Use Districts 5-9; tiie 2007 approval reduced this to the
present maximum of 3 5 du/ac.)
To determine the dwelling unit yield that would result from projects constructed at tiie proposed
minimum densities of 18 and 28 du/ac, staff conducted an intensive study of all Village Area
parcels. The results of this analysis, contained in Appendix F of the adopted Housing Element,
determined that 875 units could result if projects were constructed at tiie proposed density
minimums, a yield below that considered in the 2007 approval.
Unlike residentially-designated properties elsewhere, properties within the Village Area do not
have a residential designation assigned to them for Grov^^ Management Program compliance
purposes. This means Village Area properties have no unit allocation and no Growth
Management Control Point. Therefore, approval of residences in tiie Village Area always
requires a withdrawal of units from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank.
The Excess Dwelling Unit Bank receives allocations of units from projects city-wide that are
approved at densities below their Growth Management Control Point or that convert from a
residential to non-residential land use designation. Over time, these imits accumulate and become
available for use by other projects. Other projects that may need allocations, for example, include
a residential development in the Village Area or a project proposing a density above the Growth
Management Control Point. The allocation of all units from the bank is regulated by City
Council PoHcy 43.
As of May 31, 2012, the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank had a balance of 3,003 units. These units
are available to residential development throughout Carlsbad, subject to the cap on dwelling
units applicable to each quadrant. Analysis performed as part of the adopted Housing Element
and tiie more recent Envision Carlsbad General Plan Update reveal the Excess Dwelling Unit
Bank balance is adequate to supply the 875 unit yield determined by the Housing Element for the
Village Area.
) ")
MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) - VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
Septembers, 2012
PAGE 7
Recommended changes regarding Excess Dwelling Unit Bank allocations for Village Area
projects are proposed so it is clear withdrawals are subject to the criteria contained in City
Council Policy 43. Changes to the findings required of projects that propose densities above
Village Area maximums are proposed as well to match the standard findings used elsewhere in
the city.
V. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Staff has analyzed the project and has concluded that no potentially significant impacts would
result with tiie implementation of the amendment tiiat were not previously examined and
evaluated in the adopted Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) for tiie 2005-2010 Housing Element (GPA 03-02), dated December
22, 2009. The MND for GPA 03-02 comprehensively evaluated the potential environmental
effects of future housing faciHtated by implementation of Housing Element programs.
Regarding tiie amendment in particular, tiie MND noted tiie proposed minimum densities are
within existing Village Master Plan and Design Manual density ranges and would result in fewer
units (875) than units anticipated to result (937) from adoption of those density ranges in 2007.
Since adoption of density ranges was subject to environmental review that included analysis of
the potential environmental impacts of tiie 937 units, the MND concluded additional
environmental review is not required to implement Program 2.1 changes to the Village Master
Plan and Design Manual.
The attached Planning Commission resolution finds the project within tiie scope of the
previously adopted MND and MMRP. The MND and MMRP are available for review on the
city's website and at the Planning Department.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 6905
2. Village Area Land Use Districts map
PACIFIC.
.OQEAU
••.••PtrEW'.
City of Carlsbad
Village Area Land Use Districts
EXHIBIT 5
Planning Commission Minutes September 5,2012 Page 2
1. MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(0 - VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES - A request to recommend
(1) approval of an amendment to the Village Master Plan and Design Manual to
implement part of Program 2.1 of the 2005-2010 Housing Element, and (2) that the
amendment is within the scope of the Mitigated Negative Declaration previously adopted
for the 2005-2010 Housing Element.
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 1 and stated Senior Planner Scott Donnell would make the staff
presentation.
Chairperson Schumacher opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 1.
Mr. Donnell gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Schumacher acknowledged receipt of an errata sheet for Agenda Item 1.
Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any questions of Staff.
Chairperson Schumacher asked what would happen if a developer were to propose a project which has
20 dwelling units per acre, which would be higher than the existing minimum but not as high as the
proposed minimum number of dwelling units, and if additional work or studies would be required of the
developer. He asked if situations such as that would actually dissuade people from proposing
development in the Village. Commissioner Schumacher further asked if there is a way to work with
developers or applicants that is not able to meet the new higher minimum. Mr. Donnell stated yes and
that is already acknowledged in the Village Master Plan. There is a standard that permits modification of
development standards, particularly in the cases where a developer is struggling to meet the minimum
densities including these new proposed densities. In such situations. Staff can work with developers to
try to achieve that new minimum; however it is acknowledged that in some situations particularly with very
small lots, that even with a standards modifications it may not be possible to achieve the minimum
density. In those cases, some of the proposed text amendments would allow densities below the
minimum subject to the making of additional findings.
Commissioner L'Heureux asked about the densities of two projects in downtown Encinitas. Mr. Donnell
stated he did not have a number for density for those projects; however he gave density numbers for
projects in Carlsbad. He stated that the Village by the Sea project, which is a mixed use project, has a
density of just under 23 units per acre. Commissioner L'Heureux asked about density for the project on
Laguna Drive across from Maxton Brown Park. Mr. Donnell stated he was not sure for that project but
would suspect it is under 20 units per acre.
Ms. Mobaldi stated that in regards to the question about density, the government code provides that if a
project is approved and it is below the minimum density then there has to be a finding that the density that
was not accommodated, because the project went below the minimum, can be accommodated
somewhere else at other sites. In other words, the state's Housing and Community Development
Department does not want a net loss of density.
Commissioner Nygaard inquired if the additional density could be placed in the Excess Dwelling Unit
Bank (EDU). Ms. Mobaldi stated the EDU is not applicable in the Village area; however those units would
need to be accounted for and there would need to be other sites that could accommodate those units that
were not used to accomplish the minimum density. Chairperson Schumacher asked if that would trigger
additional work on the part of the property owner or if the property owner would then be responsible for
finding a site or sites able to accommodate the units. Mr. Donnell stated that he believed state law has a
provision that places the burden on the land owner. Typically though that is something the applicant and
staff can work together to identify other sites.
Commissioner Scully asked where the number of 28 came from. Mr. Donnell stated that in working with
the Housing Element consultant and Staff with the Housing and Neighborhood Services Department,
Staff needed to identify sites that the state would accept as being acceptable for lower income housing.
Staff knew the Village area was an area of the city where density was acceptable rather than other parts
of the city. The figure of 28 units per acre was used because it was a percentage of the existing
maximum density. Mr. Donnell stated that that percentage was a formula or a means for the state to find
J13
Planning Commission Minutes September 5,2012 Page 3
a new minimum density acceptable. He further commented that the figure of 25 units per acre may have
been acceptable however there was a requirement to go higher than 25. Commissioner Scully asked
what the reality is of the sites reaching the minimum density of 28 or larger. Mr. Donnell stated that it is
tough to say because there has not been a lot of development of late in the Village. He stated that he
does suspect that for a property owner to reach the minimum density there will need to be standards
modifications made. Commissioner Scully asked if there have been any consolidation of properties now
that there is something in the pipeline. Mr. Donnell stated that there have been preliminary reviews in the
past, which are informal proposals, which were at very high densities. Mr. Donnell stated that merging of
parcels in the Village is actually very rare because so many of the properties are owned by different
owners and some ofthe properties have been held in a family for generations.
Mr. Neu commented that the density increase would allow smaller sites to have two or three units where
previously the density would only allow one unit.
Commissioner Nygaard asked what the impact is if the Commission does not move forward with this. Mr.
Neu stated that if the program was not implemented, the City would have to make up the units that were
projected to come out of the program in another means, either through designating specific sites or
developing another program that may affect other properties. Mr. Neu stated that Staff is starting work on
the new housing element that will run from 2013-2020. This current element was extending beyond the
2010 horizon. Staff would prefer not to have to go back and redo an old element while starting on the
new one.
Commissioner L'Heureux asked if the new housing element would have further requests to increase
densities in the Village area beyond what is currently proposed. Mr. Neu responded he did not believe
so. He stated many of the sites, as seen in the Draft Preferred Land Use Plan for Envision Carlsbad, are
being planned to meet the new housing requirement. Mr. Neu stated that he did not believe the City's
current housing element compliance track involves going back to the Village and increasing the density.
If anything, because the city anticipates a certain ability to create units out of the Village, the City can
count those units for the new element. Commissioner L'Heureux said that the actions tonight would set
the density level in the Village area through 2020. Mr. Neu stated yes.
Chairperson Schumacher asked how density is calculated on sites such as Paon which is a mixed used
project with a restaurant, office and residential units. Mr. Donnell stated that the density is calculated by
simply taking the acreage of the site and dividing the number of units by that acreage. It would be treated
as a fully residential site. Chairperson Schumacher asked if this action tonight would dissuade
developers from proposing mixed use projects in the Village. Mr. Donnell stated he did not believe so
because the emphasis in the Village is mixed use. In fact, when the Housing Element considered what
the density yield would be from these higher densities, it was based on a mixed use arrangement. Mr.
Donnell stated that in addition to that, when Council adopted changes to the Village standards in 2007,
the Council entertained having a density going up to 45 units per acre. What was ultimately approved
was 35 units per acre but as part of that change the Council also modified standards such as building
height, setbacks, and lot coverage, to recognize that that higher density was coming and to help
accommodate it.
Commissioner Black asked about lot merging of many lots in the Village. Mr. Donnell stated he does not
feel the vision or standards of the Village would allow for a "superblock" type of development. If such a
project were to occur than the project would have to be designed to look more like individual projects in
order to maintain that pedestrian scale and that smaller feel that is in the Village.
Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any further questions of Staff. Seeing none, he asked if
there were any members ofthe audience who wished to speak on Agenda Item 1.
Chairperson Schumacher opened public testimony.
Lucinda Vigne, 3880 Hibiscus Circle and owner of a site on State Street, asked for clarification regarding
the proposal. She stated the new minimum density proposed is too high.
Chairperson Schumacher asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak
on Agenda Item 1. Seeing none, he closed public testimony.
Ji4
CORRECTED
Planning Commission Minutes September 5,2012 Page 4
Ms. Mobaldi clarified that the densities have already been approved by the City Council with the approval
of the Housing Element 2005-2010. This was a part of Program 2.1. This is merely the implementation,
changing the documents to reflect what has been approved in the General Plan.
Chairperson Schumacher stated he is concerned that the City is creating a hurdle for property owners
and/or developers for reaching the minimum densities and additional studies or reports, and costs being
put on the land owner. He asked if there is a way that when an applicant proposes a project that will not
be able to meet the minimum density that there will be a path on how to the applicant can work with the
City on how to achieve that and how to rebalance those numbers.
Mr. Neu stated that the Commission recently approved minimum densities throughout the city for the RH
and RMH land use designations. Findings have successfully been made for several projects to be below
the minimum required density. He further stated that he believes the City will still have the ability and the
flexibility on sites, particularly the smaller parcels, to have a way where the land owner does not have to
meet the minimum density should it be shown to be infeasible. Staff has not had to ask applicants for
additional studies as most of the time Staff can review the site, the project design and the product, and
review the other development standards in order to make a determination.
Commissioner L'Heureux asked if the property owner will have to find another site in the Village to make
up the difference in units if the minimum is not reached. Mr. Neu stated that the requirement has not
been implemented in that strict of a manner. State law requires that you show that by reducing the
density on a particular property that there are adequate sites elsewhere in the city to make up the
difference. The City has relied heavily on the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank, in that any particular residential
or non-residential site can request dwelling units and through the density increase process or
redesignation to residential could conceivably be allocated units. One of the issues that the city is
running up against with the update to the General Plan is that there are more people asking for units than
the City has dwelling units with the Growth Management caps. Practically speaking there does not seem
to be an insurmountable problem right now. It is more of an issue being able to accommodate housing
when the demand is higher for attached product Mr. Neu further stated that to date the City has not
asked a developer to go out and Identify a specific site. If the City gets closer to running out of available
sites, then Staff might take a harder line at some point in the future. Commissioner L'Heureux asked if it
is possible that as there are fewer units in the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank that projects are denied
because enough units are not being proposed. Mr. Neu stated he supposed that could be possible
however that the city is a ways from that in terms of available land left in the city. He stated that some
level of review is necessary so that the City is not abandoning the idea that the minimum is the target and
that there is flexibility to go below the minimum but Staff would want to make sure that there is rationale to
make the finding to go below the minimum. Commissioner L'Heureux asked if that by adopting the
language it does not require a certain product type, any price cap or any requirement that low income
housing be constructed. Mr. Neu stated that the requirement for income restricted housing is as it is
today in the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. As the housing program has been administered, there are
options for onsite or offsite housing, and there are quite a few options for specific sites.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Nygaard stated that no one wants to see increased density anywhere but that is not the
vision of the State. She stated that it is very important for the City to have a certified Housing Element. If
the City does not have a certified housing element, the City would have a huge amount of problems. She
feels that density does belong around transportation centers such as in the Village. The densities have
already been approved by City Council, however it is important for the Council to hear the Commission's
concerns regarding how difficult these densities will be to achieve.
Commissioner Arnold stated that he knows the Commission is mainly being asked to give a
stamp of approval onto something the City Council has already authorized, a zoning increase or a
density increase, but in light of that, the Commission's vate is basically very symbolic. His
symbolic vote is going to be no because he believes that there are too many problems that the
City has to look at. The City wants to encourage mixed use and here the City is holding people
who want to build a restaurant and maybe a boutique to the same standards as a purely
residential building. Also, down the road it could cause the City to question a development
because the City is not hitting these very high minimum units that are being set with this action.
Planning Commission Minutes September 5,2012 Page 5
What the Commission is doing, in essence, by approving this is making it more difficult for private
developers to do something that makes sense to them with their property. He understands that
the state is breathing down the city's back and the City does have a lot of requirements that have
to be met there but he believes this is the wrong thing to do so he is not going to support this
proposal.
Commissioner L'Heureux stated that this is a situation where reality is bumping up against concepts. It
bothers him that the City has arbitrarily taken the areas in the Village and applied the density numbers,
particularly in Area 9. He stated he is concerned about the unintended consequences, and he
understands the dilemma the City is in regarding the housing element. Commissioner L'Heureux will vote
to approve the changes but encouraged staff to look at Area 9 where it surrounds the transit station.
Commissioner Scully stated she has voiced her opinion on the Housing Element many times on many
different occasions. She concurs with her fellow Commissioners in that the project will create issues
further down the road. Commissioner Scully stated she will not approve this item particularly for Areas 1-
4. It is not what is right for Carlsbad.
Commissioner Black stated that the density increase has been thrown at the City. If the units do not go in
the Village, then the units would need to go elsewhere in the City. He feels that the increased density in
the Village is appropriate and he can support the project
Chairperson Schumacher stated that the numbers have already been established, however through the
implementation of the policy it could backfire and discourage development. He would like to have
language added that is more assertive in acknowledging that densities may need to be transferred.
Applicants need to be aware that the City will work with them to help achieve the densities.
Commissioner Nygaard agreed that language should be added to the resolution. Ms. Mobaldi suggested
proposed language stating that projects proposed at less than minimum density may be considered if
findings can be made in accordance with the Government Code. That acknowledges that a project can
be proposed that is below the minimum density, and it also acknowledges the state law which mandates
that certain findings be made to approve a lower density. Commissioner Scully stated she would support
the additional language as long as it was very clear that applicants had options.
Commissioner L'Heureux asked if the city attorney had the particular Government Code section. Ms.
Mobaldi stated she could provide the correct code section later. The code section she is referring to
provides that if a project is approved below the minimum density, then the Council or the decision making
body, has to make a finding that those units which were not built can be built somewhere else in the City
so there no net loss of density. Commissioner L'Heureux stated he wanted to make sure that was
citywide and not specifically in the Village. Ms. Mobaldi stated it would not be limited to the Village.
Mr. Neu added that the issue which makes it difficult in terms of getting the city's Housing Element
certified is that if there is too much flexibility, then the state looks at it as if it is not really a standard the
city is trying to meet. There is a minimum density that the state considers as providing housing that is at
more affordable levels. Mr. Neu stated that the City has built in a fair amount of flexibility but it still has to
be meaningful enough that the State will look at it and believe that there will be enough units produced
around that density level to achieve the target Ms. Mobaldi stated that an excerpt from the City of
Carlsbad Village Master Plan and Design Manual already includes those findings found in Government
Code 65863, which provides that the City has to find that the reduction in density is consistent with the
adopted General Plan including the Housing Element and secondly that the remaining sites identified in
the Housing Element are adequate to accommodate the City's share of the Regional Housing Need
pursuant to Government Code Section 65584. Ms. Mobaldi stated the City would have to show sites in
the city where the required density can be accommodated.
Chairperson Schumacher asked if there are properties available to accommodate units if a project was
proposed and it is, for example, ten units below the minimum density. Ms. Mobaldi stated that at this
stage in time, there is enough land left in the city that is vacant or is underutilized to accommodate
additional units; however it is a constantly evolving state of affairs and at some point in time, it may
change. Chairperson Schumacher asked if the additional language could be crafted to encourage mixed
use as opposed to specifically trying to meet the Regional Housing Needs Assessment numbers. Ms.
Planning Commission Minutes September 5,2012 Page 6
Mobaldi stated that in terms of mixed use, the Village Master Plan and Design Manual already has
language encouraging mixed use development along with other development guidelines. The
Commission has not seen many of those projects because the Design Review Board used to review
projects in the Village until fairly recently. In terms of the density numbers the City has to have language
that satisfies the city's commitments with regard to Housing Element Program 2.1.
Commissioner Scully asked if the additional language is not being proposed now. Chairperson
Schumacher stated the language is already included in the Village Master Plan and Design Manual. Mr.
Donnell pointed out that the language is also included in the staff report as Exhibit A.
Chairperson Schumacher asked Mr. Donnell if there would be an ability to accommodate the units in the
Village from projects that could meet the minimum density. Mr. Donnell stated because projects in the
Village tend to be smaller, he believes the potential is greater to accommodate units in the Village for
projects that might not meet the minimum density because of redevelopment opportunities. In the
Housing Element there are a number of parcels which show underutilization and the potential to
redevelop.
Commissioner Black commented that everything gets shifted and asked what happens to all of the
reserve units at the end. Mr. Neu stated that in the end there should not be just one project responsible
for a large number of units. Every housing element the city goes through the Regional Housing Needs
Allocation (RHNA), each jurisdiction in the county is given a number of units based on what SANDAG
deems an available amount of land amongst other things. SANDAG has other objectives with the RHNA
in that each jurisdiction is providing its fair share of lower income housing. There are jurisdictions in the
county that have more than the county average of lower income housing which is 40%. Carlsbad is one
of four jurisdictions that has less than the average amount. Mr. Neu further stated that either as a region
the county can accept a lower number or the region will keep getting numbers that are larger and the
jurisdictions will be asked to increase the densities in the built areas of the community. As a region,
generally speaking, there is an effort to put more development in the coastal areas or the more developed
parts of the county as opposed to the eastern parts of the county. Mr. Neu stated that what staff foresees
in a future housing element cycle is that the city may reach a point where it is right up against the growth
management dwelling unit cap.
Chairperson Schumacher hopes staff continues to help applicants with their projects in the Village area.
He stated he can support the project
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Black, and duly seconded, that the Planning Commission
adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 6905 recommending that MP 12-
01/LCPA 95-10(C) is within the scope of the Mitigated Negative Declaration
previously adopted for the 2005-2010 Housing Element (GPA 03-02) and
recommending approval of MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C) based on the findings
contained therein.
VOTE: 5-1-1
AYES: Chairperson Schumacher, Commissioner Black, Commissioner L'Heureux,
Commissioner Nygaard and Commissioner Scully
NOES: Commissioner Arnold
ABSENT: Commissioner Siekmann
ABSTAIN: None
Chairperson Schumacher closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 1 and thanked Staff for their
presentations.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
None.
<A1
City of Carlsbad
Village Area Land Use Districts
EXHIBIT 6
Scott Donnell
From: Bridget Desmarals on behalf of Planning
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 3:06 PM
To: Scott Donnell
Subject: FW: zoning
From: paul ine wrotkowski rmailto:pwrotkowski@yahoo.coml
Sent: Tuesday, September 11, 2012 2:43 PM
To: Planning
Subject: zoning
To Planning Commision,
I live in downtown Carlsbad for 23 years and I love it. I agree that State st. need improvment and development.
Those auto repear, tune up and the other stores don'.t belong to the beach area but low income hausing? those
will bring crime and drug activities to this area. Better build some senior citizen hausing and nice
condominiums. Also increasing density so high is bad idea. Planning people and developers don't live in 3
story low income hausing. Maybe they will try how it is. How about parking? Its very bad already. I know they
will built under ground parking. Also low income people won't bring busines to dowtown area, they cannot
affort it. They shop in Walmart if they can affort anyway.
I want the city of Carlsbad to do something with the ghost hause on the comer of Jefferson and Arbucle Circle.
This hause is a fire hazard and a shame to Carlsbad. Weeds are overgrown, is dirty and ugly.
Please take my remarks under your consideration and dont build low income hausing in downown. Police have
already full hands to fight crime. Thank you. Paulina Wrotkowski
0^
NQTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Counci^ham 120O
Carlsbad Village Drive, Carisbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, to consider
approval of (1) an amendment to the Village Master Plan and Design Manual and Local Coastal
Program to implement part of Program 2.1 of the 2005-2010 Housing Element, and (2) that the
amendment is within the scope of the Mitigated Negative Declaration previously adopted for the
2005-2010 Housing Element. The amendment would raise the minimum density of each
Village Master Plan and Design Manual land use district.
Whereas on September 5, 2012 the City of Carisbad Planning Commission voted 5-1-1 to
recommend (1) approval of an amendment to the Village Master Plan and Design Manual and
Local Coastal Program to implement part of Program 2.1 of the 2005-2010 Housing Element,
and (2) that the amendment is within the scope of the Mitigated Negative Declaration previously
adopted forthe 2005-2010 Housing Element.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordiallyinvite^o attend the public
hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after WKKttm-1 no^«\V"^
questions, please contact Scott Donnell in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4618 or
scott.donneipcarisbadca.qov.
If you challenge the Master Plan 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 Carisbad, Attn:
City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carisbad Village Drive, Carisbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public
hearing.
CASE FILE: MP 12-01/LCPA 95-10(C)
CASE NAME: VILLAGE MINIMUM DENSITIES
PUBLISH:
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
Easy Peel® li^eli
Use Avery® Template 5160®
CARLSBAD UNIF SCHOOL DIST
6225 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92011
•
Feed Paper
Bend along line to
expose Pop-Up Edge^
SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DISTRICT
STE 250
255 PICO AVE
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
MVCI'fY^ 5160'"'
ENCINITAS SCHOOL DISTRICT
101 RANCHO SANTA FE RD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
SAN DIEGUITO SCHOOL DISTRICT
710 ENCINITAS BLVD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
LEUCADIA WASTE WATER DIST
TIM JOCHEN
1960 LA COSTA AVE
CARLSBAD CA 92009
OLIVENHAIN WATER DISTRICT
1966 OLIVENHAIN RD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF ENCINITAS
505 S VULCAN AV
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
200 CIVIC CENTER DR
VISTA CA 92084
VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT
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
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPT OF FISH AND GAME
3883 RUFFIN ROAD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
SAN DIEGO LAFCO
STE 200
9335 HAZARD WAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE
6010 HIDDEN VALLEY RD
CARLSBAD CA 92011
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY
STE 100"
9174 SKY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-4340
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
10124 OLD GROVE RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92131
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
ATTN KANANI BROWN
STE 103
7575 METROPOLITAN DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
SD COUNTY PLANNING
STEB
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
SANDAG
STE 800
401 B STREET
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
SAN DIEGO COUNTY AIRPORT
AUTHORITY
PO BOX 82776
SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776
CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF
COMMERCE
5934 PRIESTLEY DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
LUCINDA AND THOMAS VIGNE
3880 HIBISCUS CIRCLE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLIC WORKS/ENGINEERING
DEPT- PROJECT ENGINEER
CITY OF CARLSBAD
PROJECT PLANNER
MICHAEL MCSWEENEY - BIASD
STE 110
9201 SPECTRUM CENTER BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1407
Etiquettes faciles h peler
UtIlisez le qabarit AVERY® 5160® Sens
fharaement
Repliez k la hachure afin de j
rtv6ler le rebord Pop-UpT«« J
www.avery.com
1-800-GO-AVHRY
Easy Peel® S^bels
Use Avery® Template 5160®
Bend along line to {
expose Pop-Up Edge^** AVERY® 5160®
BARONA GROU P OF THE CAPITAN
GRANDE
EDWIN ROMERO, CHAIRPERSON
1095 BARONA RD
LAKESIDE CA 92040
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
STE 103
7575 METROPOLITAN DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
2800 COTTAGE WAY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
CA DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 11 - DIVISION OF
PLANNING/DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
4050 TAYLOR STREET, MS-240
SAN DIEGO CA 92110
BUSINESS, TRANS & HSG AGENCY
STE 2450
980 NINTH ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
CANNEL ISLANDS NATL PARK
SUPERINTENDENTS OFFICE
1901 SPINNAKER DR
SAN GUENA VENTURA CA 93001
CITY OF ENCINITAS
505 S VULCAN AV
ENCINITAS CA 92024
COASTAL CONSERVANCY
STE 1100
1330 BROADWAY
OAKLAND CA 94612
COUNTY OF SD
SUPERVISOR
RM335
1600 PACIFIC
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
DEPT OF DEFENSE
LOS ANGELES DIST ENG
POBOX 2711
LOS ANGELES CA 90053
DEPT OF ENERGY
STE 400
611 RYAN PLZDR
ARLINGTON TX 760114005
DEPT OF FISH & GAME
ENV SERV DIV
POBOX 944246
SACRAMENTO CA 942442460
DEPT OF FOOD & AGRICULTURE
AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES
RM100
1220 N ST
SACRAMENTO CA 95814
DEPT OF FORESTRY
ENV COORD
POBOX 944246
SACRAMENTO CA 942442460
DEPT OF HOUSING & URBAN DEV
REGION IX
ENVIRONMENTAL OFFICER
611 WEST SIXTH ST, STE. 811
LOS ANGELES CA 90017
DEPT OF JUSTICE
DEPT OF ATTY GEN
RM 700
110 WEST A ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
MARINE RESOURCES REG DR & G
ENV SERVICES SPR
STEJ
4665 UMPSON AVE
LOSAUMITOSCA 907205139
FED AVIATION ADMIN WESTERN REG
POBOX 92007
LOS ANGELES CA
OFF OF PLANNING & RESEARCH
OFF OF LOCAL GOV AFFAIRS
POBOX 3044
SACRAMENTO CA 958123044
FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY
COMMISSION
1001ST ST., STE 2300
SAN FRANCISCO CA 941053084
SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERV & DEV
COM
STE 2600
50 CALIFORNIA ST
SAN FRANCISCO CA 941114704
SANDAG
EXEC DIRECTOR
STE 800
1STINTLPLZ401 EST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
SD COUNTY
PU\NNING & LAND USE DEPT
STE B-5
5201 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
SDGE
8315 CENTURY PARK CT
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
STATE LANDS COMMISSION
STE 1005
100 HOWE AV
SACRAMENTO CA 958258202
US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEER
1455 MARKET ST FL17
SAN FRANCISCO CA 94103
US BUREAU OF U\ND MGMT
STE RM W
2800 COTTAGE WY
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
US BUREAU OF RECLAMATION
27708 JEFFERSON AVE, STE 202
TEMECULA CA 92590
US FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICES
2800 COTTAGE WAY
STE W-2605
SACRAMENTO CA 95825
USDA RURAL DEVELOPMENT
DEPT 4169
430 G ST
DAVIS CA 95606
Itiquettes faciles h peler
UtIlisez te qabarit AVERY® 51
•
Sens de
charaement
Repliez h la hachure afin de {
r^v^ler le rebord Pop-U ,?'** !
www.avery.com
1-800-GO-AVERY
Easy P«er4.abel5 I k —• Bend along line to j j-iir e.r,rir^ «5t«o» • Use Avery® Template 5160® j Feed Paper - expose Pop-Up Edge™ j \^ cif Sl^Qw j
WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD
POBOX 100
SACRAMENTO CA 95801
itiquettes fadles ^ peler | 5-^. Ha Repliez 4 la hachure afin de | ww^avery^jsm ;
Utilisez le qabarit AVERY® 5160® ! °r_x r6v6ier ie r»hovd POO-UHTM I 1 jMin-<;n-AVFnv •
Village Minimum Densities
Scott Donnell
November 27, 2012
Proposed Amendment
•Implements adopted Housing Element
•Affects Village Master Plan & Design Manual
•Complies with prior environmental review
Proposed Amendment
•Raises minimum residential densities
•Affects all land use districts
•Encourages lot consolidation
PACIFIC
OCEAN
PINE
ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
BUENA VISTA
LAGOON
ResidentialSupport
CarlsbadVillage
Center
FreewayCommercialSupport
Hispanic
Mixed UseSupport
OfficeSupport
ServiceCommercial
Support
Tourism
Support
1
9
84 7
3
2
6
5
CARL
S
B
A
D
VI
L
L
A
G
E
D
R
CARLSBAD BLBEEC
H
A
V
OAK A
V
LAGUNA DR
MAGNOLIA AV
H
O
P
E
A
V
CHES
T
N
U
T
A
V
C H E S T N U T A V HAR
D
ING
S
T
DAVIS PL
PI
O PI
CO DRBASSWOOD AV
CHRIS
TI
A
N
S
E
N
W
Y
WALN
U
T
A
V
PALM
A
V
S
T
A
T
E
S
T
OAK
A
V
WALN
U
T
A
VWA
SH
I
N
G
TO
N
S
TOC
E
A
N
S
T
HOME
A
V
C A M E L L IA P L
AVOCA
D
O
L
NELMWOOD STPACIFI
C
A
V
WAS
H
I
NG
TO
N
S
T
LINCO
L
N
S
T ROOS
E
V
E
L
T
S
T MA
D
I
S
O
N
S
T
T
Y
L
E
R
S
T
G
A
R
F
IE
LD
S
T
STRATFORD LN
LAGUNA DR
MA
D
I
SON
S
T
PINE
A
V
EUREKA PLOAK
A
V
J
E
F
F
ER
S
O
N
S
T
OCEAN S T
Village Area Land Use Districts
600 0 Feet
J:\Requests2010Plus\ComEconDev\Planning\4850972_12
C i t y o f C a r l s b a d
Proposed Minimum Densities
Village Land
Use Districts
Minimum Density
(units/acre)
Maximum Density
(units/acre)
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
1-4 15 28 35 No change
5-9 15 18 23 No change
*For Mixed Use projects, density based on 50% of lot area
Proposed Lot Merger Statement
•Encourages consolidation of small parcels
•Indicates city assistance in identifying
potential sites
Consistency with Standards
•General Plan
•Village Master Plan and Design Manual
•Local Coastal Program
City Council adopt Resolution No. 2012-261,
approving amendments to the Village Master Plan
and Design Manual (MP 12-01) and the Local
Coastal Program (LCPA 95-10(C)
Recommendation