HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-01-10; City Council; ; Amend Zoning Ordinance Chapter 21.86 (Residential Density Bonus and Incentives or Concessions) to be consistent with state law. Project Name: Density Bonus Amendment Proj~ CITY COUNCIL
• Staff Report
Meeting Date:
To:
From:
Staff Contact:
January 10, 2017
Mayor and City Council
Kevin Crawford, City Manage~
Carl Stiehl, Associate Planner
carl.stiehl@carlsbadca.gov or 760-602-4605
CA Review ~
Subject: Amend Zoning Ordinance Chapter 21.86 (Residential Density Bonus and
Incentives or Concessions) to be consistent with state law.
Project Name: Density Bonus Amendment
Project No.: ZCA i6-02/LCPA 16-01
Recommended Action
Hold a public hearing and introduce an ordinance approving an amendment to the Zoning
Ordinance (ZCA 16-02)/Local Coastal Program (LCPA 16-01) to make the city's regulation of
residential density bonuses consistent with state law.
Executive Summary
This project is a city-initiated amendment to the Zoning Ordinance/Local Coastal Program. The
Zoning Ordinance is a component of the city's Local Coastal Program, and therefore, an
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance also constitutes an amendment of the Local Coastal
Program. The purpose of the amendments is to make the city's density bonus regulations
consistent with state law. The proposed amendments consist of reducing parking requirements
for certain types of residential projects. Review and approval of the amendments by the
California Coastal Commission is necessary after City Council action.
Discussion
In 2015, the state legislature passed Assembly Bill 744, which made changes to density bonus law
by reducing parking requirements for specific types of residential projects. The purpose of
Assembly Bill 744 was to align local land use decisions more closely with the goals of Assembly
Bill 32 and Senate Bill 375 (to reduce greenhouse gas emissions) by reducing the parking required
for residential projects that are close to public transit centers and serve individuals who have
fewer cars.
The approval of this item will ensure that the city's density bonus regulations are consistent with
the new changes in state law. Additional discussion and analysis of the proposed amendments
is provided in the Planning Commission Staff Report (Exhibit 3).
On September 21, 2016, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing and considered
the proposed amendments; the commission voted to recommend -approval (5-1-1, with
Commissioner Anderson voting no and Commissioner Montgomery absent) of the Zoning
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 1 of 27
Ordinance/Local Coastal Program amendment. There was one public speaker, a resident of
Carlsbad, who spoke in favor of the proposed amendments.
Fiscal Analysis
There is no anticipated fiscal impact.
Next Steps
Staff will submit an application for a Local Coastal Program amendment to the California Coastal
Commission following City Council approval of the Zoning Ordinance/Local Coastal Program
amendment (ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01). The amendments will not become effective until the
California Coastal Commission approves the Local Coastal Program amendment (LCPA 16-01).
Environmental Evaluation (CEQA)
The proposed amendments are exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Section
15061(b)(3), which exempts projects "where it can be seen with certainty that there is no
possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment." The
changes to the Zoning Ordinance proposed by this project are to implement state density bonus
law parking development standards adopted by the state legislature that were effective in state
law at the beginning of 2016. A development project may already invoke the reduced parking
standards in the law; the city is merely revising the standards in our Zoning Ordinance to be
consistent with the updated state law. The proposed changes are not substantial as they
implement state law development standards which may already be applied to projects;
therefore, the project will not result in a significant effect on the environment and is not subject
to CEQA. A Notice of Exemption will be filed.
Public Notification
Information regarding public notifications of this item such as mailings, public hearing notices
posted in the newspaper and on the city website are available in the Office of the City Clerk.
Exhibits
1. An ordinance approving an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance (ZCA 16-02)/Local Coastal
Program (LCPA 16-01)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7198
3. Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 21, 2016
4. Planning Commission Minutes dated September 21, 2016
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 2 of 27
ORDINANCE NO. CS-311
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 21 (ZONING
ORDINANCE) TO MAKE THE CITY'S DENSITY BONUS REGULATIONS
CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.
CASE NAME:
CASE NO.:
DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT
ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01
EXHIBIT 1
WHEREAS, the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance is the implementing ordinance of the Carlsbad Local
Coastal Program, and therefore, an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance also constitutes an
amendment to the Local Coastal Program; and
WHEREAS, the City Planner has prepared a Zoning Ordinance Amendment (ZCA 16-02)/Local
Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA 16-01} pursuant to Section 21.52.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code, Section 30514 of the Public Resources Code, and Section 13551 of California Code of Regulations
Title 14, Division 5; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to California Coastal Commission Regulations, a six-week public review
period for the Local Coastal Program Amendment began on August 26, 2016 and ended on October 7,
2016;and
WHEREAS, on September 21, 2016, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing
as prescribed by law to consider ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 7198
recommending to the City Council that ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01 be approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad held a duly noticed public hearing as
prescribed by law to consider the ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01; and
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, including written public
comments, if any, related to ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01; and
WHEREAS, the findings of the Planning Commission in Resolution No. 7198 constitute the
findings of the City Council in this matter.
NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, ordains as
follows:
1. That Section 21.86.090 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended to read as follows:
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 3 of 27
21.86.090 Density bonus housing standards.
A. Required target dwelling units shall be constructed concurrent with market-rate
dwelling units unless both the final decision-making authority of the city and the developer/applicant
agree within the density bonus housing agreement to an alternative schedule for development.
B. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units and density bonus dwelling units should be
built on-site (within the boundary of the proposed development} and, whenever reasonably possible,
be distributed throughout the project site.
C. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units should be located on sites that are in proximity
to, or will provide access to, employment opportunities, urban services, or major roads or other
transportation and commuter rail facilities (i.e., freeways, bus lines} and that are compatible with
adjacent land uses.
D. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units should vary in size and number of bedrooms,
in response to affordable housing demand priorities of the city.
E. Density bonus projects shall comply with all applicable development standards, except
those which may be modified as an incentive or concession, or as otherwise provided for in this chapter.
In addition, all units must conform to the requirements of the applicable building and housing codes.
The design of the target dwelling units shall be reasonably consistent or compatible with the design of
the total project development in terms of appearance, materials and finished quality.
F. No building permit shall be issued, nor any development approval granted, for a
development which does not meet the requirements of this chapter. No target dwelling unit shall be
rented or sold except in accordance with this chapter.
G. Upon the request of the applicant, the parking ratio (inclusive of handicap and guest
parking} for a housing development that conforms to the requirements of Section 21.86.040(A} of this
chapter shall not exceed the ratios specified in Table E or as noted, below. If the applicant does not
request the parking ratios specified in this section or the project does not conform to the requirements
of Section 21.86.040(A} of this chapter, the parking standards specified in Chapter 21.44 of this code
shall apply.
1. If a development includes the maximum percentage of low-or very low income
units provided for in Section 21.86.040(A} and is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as
defined in the state Public Resources Code (subdivision (b} of Section 21155}, and there is unobstructed
access to the major transit stop from the development, then, upon the request of the developer, the
city shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, that exceeds
0.5 spaces per bedroom. For purposes of this subsection, a development shall have unobstructed
access to a major transit stop if a resident is able to access the major transit stop without encountering
natural or constructed impediments.
2. If a development consists solely of rental units, exclusive of a manager's unit or
units, with an affordable housing cost to lower income families, as p~ovided in state Health and Safety
Code (section 50052.5}, then, upon the request of the developer, the city shall not impose a vehicular
parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, that exceeds the following ratios:
a. If the development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop,
as defined in state Public Resources Code (subdivision (b} of Section 21155), and there is unobstructed
access to the major transit stop from the development, the ratio shall not exceed 0.5 spaces per unit.
b. If the development is a for-rent housing development for individuals who
are 62 years of age or older that complies with state Civil Code (sections 51.2 and 51.3}, the ratio shall
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 4 of 27
not exceed 0.5 spaces per unit. The development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed
access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
c. If the development is a special needs housing development, as defined in
state Health and Safety Code (section 51312), the ratio shall not exceed 0.3 spaces per unit. The
development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed
bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
3. If the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other than a
whole number, the number shall be rounded down to the next whole number.
4. For purposes of this section, a housing development may provide "on-site"
parking through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through on-street parking.
5. The applicant may request parking incentives or concessions beyond those
provided in this section, subject to the findings specified in Section 21.86.050(A)(2) of this chapter.
6. Notwithstanding subsections G.1 and G.2 of this section, if the city or an
independent consultant has conducted an area-wide or jurisdiction-wide parking study in the last seven
years, then the city may impose a higher vehicular parking ratio not to exceed the ratio described in
Table E, based upon substantial evidence found in the parking study, that includes, but is not limited
to, an analysis of parking availability, differing levels of transit access, walkability access to transit
services, the potential for shared parking, the effect of parking requirements on the cost of market-
rate and subsidized developments, and the lower rates of car ownership for low-and very low income
individuals, including seniors and special needs individuals. The city shall pay the costs of any new
study. The city shall make findings, based on a parking study completed in conformity with this
paragraph, supporting the need for the higher parking ratio.
Table E
Parking Ratio for Housing Developments
Dwelling Unit Size On-Site Parking Ratio
0-1 bedrooms 1 space per unit
2-3 bedrooms 2 spaces per unit
4 or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption; and the City
Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and cause the full text of the ordinance or a summary
of the ordinance prepared by the City Attorney to be published at least once in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City of Carlsbad within fifteen days after its adoption. (Notwithstanding the preceding,
this ordinance shall not be effective until LCPA 16-01 is approved by the California Coastal Commission.)
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 5 of 27
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a Regular Meeting of the Carlsbad City Council on the __
day of , 2017, and thereafter
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the ___ day of _____ ~ 2017, by the following vote, to wit:
AVES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
CELIA A. BREWER, City Attorney
MATT HALL, Mayor
BARBARA ENGLESON, City Clerk
(SEAL)
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 6 of 27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Exhibit 2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7198
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A ZONING
ORDINANCE AMENDMENT AND A LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM
AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE TO MAKE THE
CITY'S DENSITY BONUS REGULATIONS CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW.
CASE NAME: DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT
CASE NO: ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01
WHEREAS, the City Planner has prepared a proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment
pursuant to Section 21.52.020 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to: amend the city's Zoning Ordinance to
make the city's density bonus regulations consistent with state law; and
WHEREAS, the City Planner has prepared a Local Coastal Program Amendment, as
provided in Public Resources Code Section 30514 and Section 13551 of California Code of Regulations Title
14, Division 5.5; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Local Coastal Program
Amendment are set forth in the draft City Council Ordinance, Exhibit "A" dated September 21, 2016, and
attached hereto DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT -ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01; and
WHEREAS, State Coastal Guidelines requires a six-week public review period for any
amendment to the Local Coastal Program; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on September 21, 2016, hold a duly noticed
public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request for a proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment
and Local Coastal Program Amendment; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factors relating to
the Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment.
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.
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 7 of 27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
B)
C)
At the end of the state-mandated six-week review period for the Local Coastal Program
Amendment, starting on August 23, 2016 and ending on October 4, 2016 staff shall
present to the City Council a summary of the comments received.
That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT-ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01,
based on the following findings:
Findings:
1.
2.
3.
4.
That the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment ZCA 16-02 is consistent with the General Plan
in that the proposed amendments implement General Plan Housing Element Program 3.3,
which requires the city to ensure consistency with state density bonus law. The amendments
are also consistent with the Mobility Element Goal 3-G.4 to "manage parking to support all
modes of transportation and en.sure efficient use of land." Furthermore, the amendments do
not conflict with any other goal, objective, or policy of the General Plan.
Tha~ the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment reflects sound principles of good planning.
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 of the
Carlsbad Local Coastal Program not being amended by this amendment, in that the amendments
ensure consistency with the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance and state density bonus law, and does
not conflict with any coastal zone regulations, land u~e designations or policies, with which
development must comply.
That the proposed amendment to the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program is required to bring it into
consistency with the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment {ZCA 16-02).
PC RESO NO. 7198 -2-
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 8 of 27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City
of Carlsbad, held on September 21, 2016, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Black, Goyarts, L'Heureux, Segall and Siekmann
NOES: Chairperson Anderson
ABSENT: Commissioner Montgomery
ABSTAIN:
VELYN ANDERSON, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
12 Ata:Th
13 DON NEU
City Planner
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 PC RESO NO. 7198 -3-Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 9 of 27
as follows:
ORDINANCE NO.
Exhibit A
September 21, 2016
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE TO
MAKE THE CITY'S REGULATION OF DENSITY BONUSES CONSISTENT WITH
STATE LAW.
CASE NAME:
CASE NO.:
DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT
ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, ordains as follows:
SECTION 1: That Section 21.86.090 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended to read
21.86.090 Density bonus housing standards.
A. Required target dwelling units shall be constructed concurrent with market-rate
dwelling units unless both the final decision-making authority of the city and the developer/applicant
agree within the density bonus housing agreement to an alternative schedule for development.
B. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units and density bonus dwelling units should be
built on-site (within the boundary of the proposed development) and, whenever reasonably possible,
be distributed throughout the project site.
C. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units should be located on sites that are in proximity
to, or will provide access to, employment opportunities, urban services, or major roads or other
transportation and commuter rail facilities (i.e., freeways, bus lines) and that are compatible with
adjacent land uses.
D. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units should vary in size and number of bedrooms,
in response to affordable housing demand priorities of the city.
E. Density bonus projects shall comply with all applicable development standards, except
those which may be modified as an incentive or concession, or as otherwise provided for in this chapter.
In addition, all units must conform to the requirements of the applicable building and housing codes.
The design of the target dwelling units shall be reasonably consistent or compatible with the design of
the total project development in terms of appearance, materials and finished quality.
F. No building permit shall be issued, nor any development approval granted, for a
development which does not meet the requirements of this chapter. No target dwelling unit shall be
rented or sold except in accordance with this chapter.
G. Upon the request of the applicant, the parking ratio (inclusive of handicap and guest
parking) for a housing development that conforms to the requirements of Section 21.86.040(A) of this
chapter shall not exceed the ratios specified in Table E or as noted, below. If the applicant does not
request the parking ratios specified in this section or the project does not conform to the requirements
of Section 21.86.040(A) of this chapter, the parking standards specified in Chapter 21.44 of this code
shall apply.
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 10 of 27
Exhibit A
September 21, 2016
1. If a development includes the maximum percentage of low-or very low income units
provided for in Section 21.86.040{A) and is located within one'-half mile of a major transit stop, as
defined in the state Public Resources Code (subdivision (b) of Section 21155}, and there is unobstructed
access to the major transit stop from the development, then, upon the request of the developer, the
city shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, that exceeds
0.5 spaces per bedroom. For purposes of this subsection, a development shall have unobstructed
access to a major transit stop if a resident is able to access the major transit stop without encountering
natural or constructed impediments.
2. If a development consists solely of rental units, exclusive of a manager's unit or units,
with an affordable housing cost to lower income families, as provided in state Health and Safety Code
(section 50052.5), then, upon the request of the developer, the city shall not impose a vehicular parking
ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking, that exceeds the following ratios:
a. If the development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as
defined in state Public Resources Code (subdivision {b) of Section 21155), and there is unobstructed
access to the major transit stop from the development, the ratio shall not exceed 0.5 spaces per unit.
b. If the development is a for-rent housing development for individuals who are 62
years of age or older that complies with state Civil Code (sections 51.2 and 51.3), the ratio shall not
exceed 0.5 spaces per unit. The development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed
access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight times per day.
c. If the development is a special needs housing development, as defined in state
Health and Safety Code (section 51312), the ratio shall not exceed 0.3 spaces per unit. The development
shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route
service that operates at least eight times per day.
3. If the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other than a whole
number, the number shall be rounded down to the next whole number.
4. For purposes of this section,· a housing development may provide "on-site" parking
through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through on-street parking.
5. The applicant may request parking incentives or concessions beyond those provided in
this section, subject to the findings specified in Section 21.86.050{A)(2) of this chapter.
6. Notwithstanding subsections G.1 and G.2 of this section, if the city or an independent
consultant has conducted an area-wide or jurisdiction-wide parking study in the last seven years, then
the city may impose a higher vehicular parking ratio not to exceed the ratio described in Table E, based
upon substantial evidence found in the parking study, that includes, but is not limited to, an analysis of
parking availability, differing levels of transit access, walkability access to transit services, the potential
for shared parking, the effect of parking requirements on the cost of market-rate and subsidized
developments, and the lower rates of car ownership for low-and very low income individuals, including
seniors and special needs individuals. The city shall pay the costs of any new study. The city shall make
findings, based on a parking study completed in conformity with this paragraph, supporting the need
for the higher parking ratio.
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 11 of 27
Table E
Exhibit A
September 21, 2016
Parking Ratio for Housing Developments
Dwelling Unit Size On-Site Parking Ratio
0-1 bedrooms 1 space per unit
2-3 bedrooms 2 spaces per unit
4 or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption; and the City
Clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and cause the full text of the ordinance or a summary
of the ordinance prepared by the City Attorney to be published at least once in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City of Carlsbad within fifteen days after its adoption. (Notwithstanding the preceding,
this ordinance shall not be effective until approved by the California Coastal Commission.)
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a Regular Meeting of the Carlsbad City Council on the __ _
day of 2016, and thereafter
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 12 of 27
Exhibit A
September 21, 2016
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the ___ day of ______ _, 2016, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:
CELIA A. BREWER, City Attorney
MATT HALL, Mayor
BARBARA ENGLESON, City Clerk
(SEAL)
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 13 of 27
Exhibit 3
The City of Carlsbad Planning Division
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
P.C. AGENDA OF: September 21, 2016
ltemNo. G)
Application complete date: N/A
Project Planner: Carl Stiehl
Project Engineer: N/A
SUBJECT: ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01 DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT - A request for recommendation
of approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment
to amend the city's Zoning Ordinance to make the city's regulation of density bonuses
consistent with state law.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7198 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL cif ZCA 16-02 and LCPA 16-01 based on the findings contained therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
This project is a city-initiated Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment
consisting of amendments to the text of the Zoning Ordinance. With regard to the Local Coastal Program
{LCP), the Zoning Ordinance is the LCP implementing ordinance; therefore an LCP amendment is
necessary. However, no portion of the LCP land use plan document is proposed to be amended.
Since the city last updated its density bonus ordinance in 2015, the governor signed into law California
State Legislative Assembly Bill 744 {Chau) related to parking ratios in density bonus law. The purpose of
AB 744 was to align local land use decisions more closely with the goals of AB 32 and SB 375 (to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions) by reducing the parking required for projects that are close to transit and serve
individuals who have fewer cars. In many cases existing parking requirements are based cin low-density
and single-purpose land use designations. Parking is costly to build and maintain and can increase the
cost of projects in existing development areas. The purpose of the proposed amendments to the city's
Zoning Ordinance and LCP is to ensure the city's density bonus regulations are consistent with recent
changes to state law.
Ill. ANALYSIS
The proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are provided in strikethrough/underline format
(Attachment 2) and are summarized and analyzed as follows:
A. Summary and Analysis of Changes to Maintain Consistency with Assembly Bill 744 (Chau):
Assembly Bill 744 requires the following parking ratios for residential projects thatrequest a density bonus
per the city's density bonus ordinance:
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 14 of 27
ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01-DENSITY BONUS REGULATIONS
September 21, 2016
Page 2
1. If a development includes the maximum percentage of low or very low income units and is located
within one-half mile of a major transit stop (as defined in state law) then upon request the city
shall not impose a parking ratio of more than 0.5 parking spaces per bedroom.
2. If a development consists solely of rental units to lower income families, then upon request, the
city shall not impose the following parking ratios summarized:
a. If located within one-half mile of a major transit stop the ratio shall not exceed 0.5 spaces
per unit.
b. If the development is for-rent housing for seniors who are 62 years of age or older, and is
served by paratransit or transit (as specified) then the ratio shall not exceed 0.5 spaces
per unit.
c. If the development is a special needs housing development, and is served by paratransit
or transit (as specified) then the ratio shall not exceed 0.3 spaces per unit.
3. If the city or an independent consultant has conducted a parking study in the last seven years,
then the city may impose a higher parking ratio not to exceed the standard density bonus
parking ratios if substantial evidence is found in the parking study related to availability,
transit access, walkability, shared parking and other factors.
The proposed amendments are consistent with the General Plan and directly implement General Plan
Housing Element Program 3.3, which requires the city to ensure consistency with state density bonus law.
The amendments are also consistent with the Mobility Element Goal 3-G.4 to "manage parking to support
all modes of transportation and ensure efficient use of land."
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed amendments are exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(8),
which exempts projects "where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity
in question may have a significant effect on the environment." The changes to the Zoning Ordinance
proposed by this project are to implement state density bonus law parking development standards
adopted by the state legislature that were effective in state law at the beginning of 2016. A development
project may already invoke the reduced parking standards in the law; the city is merely revising the
standards in our Zoning Ordinance to be consistent with the updated state law. The proposed changes
are not substantial as they implement state law development standards which may already be applied to
projects; therefore, the project will not result in a significant effect on the environment and is not subject
to CEQA. A Notice of Exemption will be filed.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7198
2. Proposed Text Changes to the Zoning Ordinance (Title 21) Shown in Strikethrough/Underline Format
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 15 of 27
DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT
ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01
Attachment 2
PROPOSED TEXT CHANGES TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE (TITLE 21)
SHOWN IN STRIKETHROUGH/UNDERLINE FORMAT
Se¢tioh ~1.86~090 I
21.86.090 Density bonus housing standards.
A. Required target dwelling units shall be constructed concurrent with market-rate dwelling
units unless both the final decision-making authority of the city and the developer/applicant
agree within the density bonus housing agreement to an alternative schedule for
development.
B. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units and density bonus dwelling units should be built
on-site (within the boundary of the proposed development) and, whenever reasonably
possible, be distributed throughout the project site.
C. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units should be located on sites that are in proximity
to, or will provide access to, employment opportunities, urban services, or major roads or
other transportation and commuter rail facilities (i.e., freeways, bus lines) and that are
compatible with adjacent land uses.
D. Whenever feasible, target dwelling units should vary in size and number of bedrooms, in
response to affordable housing demand priorities of the city.
E. Density bonus projects shall comply with all applicable development standards, except
those which may be modified as an incentive or concession, or as otherwise provided for
in this chapter. In addition, all units must conform to the requirements of the applicable
building and housing codes. The design of the target dwelling units shall be reasonably
consistent or compatible with the design of the total project development in terms of
appearance, materials and finished quality.
F. No building permit shall be issued, nor any development approval granted, for a
development which does not meet the requirements of this chapter. No target dwelling
unit shall be rented or sold except in accordance with this chapter.
G. Upon the request of the applicant, the parking ratio (inclusive of handicap and guest
parking) for a housing development that conforms to the requirements of
Section 21. 86 . 040(A) of this chapter shall not exceed the ratios specified in Table E or as
noted, below. If the applicant does not request the parking ratios specified in Table Ethis
section or the project does not conform to the requirements of Section 21 .86.040(A) of this
chapter, the parking standards specified in Chapter 21.44 of this code shall apply.
1. If a development includes the maximum percentage of low-or very low income
units provided for in Section 21 .86.040(A) and is located within one-half mile of a
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 16 of 27
DENSITY BONUS REGULATIONS (ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01)
PROPOSED TEXT CHANGES TO CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE
major transit stop, as defined in the state Public Resources Code (subdivision (b)
of Section 21155). and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from
the development. then, upon the request of the developer, the city shall not impose
a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of handicapped and guest parking. that exceeds
0.5 spaces per bedroom . For purposes of this subsection, a development shall
have unobstructed access to a major transit stop if a resident is able to access the
major transit stop without encountering natural or constructed impediments.
2. If a development consists solely of rental units. exclusive of a manager's unit or
units. with an affordable housing cost to lower income families, as provided in state
Health · and Safety Code (section 50052.5). then, upon the request of the
developer, the city shall not impose a vehicular parking ratio, inclusive of
handicapped and guest parking, that exceeds the following ratios:
a. If the development is located within one-half mile of a major transit stop, as
defined in state Public Resources Code (subdivision (b) of s-Section
21155), and there is unobstructed access to the major transit stop from the
development, the ratio shall not exceed 0.5 spaces per unit.
b. If the development is a for-rent housing development for individuals who
are 62 years of age or older that complies with state Civil Code (sections
51 .2 and 51 .3), the ratio shall not exceed 0.5 spaces per unit. The
development shall have either paratransit service or unobstructed access,
within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that operates at least eight
times per day.
c. If the development is a special needs housing development, as defined in
state Health and Safety Code (section 51312), the ratio shall not exceed
0.3 spaces per unit. The development shall have either paratransit service
or unobstructed access, within one-half mile, to fixed bus route service that
operates at least eight times per day.
43:-. If the total number of parking spaces required for a development is other than a
whole number, the number shall be rounded t$-down to the next whole number.
24.-. For purposes of this section, a housing development may provide "on-site" parking
through tandem parking or uncovered parking, but not through on-street parking.
JS:-. The applicant may request parking incentives or concessions beyond those
provided in this section, subject to the findings specified in Section 21.86.050(A)(2) of this
chapter.
6. Notwithstanding subsections G.1 and G.2 of this section, if the city or an
independent consultant has conducted an area-wide or jurisdiction-wide parking study in
the last seven years, then the city may impose a higher vehicular parking ratio not to
exceed the ratio described in Table E, based upon substantial evidence found in the
parking study, that includes , but is not limited to, an analysis of parking availability, differing
Page 2
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 17 of 27
DENSITY BONUS REGULATIONS (ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01)
PROPOSED TEXT CHANGES TO CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE
levels of transit access, walkability access to transit services, the potential for shared
parking, the effect of parking requirements on the cost of market-rate and subsidized
developments, and the lower rates of car ownership for low-and very low income
individuals, including seniors and special needs individuals. The city shall pay the costs of
any new study. The city shall make findings, based on · a parking study completed in
conformity with this paragraph , supportin g the need for the higher parking ratio.
Table E
Parking Ratio for Housing Developments
Dwelling Unit Size On-Site Parking Ratio
0-1 bedrooms 1 space per unit
2-3 bedrooms 2 spaces per unit
4 or more bedrooms 2.5 spaces per unit
Page 3
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 18 of 27
Planning Commission Minutes
Minutes of:
Time of Meeting:
Date of Meeting:
Place of Meeting:
CALL TO ORDER
September 21, 2016
PLANNING COMMISSION
6:00 p.m.
September 21, 2016
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
Chairperson Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Black led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
CORRECTED
Page 1
Present: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioners, Black, Goyarts, L'Heureux, Segall and
Siekmann
Absent: Commissioner Montgomery
STAFF PRESENT
Don Neu, City Planner
Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney
Farah Nisan, Senior Office Specialist
Teri Delcamp, Senior Planner
Carl Stiehl, Associate Planner
Jason Goff, Senior Planner
Jason Geldert, Engineering Manager
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting of July
20,2016. '
Commissioner Segall stated that he would like to add a preamble on page 8 indicating that he would be
attending and representing the Planning Commission at the League of California Cities Planning Commission
Academy Planning Committee meeting and asked the Commission for their input.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded by Commissioner L'Heureux to
approve the minutes of the Special Meeting of July 20, 2016 as amended.
VOTE: 5-0-2
AYES: Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner L'Heureux,
Commissioner Siekmann and Commissioner Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Montgomery
ABSTAIN: Chairperson Anderson
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
Chairperson Anderson asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak to an item not on the agenda.
Seeing none she asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item.
Exhibit 4
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 19 of 27
Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2016 Page 2
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING
Chairperson Anderson asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item and opened the public hearing on Agenda
Item 4.
4. CT 14-11/PUD 16-02/CUP 14-10 -CARLSBAD BOAT CLUB & RESORT-Request for
a Tentative Tract Map, Nonresidential Planned Unit Development Permit and Conditional
Use Permit for the demolition of a restaurant and single family residence and to allow the
construction of a twenty (20) unit timeshare condominium project with underground parking
on approximately one acre of land located at 4509 Adams Street, on the south side of
Adams Street between Highland Drive and Park Drive, within the Agua Hedionda Segment
of the Local Coastal Program (LCP) and in Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The City
Planner has determined that the project belongs to a class of projects that the State
Secretary for Resources has found do not have a significant impact on the environment,
and it is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of
environmental documents pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 -In-fill
Development Projects. The Agua Hedionda LCP Segment is in an area of deferred
certification where the City of Carlsbad does not have permit authority to issue Coastal
Development permits and thus, the project will need to obtain a Coastal Development
Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission.
Mr. Neu stated that the applicant has requested a continuance and staff is recommending that Agenda Item
4 be continued to a date uncertain subject to re-noticing given the additional study the applicant proposes
to prepare and community outreach that is planned.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded by Commissioner L'Heureux that
the Planning Commission continue Agenda Item 4 to a date uncertain subject to re-
noticing.
VOTE: 6-0-1
AYES: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner
L'Heureux, Commissioner Siekmann and Commissioner Segall
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Montgomery
ABSTAIN: None
Chairperson Anderson closed the public hearing on Item 4, asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item and
opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 1.
1. ZCA 16-03/LCPA 16-02 RECYCLING REQUIREMENTS -A request for
recommendation of approval of a Zoning Ordinance amendment and Local Coastal
Program amendment to amend Zoning Ordinance Chapter 21.105 (Recycling Facilities
and Recycling Areas) consistent with state law.
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 1 and stated Associate Planner Carl Stiehl would make the staff
presentation.
Mr. Stiehl gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if any person in the audience wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, she
opened and closed public testimony on Agenda Item 1 .
Chairperson Anderson stated that she has a problem with the way that the third paragraph is written on
page 2, section B as it does not make it clear that the city is not requiring multifamily dwellings to divert
food waste. She stated that it is all lumped together with organic waste that would put an unfair burden on
property owners.
Mr. Stiehl replied stating that the only change in the code is to the definition of what is considered recyclable
material within the section only in the zoning ordinance. He added that the state mandate requires organic
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 20 of 27
CORRECTED
Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2016 Page 3
waste be included within the recyclable materials. Chairperson Anderson asked if modifications to groups
of units would require that whole development to modify their trash recycling areas and it is saying that an
older or newer development has to provide a larger trash area to include the food waste when there is not
a food waste diversion for multifamily. Mr. Stiehl stated that something like that would be reviewed by a
case by case basis as it is possible a property owner will not have to change the area if they already have
enough room for recycling. Mr. Kemp added that there is an exception in the law that if there is no room
and a finding could be made, then it would not be required. Chairperson Anderson asked if more room
meant taking up a parking space, would it mean that it is not required to take up a parking space. Mr. Kemp
replied stating that if the legislative body could determine that there is no room to accommodate the extra
area, then they could make a finding and not require it. Chairperson Anderson stated that she has a
problem with the requirement of residential properties making accommodations for food waste diversion
when they are not required to do so. Mr. Kemp clarified that the ordinance expands the definition of
recyclable materials and it does not do anything beyond that.
Commissioner Segall asked if there were two words added to define the ordinance further under section
42649.8. Mr. Stiehl replied yes, the terms added are 'organic waste' and 'cardboard', taking dates out from
the 90's including Stormwater Pollution Prevention. Commissioner Segall stated that he does not see
Chairperson Anderson's concern with food waste diversion in the strikeout version of the ordinance.
Chairperson Anderson clarified that there is not a food waste diversion program anywhere in San Diego
County, it is something the state would like to see but it is not happening yet. She stated that she could not
see restaurants or multifamily units composting waste in a yard.
Commissioner Siekmann commented that it appears to her that the state is trying to start going in that
direction. Mr. Stiehl stated that some of the communication received from the state recycling department
is that they anticipate there will be additional changes coming as this is a part of the legislative session two
years ago. He stated that there could be future amendments similar to what is before the Commission.
Mr. Neu, stated that until the waste hauler for the city specifies a need for a certain sized area, staff would
find what is existing adequate. He added that over time when additional containers have been added, the
city's enclosure standards have been adjusted to accommodate the waste containers. Mr. Neu stated that
until the program is further developed, and service is provided, that staff would find that it is adequate or
ask for additional space.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any further questions for staff. Seeing none, she closed the
public testimony.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded by Commissioner Siekmann that
the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 7199
recommending approval of a Zoning Ordinance amendment (ZCA 16-03) and Local
Coastal Program amendment (LCPA 16-02), based on the findings contained
therein.
VOTE: 5-1-1
AYES:
NOES:
Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner L'Heureux,
Commissioner Siekmann and Commissioner Segall
Chairperson Anderson
ABSENT: Commissioner Montgomery
ABSTAIN: None
Chairperson Anderson closed the public hearing on Item 1, asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item and
opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 2.
2. ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01 DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT -A request for
recommendation of approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Local Coastal
Program Amendment to amend the city's Zoning Ordinance to make the city's regulation
of density bonuses consistent with state law.
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 21 of 27
Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2016 Page 4
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Associate Planner Carl Stiehl would make the ·staff
presentation.
Mr. Stiehl gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner L'Heureux asked if there is a current citywide parking study. Mr. Stiehl stated no.
Commissioner L'Heureux asked if separate parking ratios for affordable housing is required. Mr. Stiehl
stated no, unless a density bonus project pursuant to the tables qualifies.
Chairperson Anderson stated that she has a problem with mixed development where they are complying
with their percentage of low income, the market rate, and an allowance for the project to have a low parking
ratio. She stated that she could see it working in a downtown area where people walk to various places
close by however, she could not see seniors walking a half mile to a major transit stop. Mr. Stiehl stated
that would only apply to two specific types of projects, a senior facility with a hundred percent rentals and
the other is a special needs facility with a hundred percent rental for special needs only.
Commissioner Segall asked what the impetus was for the legislature to create the law. Mr. Stiehl replied
stating that assembly members from Los Angeles and San Francisco pushing for the legislative law
however, there were a number of cities opposed as mentioned in AB744. Commissioner Segall asked if it
is a state law, then the Planning Commission does not have the opportunity to vote against it. Mr. Kemp
stated yes, any change to the zoning code does need to run through the Planning Commission and the
update to the zoning code must be consistent with state law. Mr. Kemp added that the state has dictated
the changes and that it applies to charter cities such as the City of Carlsbad.
Commissioner Goyarts stated that the Commission should go on record and mention that there are more
than 80 charter cities that are struggling with this requirement from the state legislature which supersedes
local requirements and it is due to the need for more affordable housing. Mr. Kemp added that the
legislature, has essentially said, that they feel to require more parking than they deemed necessary
increases the costs of housing and to make the housing more affordable, they can cut the parking ratios as
they think there is a direct correlation. Mr. Kemp stated that they have made a finding that it costs $24,000
per space for a parking structure.
Commissioner Black inquired about the timing and dates of other projects that undergo the parking
consideration before this update was on its way. Mr. Neu stated no, the Commission has considered a
density increase through the local ordinance. He stated that a standards modification was considered and
approved.
Chairperson Anderson asked what the parking ratios for Quarry Creek's low income housing was approved
for. Mr. Neu stated that it was varied based on the number of bedrooms per unit, 1 or slightly over 1.
Chairperson Anderson stated her concerns with developers that come in and entitle projects not caring
about how the project operates.
Mr. Neu stated that an email submitted by Elizabeth Banks states her concerns with the proposal.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any further questions of staff. Seeing none, she asked if any
person in the audience wished to speak on the item.
Chris Velasco, 5480 Foxtail Loop, stated his concerns with the correlation between units and the price of
an average rental and added that certain areas should be affordable near major transit areas.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there was anyone else in the audience who wished to speak. Seeing none,
she closed the public testimony and opened Commission discussion.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Black stated that he feels he has to approve this project as it is mandated by the state.
Commissioner Goyarts stated he can support the project.
Commissions Siekmann stated that she can approve the project.
Commissioner L'Heureux stated he feels that he should also approve this project as mandated by the state.
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 22 of 27
CORRECTED Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2016 Page 5
Commissioner Segall stated that he concurs with Commissioners Black and L'Heureux.
Chairperson Anderson stated that she cannot vote to approve the project.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded by Commissioner Black that the
Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 7198
recommending approval of ZCA 16-02 and LCPA 16-01 based on the findings
contained therein.
VOTE: 5-1-1
AYES: Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner L'Heureux,
Commissioner Siekmann and Commissioner Segall
NOES: Chairperson Anderson
ABSENT: Commissioner Montgomery
ABSTAIN: None
Chairperson Anderson closed the public hearing on Item 2, asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item and
opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 3.
Commissioner Black stated that he would like to recuse himself from the dias due to potential conflict of
interest.
3. CUP 16-06 -BREWERY IGNITER -Request for a Conditional Use Permit to allow two
separate brewery tasting rooms as accessory uses in two separate adjacent industrial
office and warehousing suites on property located in the Carlsbad Corporate Center at
5840 El Camino Real, Suites 100 and 101, in the M-Q Zone and Local Facilities
Management Zone 5. The City Planner has determined that this project is exempt from
the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15301,
"Existing Facilities," of the State CEQA Guidelines and will not have any adverse significant
impact on the environment. A Notice of Exemption shall be filed with the County Clerk
upon approval of this project.
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 3 and stated Senior Planner Jason Goff would make the staff presentation.
Mr. Goff, gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any questions .of staff.
Commissioner Segall asked if the city is consistent with other brewery hours of operation. Mr. Neu stated
that the operators proposed hours and that most of them, if not all have similar closing times. Commissioner
Segall asked if the applicant would have to apply for a Conditional Use Permit to change the hours of
operation to open an hour early. Mr. Neu stated that if the applicant wanted to change the hours of operation
to go earlier or later than proposed, the item would need to come back to the Commission as an
amendment.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any other questions of staff. Seeing none, she asked if the
applicant would like to make a presentation.
Bill Hofman, Hofman Planning and Engineering, 3156 Lionshead, made the presentation and stated he
would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Seeing none, she asked if any
person in the audience wished to speak on the item.
Rolly Mesias, 3583 Wild Oak Lane, Escondido, stated that he is one of the proposed tenants and has been
brewing beer for over 12 years. Mr. Mesias added that he has spent 2 years planning with starting up his
business and the startup cost associated with the brewery at minimum cost $850,000. He stated that this
project will allow him to financially assist in obtaining a small business loan to expand and grow his
business.
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 23 of 27
Planning Commission Minutes September 21, 2016 Page 6
Commissioner L'Heureux asked if street signage is allowable for each brewery. Mr. Goff stated signage
would only be allowed on the building based on the industrial signage requirements.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any other questions for staff. Seeing none, she asked if there
was anyone else in the audience who wished to speak. Seeing none, she closed the public testimony and
opened Commission discussion.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Goyarts stated he can support the project.
Commissioner Siekmann stated she can support the project.
Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he could also support the project.
Commissioner Segall stated that he can support the project.
Chairperson Anderson stated she can also support the project.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded by Commissioner L'Heureux that
the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 7196
recommending approval of CUP 16-06, based upon the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein.
VOTE: 5-0-2
AYES:
NOES:
Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner Siekmann,
Commissioner L'Heureux, and Commissioner Segall
None
ABSENT: Commissioner Black, Commissioner Montgomery
ABSTAIN: None
Chairperson Anderson closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 3 and thanked staff for their presentations.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
None.
CITY PLANNER COMMENTS
None.
CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
By proper motion, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of September 21, 2016 was adjourned
[?t
DON NEU
City Planner
Farah Nisan
Minutes Clerk
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 24 of 27
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council
of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chamber, 1200 Carlsbad Village
Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00p.m. on Tuesday, January 10, 2017, to consider approval of a
Zoning Ordinance Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to amend the city's
Zoning Ordinance to make the city's regulation of density bonuses consistent with state law.
Whereas, on September 21, 2016 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 5-1-1
(Anderson) (Montgomery absent) to recommend approval of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment
and Local Coastal Program Amendment to amend the city's Zoning Ordinance to make the city's
regulation of density bonuses consistent with state law.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing.
Copies of the staff report will be available on and after Thursday, January 5, 2017. If you have
any questions, please contact Carl Stiehl in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4605 or
carl.stiehl@carlsbadca.gov.
If you challenge the Zoning Ordinance amendment and 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: ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01
CASE NAME: DENSITY BONUS AMENDMENT
PUBLISH: FRIDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2016
CITY OF CARLSBAD
CITY COUNCIL
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 26 of 27
Easy Peel® Labels
Use Avery® Template 5160®
CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
6225 EL CAMINO REAL
CARLSBAD CA 92011
SAN DIEGUITO SCHOOL DISTRICT
710 ENCINITAS BLVD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF ENCINITAS
505 S VULCAN AV
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF VISTA
200 CIVIC CENTER DR
VISTA CA 92084
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
DEPT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
3883 RUFFIN RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
SAN DIEGO LAFCO
STE 200
9335 HAZARD WAY
SAN DIEGO CA 92123
U.S. FISH & WILDLIFE
STE 250
2177 SALK AV
CARLSBAD CA 92011
CARLSBAD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE
5934 PRIESTLEY DR
CARLSBAD CA 92008
Etiquettes faciles a peler
Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160®
I I I j
I I
I j
.A-
Feed Paper-
I Bend along line to 1
expose Pop-up Edge™ j
SAN MARCOS SCHOOL DISTRICT
STE 250
255 PICOAV
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
LEUCADIA WASTE WATER DISTRICT
TIM JOCHEN
1960 LA COSTA AV
CARLSBAD CA 92009
CITY OF SAN MARCOS
1 CIVIC CENTER DR
SAN MARCOS CA 92069-2949
VALLECITOS WATER DISTRICT
201 VALLECITOS DE ORO
SAN MARCOS CA 92069
REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL
BOARD
STE 100
2375 NORTHSIDE DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-2700
AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT
10124 OLD GROVE RD
SAN DIEGO CA 92131
CA COASTAL COMMISSION
ATIN KANANI BROWN
STE 103
7575 METROPOLITAN DR
SAN DIEGO CA 92108-4402
MICHAEL MCSWEENEY-BIA SO
STE 110
9201 SPECTRUM CENTER BLVD
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1407
..A
Sens de
chargement
Repliez a Ia hachure afin de :
reveler le rebord Pop-upMC J
® AVERY® 5160® l
ENCINITAS SCHOOL DISTRICT
101 RANCHO SANTA FE RD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
OLIVENHAIN WATER DISTRICT
1966 OLIVENHAIN RD
ENCINITAS CA 92024
CITY OF OCEANSIDE
300 NORTH COAST HWY
OCEANSIDE CA 92054
I.P.U.A.
SCHOOL OF PUBLIC ADMIN AND URBAN
STUDIES
SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY
SAN DIEGO CA 92182-4505
SD COUNTY PLANNING
STE 110
5510 OVERLAND AV
SAN DIEGO CA 92123-1239
SANDAG
STE 800
401 B ST
SAN DIEGO CA 92101
AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION
SAN DIEGO CO. AIRPORT AUTHORITY
PO BOX 82776
SAN DIEGO CA 92138-2776
CITY OF CARLSBAD
1200 CARLSBAD VILLAGE DRIVE
CARLSBAD CA 92008
www.avery.com
1-800-GO-AVERY
I I I
!
Item #9 January 10, 2017 Page 27 of 27
Carl Stiehl
January 10, 2017
Agenda Item No. 9
Density Bonus Amendment
ZCA 16-02/LCPA 16-01
Density Bonus Amendment
•Intent of city DB is to implement state DB law
•State passed AB 744 in 2015, effective in 2016
•Changes to parking ratios with DB
•State legislature wants more housing with less
parking
Density Bonus Amendment
Reduced Parking:
•Within 1/2 mile of major transit stop, .5s/br
•100% lower income rentals
-Within 1/2 mile of major transit stop, .5s/du
-Senior Housing, .5s/du
-Special Needs Housing, .3s/du
Recommendation
Introduce an ordinance approving an
amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
(ZCA 16-02) and the Local Coastal
Program (LCPA 16-01) to make the city’s
regulation of density bonuses consistent
with state law.