HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-01-10; City Council; Resolution 2017-008RESOLUTION NO. 2017-008
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A MAJOR REVIEW PERMIT AND COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE DEMOLITION OF A ONE-STORY,
TWO-UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW
MIXED-USE BUILDING CONSISTING OF 1,105 SQUARE FEET OF
COMMERCIAL/RETAIL SPACE AND FOUR APARTMENTS, AND A REQUEST TO
PARTICIPATE IN THE PARKING IN-LIEU FEE PROGRAM FOR 4 PARKING
SPACES ON PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3050 MADISON STREET IN LAND USE
DISTRICT 1 OF THE VILLAGE REVIEW ZONE, THE VILLAGE SEGMENT OF THE
LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AND WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
ZONE 1.
CASE NAME:
CASE NO.:
4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING
RP 15-16/CDP 15-37
EXHIBIT 1
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California has determined that pursuant to
the provisions ofthe Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on November 16, 2016, hold a duly
noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider Major Review Permit Permit No. RP 15-16 and
Coastal Development Permit No. CDP 15-37, as referenced in Planning Commission Resolution No.
7210; and the Planning Commission adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 7210 recommending
to the City Council that it be approved; and
WHEREAS the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider
said Major Review Permit and Coastal Development Permit; 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 relating to the Major
Review Permit and Coastal Development Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as
follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct.
2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the approval of Major Review
Permit No. 15-16 and Coastal Development Permit No. CDP 15-37, is approved, and that the findings
and conditions of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution No. 7210 on
file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and conditions ofthe City
Council.
EXHIBIT 1
3. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions
of Chapter 1.16 ofthe Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply:
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad on the lOth day of January, 2017, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: M. Hall, K. Blackburn, M. Schumacher, M. Packard.
NOES: C. Schumacher.
ABSENT: None.
(SEAL)
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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7210
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A MAJOR
REVIEW PERMIT AND COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR
THE DEMOLITION OF A ONE-STORY, TWO-UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED-USE BUILDING CONSISTING OF
1,105 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE AND FOUR APARTMENT UNITS ON
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 3050 MADISON STREET IN LAND USE DISTRICT 1
OF THE VILLAGE REVIEW ZONE, THE VILLAGE SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM AND WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
ZONE 1.
CASE NAME:
CASE NO:
4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING
RP 15-16/CDP 15-37
Exhibit 4
WHEREAS, First BMS Properties, LLC, "Developer/Owner," has filed a verified application
with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as
Lots 9 and 10 in Block 48 Town of Carlsbad, in the City of Carlsbad,
County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No.
535 and 775, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego
County May 2, 1888 and February 15, 1894, respectively.
("the Property"); and
WHEREAS, said verified application constitutes a request for a Coastal Development
Permit as shown on Exhibits "A" -"K" dated November 16, 2016, attached hereto and on file in the
Carlsbad Planning Division, 4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING -RP 15-16/CDP 15-37, as provided in Chapter
21.201.030 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on November 16, 2016, hold a duly noticed
public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request;
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 Coastal Development Permit.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad, as follows:
A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Commission
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of 4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING -RP 15-16/CDP 15-37, based on
the following findings and subject to the following conditions: Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 14 of 59
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
Findings:
Major Review Permit RP 15-16
1. The Planning Commission finds that the project, as conditioned herein, is on conformance with
the Elements of the City's General Plan, based on the facts set forth in the staff report dated
November 16, 2016 including, but not limited to the following:
A.
B.
C.
Land Use Goal 2-G.30: Develop a distinct identity for the Village by encouraging a variety
of uses and activities, such as a mix of residential, commercial office, restaurants and
specialty retail shops, which traditionally locate in a pedestrian-oriented downtown area
and attract visitors and residents from across the community by creating a lively,
interesting social environment.
Land Use Policy 2-P.70: Seek an increased presence of both residents and activity in the
Village with new development, particularly residential, including residential as part of a
mixed-use development, as well as commercial, entertainment and cultural uses that
serve both residents and visitors.
The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies for the Village, as outlined
within the General Plan, because it provides a mix of multi-family residential and
commercial/retail uses in an appropriate location (Carlsbad Village Center Land Use
District No. 1) within the Village. This in turn serves to enhance and maintain the area
as the Village center and encourages greater residential support opportunities in the
Village. It also increases the number of and improves the condition and appearance of
housing units within the Village. By providing more residential and commercial/retail
opportunities, the project helps to create a lively, interesting social environment by
encouraging and increasing the opportunity for 24-hour life in the Village, which
provides the necessary customer base to attract complementary uses. The project
reinforces the pedestrian-orientation desired for the downtown area by providing the
new residents an opportunity to walk to shopping, recreation, and mass transit
functions. The project's proximity to existing bus routes and mass transit will help to
further the goal of providing new economic development near transportation corridors.
Furthermore, the project will provide a strong street presence with extensive
architectural relief and visually subordinate parking. Overall, the new residential units
will enhance the Village as a place for living and working.
Circulation Policy 3-P.5: Require developers to construct or pay their fair share toward
improvements for all travel modes consistent with the Mobility Element, the Growth
Management Plan, and specific impacts associated with their development.
The applicant will be required to pay traffic impact fees prior to issuance of building
permit that will go towards future road improvements.
Noise Goal 5-G.2: Ensure that new development is compatible with the noise
environment, by continuing to use potential noise exposure as a criterion in land use
planning.
Noise Policy 5.P.2: Require a noise study analysis be conducted for all discretionary
development proposals located where projected noise exposure would be other than
"normally acceptable."
PC RESO NO. 7210 -2-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 15 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
3.
D.
A noise study was prepared by Ldn Consulting, Inc. (August 6, 2015) and determined
that the worst-case cumulative noise level from all roadways was found to be 65.0 dBA
CNEL at the site. Standard building construction will provide a noise reduction of
approximately 12-15 dBA with a windows open condition, and a minimum 20 dBA noise
reduction with the windows closed. To meet the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard,
an overall minimum interior noise level reduction of 21 dBA CNEL is needed for the
project. A closed window condition is required to reduce noise levels to comply with
Title 24 and City of Carlsbad requirements. The windows closed condition requires that
mechanical ventilation is installed to move air within the structure and control
temperatures.
Housing Policy 10-P.15: Pursuant to the lnclusionary Housing Ordinance, require
affordability for lower income households of a minimum of 15 percent of all residential
ownership and qualifying rental projects.
The inclusionary housing requirement may be satisfied through the payment of an in-
lieu fee for projects that have less than seven units. The project has been conditioned
to require the payment of the housing in-lieu fee for two units prior to issuance of a
building permit.
That the project is consistent with the Village Review Zone and the Village Master Plan and Design
Manual in that the project as designed is consistent with the development standards for Land
Use District 1, the Village Design Guidelines and other applicable regulations set forth in the
Village Master Plan and Design Manual as discussed in the staff report dated November 16,
2016.
The Developer/Property owner qualifies to participate in the Parking In-Lieu Fee Program and
participation in the program will satisfy the parking requirements for the project. Justification for
participation in the Parking In-Lieu Fee Program is contained in the following findings:
A.
B.
The project is consistent with Village Review Master Plan and Design Manual in that the
project assists in satisfying the goals and objectives through the following actions 1) the
mixed-use project stimulates property improvements and new development in the
Village by constructing a new permitted mixed-use building in an area with a mix of
dated buildings and increasing the intensity of development within the Village; 2) it
establishes Carlsbad Village as a quality shopping, working and living environment by
providing new employment opportunities; increasing the number, quality, and diversity
of housing units within the Village; and reinforcing pedestrian retail continuity within
the Village commercial areas; and 3) improves the physical appearance of the Village
Area by redeveloping an underutilized site on Madison Street with a new attractive
building that adheres to the land use regulations and design guidelines set forth for the
area.
The proposed use is consistent with the goals and objectives set forth for Land Use
District 1 of the Village Master Plan and Design Manual in that the mixed-use
development not only provides mutually supportive uses in the form of residential, and
commercial/retail uses on Madison Street, but reinforces the pedestrian-orientation
desired for the downtown area by providing new residents and employees an
opportunity to walk to local shopping, dining, recreation, and mass transit functions;
furthermore, its close proximity to existing bus routes and mass transit help to further
PC RESO NO. 7210 -3-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 16 of 59
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
C.
the goal of providing new economic and residential development near transportation
corridors; and lastly, it will contribute to the revitalization of the Village area in the form
of a new building in the core of the Village; new commercial lease space, new
employment opportunities and new patrons.
Adequate parking is available within the Village to accommodate the project's parking
demands. A parking study was recently completed for the Village and Barrio areas, and
parking occupancies were observed in the morning (9 A.M.), afternoon (1:00 P.M.), and
evening (7:00 P.M.). The highest occupancy for all public parking lots combined in the
Village was 72% at 1:00 P.M. in May 2016. This utilization ratio allows for continued
implementation of the parking in-lieu fee program because it is less than the 85%
threshold for maximum utilization set by the City Council.
D. The In-Lieu Fee Program has not been suspended or terminated by the City Council.
Coastal Development Permit CDP 15-37
4.
5.
6.
That the proposed development is in conformance with the Certified Local Coastal Program and
all applicable policies in that the proposed building will not obstruct views of the coastline as
seen from public lands or the public right of way or otherwise damage the visual beauty of the
coastal zone. The project is consistent with the surrounding development of medical office and
commercial buildings. No agricultural uses currently exist on the site, and the property is not
within the Coastal Agricultural Overlay Zone that would require mitigation for conversion to
urban uses. There are no sensitive coastal resources within the property and is not located in
an area of known geologic instability or flood hazard.
The proposal is in conformity with the public access and recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the
Coastal Act in that no public opportunities for coastal shoreline access are available from the
subject site and no public access requirements are conditioned for the project since it is not
located between the first public road and the ocean. The commercially designated site is not
suited for water-oriented recreation activities.
The project is consistent with the provisions of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone
(Chapter 21.203 of the Zoning Ordinance) in that the project will adhere to the City's Master
Drainage Plan, Grading Ordinance, Storm Water Ordinance, BMP Design Manual and Jurisdictional
Runoff Management Program (JRMP) to avoid increased urban runoff, pollutants, and soil
erosion. No steep slopes or native vegetation is located on the subject property and the site is
not located in an area prone to landslides, or susceptible to accelerated erosion, floods, or
liquefaction.
City Council Policy No. 43, Allocation for Excess Dwelling Units
7.
8.
That the project location and density are compatible with the existing adjacent residential
neighborhoods and/or nearby existing or planned uses in that the project is consistent with the
adjacent mix of residential and commercial land uses and anticipated uses in that Land Use
District 1 of the Village Master Plan is intended to provide for a gradual transition to a mix of
higher quality commercial and residential uses which will provide positive support for the core
of the Village.
That the project location and density are in accordance with the applicable provisions of the
General Plan and any other applicable planning document, in that Village (V) General Plan Land
PC RESO NO. 7210 -4-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 17 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
9.
Use designation allows residential development at a density range of 28 to 35 dwelling units
per acre. For mixed use projects, the minimum allowable density is calculated based on 50% of
the developable area. Therefore, based on an overall project area gross/net acreage of 0.16
acres, the minimum density shall be calculated based on 0.08 acres (0.16 x 0.50 = 0.08). The
resulting minimum density for the proposed mixed use project is 25 dwelling units per acre; the
resulting minimum unit yield is 2.24 dwelling units. Pursuant to Table A of CMC Section
21.53.120, a unit yield which results in a fractional unit below 0.5 may be rounded down.
However, the maximum unit yield at 35 du/ac is 5.6 units, or 5 units rounded down pursuant to
CMC Section 21.53.120. The proposal for four residential units falls within the allowable range
(two -five units) for the dwelling unit yield.
That there are an adequate number of units in the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank (EDUB) to allocate
two units. Two units will be deducted from the EDUB as there are two existing residential units
on site, giving a net gain of two units. Per the city's Quadrant Dwelling Unit Report (dated
August, 2016), 759 units remain available for allocation in the Village.
10 California Environmental Quality Act:
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10. 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 preparation of environmental
documents pursuant to Section 15332 of the State CEQA Guidelines as an infill development
project. In making this determination, the City Planner has found that the exceptions listed in
Section 15300.2 of the State CEQA Guidelines do not apply to this project.
General
11.
12.
13.
The project is consistent with the City-Wide Facilities and Improvements Plan, the Local Facilities
Management Plan for Zone 1 and all City public policies and ordinances. The project includes
elements or has been conditioned to construct or provide funding to ensure that all facilities and
improvements regarding: sewer collection and treatment; water; drainage; circulation; fire;
schools; parks and other recreational facilities; libraries; government administrative facilities; and
open space, related to the project will be installed to serve new development prior to or
concurrent with need. Specifically,
A.
B.
C.
The project has been conditioned to provide proof from the Carlsbad Unified School
District that the project has satisfied its obligation for school facilities.
The Public Facility fee is required to be paid by Council Policy No. 17 and will be collected
prior to the issuance of building permit.
The Local Facilities Management fee for Zone 1 is required by Carlsbad Municipal Code
Section 21.90.050 and will be collected prior to issuance of building permit.
That the project is consistent with the City's Landscape Manual and Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 18.50).
The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed to
mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the degree
of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
PC RESO NO. 7210 -5-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 18 of 59
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
Conditions:
General
Note: Unless otherwise specified herein, all conditions shall be satisfied prior to issuance of a building
permit.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
If any of the following conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented
and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained
according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein
granted; deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits; deny, revoke, or further
condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted;
record a notice of violation on the property title; institute and prosecute litigation to compel their
compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained
by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's approval of this Major Review Permit and
Coastal Development Permit
Staff is authorized and directed to make, or require the Developer to make, all corrections and
modifications to the Major Review Permit and Coastal Development Permit documents, as
necessary to make them internally consistent and in conformity with the final action on the
project. Development shall occur substantially as shown on the approved Exhibits. Any proposed
development, different from this approval, shall require an amendment to this approval.
Developer shall comply with all applicable provisions of federal, state, and local laws and
regulations in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
If any condition for construction of any public improvements or facilities, or the payment of any
fees in-lieu thereof, imposed by this approval or imposed by law on this Project are challenged,
this approval shall be suspended as provided in Government Code Section 66020. If any such
condition is determined to be invalid, this approval shall be invalid unless the City Council
determines that the project without the condition complies with all requirements of law.
Developer/Operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold
harmless the City of Carlsbad, its Council members, officers, employees, agents, and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and
costs, including court costs and attorney's fees incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly,
from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Major Review Permit/Coastal Development Permit,
(b) City's approval or issuance of any permit or action, whether discretionary or nondiscretionary,
in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Developer/Operator's installation and
operation of the facility permitted hereby, including without limitation, any and all liabilities
arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or
emissions. This obligation survives until all legal proceedings have been concluded and continues
even if the City's approval is not validated.
Prior to submittal of the building plans, improvement plans, or grading plans, whichever occurs
first, developer shall submit to the City Planner, a 24" x 36" copy of the Site Plan or other,
conceptual grading plan and preliminary utility plan reflecting the conditions approved by the final
decision making body. The copy shall be submitted to the city planner, reviewed and, if found
acceptable, signed by the city's project planner and project engineer. If no changes were required,
the approved exhibits shall fulfill this condition.
PC RESO NO. 7210 -6-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 19 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Developer shall provide proof to the Building
Division from the Carlsbad Unified School District that this project has satisfied its obligation to
provide school facilities.
This project shall comply with all conditions and mitigation measures which are required as part
of the Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan and any amendments made to that Plan prior to
the issuance of building permits.
This approval shall become null and void if building permits are not issued for this project within
24 months from the date of project approval.
Prior to the issuance of the building permit, Developer shall submit to the City a Notice of
Restriction executed by the owner of the real property to be developed. Said notice is to be filed
in the office of the County Recorder, subject to the satisfaction of the City Planner, notifying all
interested parties and successors in interest that the City of Carlsbad has issued a Major Review
Permit and Coastal Development Permit by Resolutions No. 7210 on the property. Said Notice
of Restriction shall note the property description, location of the file containing complete project
details and all conditions of approval as well as any conditions or restrictions specified for
inclusion in the Notice of Restriction. The City Planner has the authority to execute and record an
amendment to the notice which modifies or terminates said notice upon a showing of good cause
by the Developer or successor in interest.
Building permits will not be issued for this project unless the local agency providing water and
sewer services to the project provides written certification to the City that adequate water service
and sewer facilities, respectively, are available to the project at the time of the application for the
building permit, and that water and sewer capacity and facilities will continue to be available until
the time of occupancy.
Developer shall pay the citywide Public Facilities Fee imposed by City Council Policy #17, the
License Tax on new construction imposed by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 5.09.030, and CFO
#1 special tax (if applicable), subject to any credits authorized by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section
5.09.040. Developer shall also pay any applicable Local Facilities Management Plan fee for Zone
1, pursuant to Chapter 21.90. All such taxes/fees shall be paid at issuance of building permit. If
the taxes/fees are not paid, this approval will not be consistent with the General Plan and shall
become void.
Developer shall submit and obtain City Planner approval of a Final Landscape and Irrigation Plan
showing conformance with the approved Preliminary Landscape Plan and the City's Landscape
Manual. Developer shall construct and install all landscaping as shown on the approved Final
Plans, and maintain all landscaping in a healthy and thriving condition, free from weeds, trash,
and debris.
The first submittal of Final Landscape and Irrigation Plans shall be pursuant to the landscape plan
check process on file in the Planning Division and accompanied by the project's building,
improvement, and grading plans.
All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners, shall be architecturally integrated and
concealed from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets, in substance
as provided in Building Department Policy No. 80-6, to the satisfaction of the Director of the
Community and Economic Department.
PC RESO NO. 7210 -7-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 20 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
16.
17.
18.
19.
Developer shall construct, install, and stripe not less than 10 parking spaces, including one {l)
accessible parking space, as shown on Exhibit "B".
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall pay to the City an inclusionary housing
in lieu fee as an individual fee on a per market rate dwelling unit basis (total of two units) in the
amount in effect at the time, as established by City Council Resolution from time to time.
Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall enter into a Parking In-Lieu Fee
Participation Agreement and pay the established Parking In-Lieu Fee for 1 parking spaces. The
fee shall be the sum total of the fee per parking space in effect at the time of the building permit
issuance times the number of parking spaces needed to satisfy the project's parking
requirement.
The construction of the building shall incorporate all noise reduction measures identified in the
noise study prepared by Ldn Consulting (August 6, 2015).
10 Engineering:
11 NOTE: Unless specifically stated in the condition, all of the following conditions, upon the approval of
this proposed development, must be met prior to approval of a demolition permit, grading permit
12 or building permit, whichever comes first.
13 General
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
20.
21.
22.
Prior to hauling dirt or construction materials to or from any proposed construction site within
this project, developer shall apply for and obtain approval from, the city engineer for the proposed
haul route.
This project is approved upon the express condition that building permits will not be issued for
the development of the subject property, unless the district engineer has determined that
adequate water and sewer facilities are available at the time of permit issuance and will continue
to be available until time of occupancy.
Developer shall install sight distance corridors at all street and driveway intersections in
accordance with City Engineering Standards. The property owner shall maintain this condition.
Fees/ Agreements
23.
24.
25.
Developer shall cause property owner to execute and submit to the city engineer for recordation,
the city's standard form Geologic Failure Hold Harmless Agreement.
Developer shall cause property owner to submit an executed copy to the city engineer for
recordation a city standard Permanent Stormwater Quality Best Management Practice
Maintenance Agreement.
Prior to approval of a grading permit or any building permits for this project, developer shall cause
owner to give written consent to the city engineer for the annexation of the area shown within
the boundaries of the (SUBDIVISION OR SITE PLAN) into the existing City of Carlsbad Street
Lighting and Landscaping District No. 1 and/or to the formation or annexation into an additional
Street Lighting and Landscaping District. Said written consent shall be on a form provided by the
City Engineer.
PC RESO NO. 7210 -8-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 21 of 59
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
26. Developer shall cause owner to execute, for recordation, a city standard Local Improvement
District Agreement to pay fair share contributions for undergrounding of all existing overhead
utilities and installation of street lights, as needed, along the subdivision frontage, should a future
district be formed.
Grading
27.
28.
Based upon a review of the proposed grading and the grading quantities shown on the tentative
map, grading permit for this project is required. Developer shall prepare and submit plans and
technical studies/reports as required by city engineer, post security and pay all applicable grading
plan review and permit fees per the city's latest fee schedule.
Prior to issuance of a demolition permit or grading permit, the contractor shall submit a
Construction Plan to the city engineer for review and approval. Said Plan may be required to
include, but not be limited to, identifying the location of the construction trailer, material staging,
bathroom facilities, parking of construction vehicles, employee parking, construction fencing and
gates, obtaining any necessary permission for off-site encroachment, addressing pedestrian
safety, and identifying time restrictions for various construction activities.
Storm Water Quality
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
Developer shall comply with the city's Stormwater Regulations, latest version, and shall
implement best management practices at all times. Best management practices include but are
not limited to pollution control practices or devices, erosion control to prevent silt runoff during
construction, general housekeeping practices, pollution prevention and educational practices,
maintenance procedures, and other management practices or devices to prevent or reduce the
discharge of pollutants to stormwater, receiving water or stormwater conveyance system to the
maximum extent practicable. Developer shall notify prospective owners and tenants of the above
requirements.
Developer shall complete and submit to the city engineer a Determination of Project's SWPPP Tier
Level and Construction Threat Level Form pursuant to City Engineering Standards. Developer shall
also submit the appropriate Tier level Storm Water Compliance form and appropriate Tier level
Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) to the satisfaction of the city engineer.
Developer shall pay all applicable SWPPP plan review and inspection fees per the city's latest fee
schedule.
This project is subject to 'Priority Development Project' requirements. Developer shall prepare
and process a Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP), subject to city engineer
approval, to comply with the Carlsbad BMP Design Manual latest version. The final SWQMP
required by this condition shall be reviewed and approved by the city engineer with final grading
plans. Developer shall pay all applicable SWQMP plan review and inspection fees per the city's
latest fee schedule.
Developer is responsible to ensure that all final design plans (grading plans, improvement plans,
landscape plans, building plans, etc.) incorporate all source control, site design, pollutant control
BMP and applicable hydromodification measures.
Developer shall complete the City of Carlsbad Standard Stormwater Requirement Checklist Form.
Developer is responsible to ensure that all final design plans, grading plans, and building plans
incorporate applicable best management practices (BMPs). These BMPs include site design,
PC RESO NO. 7210 -9-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 22 of 59
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
source control and Low Impact Design {LID) measures including, but not limited to, minimizing the
use of impervious area (paving), routing run-off from impervious area to pervious/landscape
areas, preventing illicit discharges into the storm drain and adding storm drain stenciling or
signage all to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Dedications/Improvements
34.
35.
36.
Utilities
37.
38.
Developer shall design the private drainage systems, as shown on the site plan to the satisfaction
of the city engineer. All private drainage systems (12" diameter storm drain and larger) shall be
inspected by the city. Developer shall pay the standard improvement plan check and inspection
fees for private drainage systems.
Developer shall prepare and process public improvement plans and, prior to city engineer
approval of said plans, shall execute a city standard Development Improvement Agreement to
install and shall post security in accordance with C.M.C. Section 20.16.070 for public
improvements shown on the site plan. Said improvements shall be installed to city standards to
the satisfaction of the city engineer. These improvements include, but are not limited to:
A. Curb, gutter, sidewalk and driveway approach.
B. Sewer lateral and water service with water meter.
Developer shall pay the standard improvement plan check and inspection fees. Improvements
listed above shall be constructed within 36 months of approval of the subdivision or development
improvement agreement or such other time as provided in said agreement.
Developer shall design all proposed public improvements including but not limited to (sewer
laterals, streetlights, pedestrian ramps, driveways, sidewalk, water services/meters, curb drains,
etc.) as shown on the site plan. These improvements shall be shown on one of the following,
subject to city engineer approval:
A.
B.
Grading plans processed in conjunction with this project; or
Construction Revision to an existing record public improvement drawing.
Developer shall pay plan check and inspection fees using improvement valuations in accordance
with the city's current fee schedule. Developer shall apply for and obtain a right-of-way permit
prior to performing work in the city right-of-way.
Developer shall meet with the fire marshal to determine fire protection measures (fire flows, fire
hydrant locations, building sprinklers) required to serve the project. Fire hydrants, if proposed,
shall be considered public improvements and shall be served by public water mains to the
satisfaction of the district engineer.
The developer shall agree to design landscape and irrigation plans utilizing recycled water as a
source and prepare and submit a colored recycled water use map to the Planning Department for
processing and approval by the district engineer.
PC RESO NO. 7210 -10-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 23 of 59
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
39.
40.
Developer shall install potable water and/or recycled water services and meters at locations
approved by the district engineer. The locations of said services shall be reflected on public
improvement plans.
The developer shall agree to install sewer laterals and clean-outs at locations approved by the city
engineer. The locations of sewer laterals shall be reflected on public improvement plans.
Code Reminders
The project is subject to all applicable provisions of local ordinances, including but not limited to the
following:
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
Developer shall pay planned local area drainage fees in accordance with Section 15.08.020 of the
City of Carlsbad Municipal Code to the satisfaction of the city engineer.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, Developer shall pay a Public Facility fee as required by
Council Policy No. 17.
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, Developer shall pay the Local Facilities Management
fee for Zone 1 as required by Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 21.90.050.
Developer shall pay a landscape plan check and inspection fee as required by Section 20.08.050
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Approval of this request shall not excuse compliance with all applicable sections of the Zoning
Ordinance and all other applicable City ordinances in effect at time of building permit issuance,
except as otherwise specifically provided herein.
Premise identification (addresses} shall be provided consistent with Carlsbad Municipal Code
Section 18.04.320.
Any signs proposed for this development shall at a minimum be designed in conformance with
the Village Master Plan and Design Manual and shall require review and approval of the City
Planner prior to installation of such signs.
Developer shall pay traffic impact and sewer impact fees based on Section 18.42 and Section
13.10 of the City of Carlsbad Municipal Code, respectively. The Average Daily Trips (ADT} and
floor area contained in the staff report and shown on the tentative map and project site plan are
for planning purposes only.
PC RESO NO. 7210 -11-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 24 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
NOTICE
Please take NOTICE that approval of your project includes the 11imposition" of fees, dedications,
reservations, or other exactions hereafter collectively referred to for convenience as 11fees/exactions."
You have 90 days from date of final approval to protest imposition of these fees/exactions. If you protest
them, you must follow the protest procedure set forth in Government Code Section 66020(a), and file the
protest and any other required information with the City Manager for processing in accordance with
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.030. Failure to timely follow that procedure will bar any subsequent
legal action to attack, review, set aside, void, or annul their imposition.
You are hereby FURTHER NOTIFIED that your right to protest the specified fees/exactions DOES NOT
8 APPLY to water and sewer connection fees and capacity charges, nor planning, zoning, grading, or other
similar application processing or service fees in connection with this project; NOR DOES IT APPLY to any
9 fees/exactions of which you have previously been given a NOTICE similar to this, or as to which the statute
of limitations has previously otherwise expired.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 7210 -12-Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 25 of 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of
the City of Carlsbad, California, held on November 16, 2016, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
·. NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Chairperson Anderson, Commissioners Black, Goyarts, Montgomery,
Segall and Siekmann
. Commissioner L'Heureux
V~ch!itf:~W
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
~~
DON NEU
15 City Planner
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PC RESO NO. 7210 -13-
j
I
1 I I I f
I I l I I i
t I
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 26 of 59
The City of Carlsbad Planning Division Exhibit 5
A REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION
Item No. 0
P.C. AGENDA OF: November 16, 2016
Application complete date: August 15, 2016
Project Planner: Austin Silva
Project Engineer: Steve Bobbett
SUBJECT: RP 15-16/CDP 15-37 - 4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING -Request for a recommendation of
approval of a Major Review Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow for the
demolition of a one-story, two-unit residential building and the construction of a mixed-
use building consisting of 1,105 square feet of retail space and four apartment units
located at 3050 Madison Street in Land Use District 1 of the Village Review zone, the
Village Segment of the Local Coastal Program, and within Local Facilities Management
Zone 1. The City Planner has determined that this 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 is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the
preparation of environmental documents pursuant to section 15332 (ln~fill Development
Projects) of the State CEQA guidelines.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7210 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of Major Review Permit RP 15-16 and Coastal Development Permit CDP 15-37 to the City
Council based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
The subject .16 acre site is located on the east side of Madison Street, just south of Carlsbad Village Drive.
The project site is located in the coastal zone and within Land Use District 1 of the Village Review zone.
The site is currently developed with a one-story, two-unit residential building, which will be demolished
to accommodate the proposed mixed-use building.
Table 1 below includes the General Plan designations, zoning and current land uses of the project site and
surrounding properties.
TABLE 1-SURROUNDING LAND USE
Location General Plan Designation Zoning Current Land Use
Site Village V-R, District 1 Residential
North Village V-R, District 1 Fast food restaurant
South Village V-R, District 1 Medical Therapy Office
East Village V-R, District 2 Residential
West Village V-R, District 1 Financial Institution
Vehicular access to the site will be taken from the rear alley where residents will pull into a secured parking
garage that occupies a majority of the ground floor. The remaining front portion of the ground floor is
dedicated towards a 1,105 square foot retail space. The second floor consists of storage space for the
retail business and the four apartments, as well as apartment unit one. Units two and three occupy the
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 27 of 59
RP 15-16/CDP 15-37 -4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING
November 16, 2016
Page 2
third floor, and the entire fourth floor is dedicated towards unit four. All of the apartment units have their
own private deck space. Table 2 below provides a breakdown of the details for each of the apartment
units.
TABLE 2 -DETAILS FOR UNIT TYPE
Unit# Size (sq. ft.) Bedrooms/Bathrooms Private Deck Space (sq. ft.)
1 2,663 3/3.5 486
2 2,018 3/2.5 594
3 2,049 3/3.5 259
4 3,018 4/4.5 749
The mixed-use building takes on a California Contemporary architectural theme with the use of traditional
California building materials such as stucco, stone veneer, and wood. The simple building forms and use
of clean lines give the building a contemporary feel. A neutral color scheme is used with the use of three
different stucco colors {Sedona, desert trail, and egg shell) and stone veneer is incorporated into all sides
of the building to break up stucco walls. The west (front) elevation includes a horizontal wood
architectural feature that wraps around the sides of the building and visually breaks up the second and
third floor. The use of horizontal wood siding is carried throughout the building to tie all sides together.
The project is consistent with the design guidelines of the Village Master Plan and Design Manual by
providing access to the parking area from the alley, stepping the building back at upper levels, utilizing
simple building forms, providing visual interest on all sides of the building, and providing significant
storefront glazing for the retail storefront.
Ill. ANALYSIS
The proposed project is subject to the following ordinances, standards, and policies:
A. Village {V} General Plan Land Use designation;
B. Village Review {VR) Zone {C.M.C. Chapter 21.35}, District 1 {Village Master Plan and Design
Manual};
C. Coastal Development Regulations for the Village Segment of the Local Coastal Program {C.M.C
Chapter 21.81 and Village Master Plan and Design Manual);
D. lnclusionary Housing Ordinance {C.M.C. Chapter 21.85}; and
E. Growth Management Ordinance {C.M.C. Chapter 21.90).
The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project's consistency
with the applicable regulations and policies. The project's compliance with each of the above regulations
and policies is discussed in the sections below.
A. Village {V) General Plan Land Use designation
The General Plan does not assign densities to properties within the Village area. Rather, the Village Master
Plan establishes the minimum and maximum densities for residential development. For mixed-use
projects, the minimum allowable density is calculated based on 50% of the developable area. Table 3
below identifies the allowable density range for properties located within Land Use District 1.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 28 of 59
RP 15-16/CDP 15-37-4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING
November 16, 2016
Page 3
TABLE 3-PROJECT DENSITY
Gross Acres Net Acres Allowable Density Range Project Density
.16 Same 28-35 du/ac 4 units/0.16 ac = 25 du/ac*
TABLE 4 -PROJECT YIELD
Gross Acres Net Acres Min/Max Dwelling Units per Proposed Yield Village Master Plan
Minimum units based on 50% of the developable
area:
0.16 x a.so = 0.08 acres
0.08 acres x 28 du/ac = 2.24 units
(Pursuant to Table A of CMC Section 21.53.120, a unit yield which 4 dwelling 0.16 Same results in a fractional unit below 0.5 may be rounded down) units
Maximum units:
0.16 acres x 35 du/ac = 5.6 units
2-5 dwelling units= allowable range
* Although the project's proposed density of 25 dwelling units per acre falls below the minimum density of the 28 dwelling units
per acre, pursuant to CMC Section 21.53.230, Table A, unit yields rounded down that result in a density which is below the
minimum density shall be found consistent with the General Plan.
Pursuant to the Housing Element of the General Plan, because a Growth Management Control Point has
not been established for residential development in the Village, all residential units approved in the Village
must be withdrawn from the City's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. The City's Excess Dwelling Unit Bank is
implemented through City Council Policy No. 43. Pursuant to City Council Policy No. 43, an applicant for
an allocation of dwelling units shall agree to provide the number of inclusionary units as required pursuant
to C.M.C. Section 21.85.110. As discussed in Section D below, the proposal to pay the in-lieu inclusionary
housing fees for two (2} residential units is consistent with the inclusionary housing requirements as set
forth in City Council Policy No. 43. Pursuant to C.M.C. Chapter 21.85.030 (D.3}, a project may be exempt
from paying inclusionary housing fees for the construction of new residential units which replace
residential units that were demolished within two years prior to the application for a building permit for
the new residential units. Because there is a net increase of two units, the project is accordingly-
conditioned to require to pay the requisite in-lieu inclusionary housing fees for two units prior to the
issuance of a building permit.
In approving a request for an allocation of excess dwelling units, the project shall meet the findings
identified in City Council Policy No. 43. Specifically, the project location and density shall be found to be
compatible with adjacent land uses and applicable provisions of the General Plan and other applicable
planning documents. As discussed in the attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 7210, the
proposed project meets these findings. Because there are two existing residential units on the property,
two units will be deducted from the Excess Dwelling Unit Bank. As the proposed project requires approval
from City Council, the City Council is the final decision-making authority for the allocation from the Excess
Dwelling Unit Bank.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 29 of 59
RP 15-16/CDP 15-37 -4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING
November 16, 2016
Page 4
TABLE 5 -GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE
Element Goal/Policy Compliance with Goal
Land Use Goal 2-G.30: Develop a distinct The proposed project is consistent with the goals
identity for the Village by and policies for the Village, as outlined within the
encouraging a variety of uses and General Plan, because it provides a mix of multi-
activities, such as a mix of family residential and commercial/retail uses in
residential, commercial office, an appropriate location (Carlsbad Village Center
restaurants and specialty retail Land Use District No. 1) within the Village. This in
shops, which traditionally locate turn serves to enhance and maintain the area as
in a pedestrian-oriented the Village center and encourages greater
downtown area and attract residential support opportunities in the Village. It
visitors and residents from across also increases the number of and improves the
the community by creating a condition and appearance of housing units within
lively, interesting social the Village. By providing more residential and
environment. commercial/retail opportunities, the project
helps to create a lively, interesting social
Policy 2-P.70: Seek an increased environment by encouraging and increasing the
presence of both residents and opportunity for 24-hour life in the Village, which
activity in the Village with new provides the necessary customer base to attract
development, particularly complementary uses. The project reinforces the
residential, including residential as pedestrian-orientation desired for the downtown
part of a mixed-use development, area by providing the new residents an
as well as commercial, opportunity to walk to shopping, recreation, and
entertainment and cultural uses mass transit functions. The project's proximity to
that serve both residents and existing bus routes and mass transit will help to
visitors. further the goal of providing new economic
development near transportation corridors.
Furthermore, the project will provide a strong
street presence with extensive architectural relief
and visually subordinate parking. Overall, the
new residential units will enhance the Village as a
place for living and working.
Circulation Policy 3-P.5: Require developers The applicant will be required to pay traffic
to construct or pay their fair share impact fees prior to issuance of building permit
toward improvements for all that will go towards future road improvements.
travel modes consistent with the
Mobility Element, the Growth
Management Plan, and specific
impacts associated with their
development.
Noise Goal 5-G.2: Ensure that new A noise study was prepared by Ldn Consulting,
development is compatible with Inc. (August 6, 2015) and determined that the
the noise environment, by worst-case cumulative noise level from all
continuing to use potential noise roadways was found to be 65.0 dBA CNEL at the
exposure as a criterion in land use site. Standard building construction will provide
planning. a noise reduction of approximately 12-15 dBA
with a windows open condition, and a minimum
Policy 5.P.2: Require a noise 20 dBA noise reduction with the windows closed.
study analysis be conducted for all To meet the 45 dBA CNEL interior noise standard,
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 30 of 59
RP 15-16/CDP 15-37 -4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING
November 16, 2016
Page 5
discretionary development
proposals located where
projected noise exposure would
be other than "normally
acceptable."
Housing Policy 10-P.15: Pursuant to the
lnclusionary Housing Ordinance,
require affordability for lower
income households of a minimum
of 15 percent of all residential
ownership and qualifying rental
projects.
an overall minimum interior noise level reduction
of 21 dBA CNEL is needed for the project. A
closed window condition is required to reduce
noise levels to comply with Title 24 and City of
Carlsbad requirements. The windows closed
condition requires that mechanical ventilation is
installed to move air within the structure and
control temperatures.
The inclusionary housing requirement may be
satisfied through the payment of an in-lieu fee
for projects that have less than seven units. The
project has been conditioned to require the
payment of the housing in-lieu fee for two units
prior to issuance of a building permit.
B. Village Review Zone (C.M.C. Chapter 21.35), Land Use District 1 (Village Master Plan and Design
Manual)
The subject property is located within Land Use District 1 {Carlsbad Village Center) of the Village Master
Plan. Mixed-use developments are permitted in Land Use District 1. The specific development standards
for new development within Land Use District 1 and the project's compliance with these standards is
shown in Table 6 below:
TABLE 6 -COMPLIANCE WITH VILLAGE MASTER PLAN, LAND USE DISTRICT 1
STANDARD REQUIRED/ ALLOWED PROPOSED COMPLY
Front Yard Setback 0 feet {first floor) 1.5 feet Yes
10 feet average for all floors 10 feet average minimum for
above first floor all floors above first floor
Side Yard Setback No minimum or maximum 0 feet Yes
requirement
Rear Yard Setback No minimum or maximum 0 feet Yes
requirement
Building Height 45 feet 45 feet Yes
Building Coverage 100% 96% Yes
Roof Pitch 50% of the total roof structure 55% of the roof structure has a
must have a 5:12 roof pitch 5:12 roof pitch
Open Space 20% {1,383 sq. ft.) 65% Yes
Landscape Areas -877 sq. ft.
Decks -3,588 sq. ft.
Total -4,465 sq. ft.
Parking Residential: 2 spaces/unit (4 Residential: 10 parking spaces Yes
units x 2 = 8 spaces) on-site
Residential Guest: Yi space/unit
(4 units x .5 = 2 spaces Retail: Applicant is requesting
Retail: 1 space/300 sq. ft. to participate in the Parking In-
1,105/300 = 3.7 (4 spaces Lieu fee program for the four
rounded up) (4) required retail parking
spaces.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 31 of 59
RP 15-16/CDP 15-37 -4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING
November 16, 2016
Page 6
The project site is located in the Coastal Zone and Parking Zone 1 of the Village, which allows the developer
to make an in-lieu fee payment for up to 100% of the on-site parking requirement if the property is located
within 600 feet of an existing parking facility. The site is located approximately 500 feet from the public
parking lot at the northeast corner of Carlsbad Village Drive and Roosevelt Street. As a condition of project
approval, the applicant shall be required to enter into an agreement to pay the parking in-lieu fee prior to
the issuance of building permits for the project. In order to participate in the Parking In-lieu Fee program,
the appropriate decision-maker {City Council) must find that:
1. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Village Master Plan and
Design Manual;
2. The proposed use is consistent with the land use district in which the property is located;
3. Adequate parking is available within the Village to accommodate the project's parking demands;
and
4. The In-Lieu Fee Program has not been suspended or terminated by the City Council.
Justification for the above referenced findings is as follows:
1. The project is consistent with Village Review Master Plan and Design Manual in that the project assists
in satisfying the goals and objectives through the following actions 1) the mixed-use project stimulates
property improvements and new development in the Village by constructing a new permitted mixed-
use building in an area with a mix of dated buildings and increasing the intensity of development
within the Village; 2) it establishes Carlsbad Village as a quality shopping, working and living
environment by providing new employment opportunities; increasing the number, quality, and
diversity of housing units within the Village; and reinforcing pedestrian retail continuity within the
Village commercial areas; and 3) improves the physical appearance of the Village Area by redeveloping
an underutilized site on Madison Street with a new attractive building that adheres to the land use
regulations and design guidelines set forth for the area.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the goals and objectives set forth for Land Use District 1 of the
Village Master Plan and Design Manual in that the mixed-use development not only provides mutually
supportive uses in the form of residential, and commercial/retail uses on Madison Street, but
reinforces the pedestrian-orientation desired for the downtown area by providing new residents and
employees an opportunity to walk to local shopping, dining, recreation, and mass transit functions;
furthermore, its close proximity to existing bus routes and mass transit help to further the goal of
providing new economic and residential development near transportation corridors; and lastly, it will
contribute to the revitalization of the Village area in the form of a new building in the core of the
Village, new commercial lease space, new employment opportunities and new patrons.
3. Adequate parking is available within the Village to accommodate the project's parking demands. A
parking study was recently completed for the Village and Barrio areas, and parking occupancies were
observed in the morning {9 A.M.), afternoon {1:00 P..M.), and evening (7:00 P.M.). The highest
occupancy for all public parking lots combined in the Village was 72% at 1:00 P.M. in May. This
utilization ratio allows for continued implementation of the parking in-lieu fee program because it is
less than the 85% threshold for maximum utilization set by the City Council.
4. The In-Lieu Fee Program has not been suspended or terminated by the City Council.
Based on these findings, it is staffs recommendation that the proposed project warrants granting
participation in the Parking In-Lieu Fee Program for four parking spaces. If the City Council grants
participation in the Parking In-Lieu Fee Program, the project will satisfy its parking requirement as set
forth in the Village Master Plan.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 32 of 59
RP 15-16/CDP 15-37-4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING
November 16, 2016
Pa e 7
C. Coastal Development Regulations for the Village Segment of the Local Coastal Program {CMC
Chapter 21.81 and Village Master Plan and Design Manual
The site for the proposed project is located within the Village Segment of the Coastal Zone. Consistency
with the Village Local Coastal Program is required for this project. The Village Master Plan and Design
Manual function as the Local Coastal Program for the Village area. Therefore, as long as the project is
consistent with the Village Master Plan and Design Manual, the project is consistent with the Local Coastal
Program. Staff finds the proposed project, as discussed in the prior section, to be consistent with the
Village Master Plan and Design Manual and therefore the Local Coastal Program.
D. lnclusionary Housing Ordinance
For all residential development less than seven units, the inclusionary housing requirement may be
satisfied through the payment of an inclusionary housing in-lieu fee. The proposal to construct four
apartment units has been conditioned to pay the applicable housing in-lieu fee for two units prior to
issuance of a building permit.
E. Growth Management Ordinance (C.M.C. Chapter 21.90), Local Facilities Management Zone 1
TABLE 7 -GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPLIANCE
STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE
City Administration 14.1481 sq. ft. Yes
Library 7.54 sq. ft. Yes
Waste Water Treatment 4.00 EDU's Yes
Parks .028 acres Yes
Drainage 1 CFS Yes
Circulation 78ADT Yes
Fire Station 1 Yes
Open Space N/A N/A
Schools 1.04 students Yes
Sewer Collection System 2,420 GPD Yes
Water 1,254 GPD Yes
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project qualifies as a CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (In-Fill Development Project) Class 32 Categorical
Exemption. The project is consistent with the Village Master Plan as well as the General Plan, the project
site is within the city limits, is less than 5 acres in size, and is surrounded by urban uses; there is no
evidence that the site has value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species; approval of the
project will not result in significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality; and the
site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The project is exempt from
further environmental documentation pursuant to Section 15332 of the State CEQA guidelines. A Notice
of Exemption will be filed by the City Planner upon final project approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7210
2. Location Map
3. Disclosure Statement
4. Reduced Exhibits
5. Reduced Colored Renderings
6. Full Size Exhibits (IA" -(IN" dated November 16, 2016
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 33 of 59
(
\.
Ccicyof
Carlsbad
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
P-1(A)
Development Services
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
(760) 602-4610
www.carlsbadca.gov
Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will
require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission
or Committee.
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project
cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
Note: . . .· . . . . . . .. ' . . . . . . . . .. . .. Perseri is clefine.d as "Any indlvidual; firm, CO.".i~artne,rsti'ip, J9int \i~nt.1;J:re( ass:ocfaticm, S()eial club, fraternal
or,ganization, corporation,. estate; trust; receivei\: s:yndicat~; im this :!:!h"d ?riY' other ¢otJ·nty; city and count¥,,
cit¥.hlUHJe.,ipality, ·eilsttiqt Or. otner p.otitiCfl'l's1.11bdlyisiorr'Glr'.anyother grci1p o:r ci.3mbinatro:11 ~ctin·g as a !,lnit." . .. ·, . . . . . .
Age.tt:lS nJ~· si9ii this dt>Cblfnfmt;-h~~~ver,\iie':1~9.aL n~me ~na· entity of the·appJi~l;lrit ~ndproperty owner must b~ provkfed be,!ow. · · · ·· · · · · ·
1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent)
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a
financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership,
include the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the
shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE
INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned
corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A
separate page may be attached if necessary.)
Person Tony Tonekaboni Corp/Part __________ _
Title __________ _ Title ____________ _
Address 2652 Escala Circle, San Diego, CA 92108 Address ------------
2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent)
P-1(A)
Provide the COMPLETE •. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any
ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal
ownership (i.e., partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the
ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, titles, addresses of
all individuals owning· more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE
THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE
SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and
addresses .of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.)
Person Bruce Sahba
Title Managing Member
Address 8528 Ruette Monte Carlo
La Jolla, CA 92037
corp/Part FIRST RMS PROPERTIES
Title ____ -,-________ _
Address 1010 Pearl Street #12
La Jolla, CA 9203. 7
Page 1 of2 Revised 07/10
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 34 of 59
I
( (.
3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust,
list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-
profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
Non Profitrf rust Non Profitrrrust --------~-~ Title Title ____________ _
Address. _________ _ Address. ___________ _
4. Have you had more than $500 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12)
months?
D Yes [HNo If yes, please indicate person(s):. __________ _
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date
Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent
P-1(A) Page 2 of 2 Revised 07/10 Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 35 of 59
!
f I I
I
i I
f
I
R •
T-01 COVER SHEET/SHEET INDEX
ARCHITECTURAL:
A-01 SITE R...AN -FIRST FLOOf'l. ~A!L t 6,A.RA,SE PLAN
A-02 2nd t !'RD FLOOR PLAN UNITS lt:2 t ?l
A-0:3 FOURTI-l FLOOR PL.AN UNIT 4 t ROOF
A-04 ~ST t 5CllJTI-l ELEVATIONS
A-05 EAST • NORTI-l ELEVATION.5
A-06 SEGTION.5
P-01 C-OLOR ELEVATIONS EAST • WEST
P-02 COLOR ELEVATION 50lJTH
LANDSCAPE:
L-1 LAN.DSG.APE CONCEPT PLAN
L-1 IAAl6ATION PLAN
CONSULTANT
FIRST BM5 PIWPERT1E5, LlG
1010 PEAAL STRfcT •12 LA JOUA, GA •1:2031
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOTS 'I AND 10 BI..OGK 4b OF GARl..58AO, IN THE Gin' OF GAALSB>D, GalHT1" OF SAA D1E60, STATE OF GAI..JfcmilA, NZO!mlHS TO HAP
~ HO. 5'5 AND 115, Fll.fD !N 1ttE Off!GE OF THE GCWTY 1<.ECCRDER Of SAA D1E60 GOJNTY HAl' 2, !l'Jlib AND R:Bi.l.lAAl' IS, lb'l.of.,
RfSPEGTlval',
PROJECT INFORMATION
LOT SIZE 0.161 AC:.RES I t,qjt:, 5.F.
t,qlt, S.F. x%:20= 1:3.e.S.:2
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
20:3-:351-0:3
PROPERTY ADDRESS
!'050 HAD150N STREET
CARLSBAD, GA.
ZONING/LAND USE DESIGNATION
FIRE NOTE
ALL LIVIN5 AREA ABOVE THIRD FLOOR N.eE0 FIRE ALARM.
PROJECTED WATER USAGE
RESIDENTIAL
COHMERCIAL
.:250 6PD X4 • 1000 SPD
.:2!' 6PD PER 5F'XII05 : 25'4-6PD
PROJECTED SEWER USAGE
RESIDENTIAL
(EDU) .220 6PD /DAY X II DU X 0EDUPER/DU)= 2420 6PD I DAY
COMMERCIAL
I EDU/ 1600 5F =1105 SF/l000=.6!4X220•1"5 6PL/OAY
AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC
RESIDENTIAL e, TRIPS PER D.U. X 4 UNITS "' :32 ADT
COMMERGIAL
ifaoo SF,.0.4XII05" 46 ADT
BUILDING CODE ANALYSIS:
Tl'F'E OF GONSmJGTION,
al1LD1H6 OGGlPANc.l'
RJU.l'Sf'RJNKI...ER
STORIES
HEISHT,
6ENERAL 1'1..AN,
ZONIN.5
(.}'"~,-~" ::.#..,.
~ .. ,.sd(1 \ ..
S1a1bt1<k1 •~·j '}V1~1q•f•irll \!!,
tfl_,t.,~•Mui<•~
VICINITY MAP NO SCALE
RESIDENTIAL DENSITY
:15 D~LLIN6 UNITS PER AGRE
.!6 ACRES X :!!.:I dt1/aG= 5.6 or 5 PROVIDE 4 UNITS
UNIT-1
Fl""' 266, S.F. ·-3,\!i BATH!WOM!i DE'GK 12165.F.
5T""'6E 13&S.F.
UNIT-2
FLOOR 2016 S.F,
368:l!WOH 3~ BATHROOMS DE'GK 1'14S.F. ST""-"'E 13"S.F.
UNIT-3
FLOOR 20'4'f S.F.
:SBED~OH :,J!z BATifWOMS
DEGK bO<f.S.F. ST""-"'E 1'6S.F.
UNIT-4
RAOR :501t.i S.f,
DE'GK I0:505.F. STOFV6E l:l&S.f.
RESIDENTIAL TOTAL:
RETAIL
'1,1..ffi S.F. ,,b44s.F.
5525.f.
FlOOR IJqj S.F, STOIV.SE '15 S.F,
TOTAL 621 S.F.
OPEN SPACE
LOT SIZE 0.161 AC:.RES I E,qlE, 5.F.
OPEN SPACE REGUIREMENT1 t,qlt, S.F. x%:2011 19e>9.2
PROVIDE 65% OPENSPAGE PROVIDE:
L.AM05GAPE 6Tl S.F. DECK~ :l,S&b S.F. TOT AL +465 S.F.
PROJECT GOVERNING CODES
D:IE GONSTR!JGTlot:! Cf E'BPJEGT SHAl l l;f IN GONFQBMN!GE WlJY
Ilf§ CLRREto: AOOfIR? EPIJ10ti5 Cf M EPLLOWltt? r,ope;,
20!:, allLOIHS STAND.ARDS AOMIN. GODE, PART I, Tln...E 2-4 G.C.R. (C..Al..l~A GODE OF R5511LATION5)
20!:l GAI..IFORNIA allLDIN.S GroE (GBGJ, PART 2, Tln..E 2-4 G.C.R
201, CALIFORNIA a.EGTRIGAI.. GODE (GEGJ, PART :,, T1TlE 2-4 C.C.R.
20!3 GAI..IFOMA Me.GHANJGAI.. GODf (CMG), PART 4, 11TlE 2-4 G£..R.
20l3 GAI..IFOMA f'Ut-lBIHS GODE (GPG), PAAT 5, 11n..E 24 G.C.R.
20!1 GAI..IFOAAIA ENER6l' GODE (GEC), PAAT 6, 11TtE 2.of. G.G.R. 20l3 GAI..IFORNIA FIRE GOOE , PART 'I, TITLE 24 G.l..R.
20l3 GAI..IFORNIA EXISTIHS allLOIHS CODE, PART 10, 11n.E 24, Gt:,R 20l:l GAI..IFORNIA F<EFl:RENCB:> STANDARDS, PART 12, 11n.E 24 GU<.
20! RB.JG SAFETY, STATE Fll<.E MARSHAi.. 1<551.1i...AT10H5 TITLE l'i ,~ ..
PARTIAL. UST Of Af'fUC..AELE filANQAApS,
NFPA l:l AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER Sl'Sm-ts 2019 EDITION NFPA 1-4 ST.AWPIPE S'l'STEMS 2013 EDITloN NFPA 20 STATIOHAR'I" R.MPS, 201:l EDITION
HFPA 2-4 PRIVATE FIRE HAINS, 201:l EDITloN
NFPA 12, NATICtW... FIRE A1...AAM GGOE (C..A AM::NDEDI-ENTS)20i:S
(HoTE, SEE UL STO l<fll FOR 'VIOOAI.. DfVIGES'J NFPA M, STANDARD Fett FIRE DOORS AND an-ER OPBl!HS
F'MTEGTIV?: HFPA 253, GRl11GAI.. RADIN« R.JJX OF FLOOR c.o\lERIHS S'l'STEMS, 2006 EDITION
NFPA 2001 c..l.EAA ~ FIRE EXTIH'51.!ISHIHS Sl'STEMS 2006 EDITION
~ GGOE SE:GTIOH FOR NFPA STANDARDS-2010 GBG (~ 3504.1
WATER METER NOTE
1 .. u .. oat.a,
1-10-.:201,
lltav!11orbo ~/a,ing,
(IJS.16-.:20!6
(~,-0..--.:2011,
Ra\/11"""' eu11,rr19,
=
Clra"'1"''/0la<:k4<:I,
G<>Multail.
/"l'"D""'-t~ ;2015-0!5
Jt.-15-11!1~1'-'1
u .... ....
vi N cu '"" r--.... :II, ..... .... M 1-.. QJ 0 cu QJ N
Q., .. a, .... ~ 0 "' 1-.. ;:: ~ "' .i QJ !;fl i:i. ]. :;;: 0 '"" "' e:Q 0 ... ..... '"" fll 1-.. . ... '-
b() = .... '> QJ
"" QJ • .... .. "' -z '"'U e, ~ "' -="' 0"' ="" v,,.C ~~ ·-"' .,,_ "' .. .... ~ ::;:j
0 .-I l1l + 0
~ M
'l'll'l'
~~
!!ihaatntla,
COVERSHEET
AND INDEX
Shaat~.
T-01
~HO., ·Ol"-!!Hr.!,
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 36 of 59
f I
i
I
t
I q •
.10'. .....
5'±
UNIT-1
FLOOR
Df<K
STOl<A6f
UNIT-2
FLOOR
DE'GK
5T"""6E
UNIT-3
FLOOR Dl'<OK
STORA6E
UNIT-4
FLOOR DE'GK
5TOR>6E
RETAIL
F\LXlR
5T"""6E
:2663 S.F. 1.216 5.F.
1365.f.
201!1 SF.
1'145.F. 1:,asr.
.W-4'1 S.F.
~SF.
13!5.f.
.40'.
......• JQ'
,011!1 5.F. 10905.F. 1,esf.
1105 S.F.
"55.F.
.
BlA1DIN5 SET SAGI<,
1-w w ~ en
OZNEWl'fllVATE
'"''"'" en c5 < ~
FOR Ml)(B:) USE DEVELOPMENT WlnllN GOASTAL ZONE, lHRE !:iiAU. BE NO MIN. OR
MAX. SETBACK FOR FIRST AT 6RADE FLOOR
NOTE:
• ALL UTILIT'r' FAG!LIT1ES l~WD1N6 UPSAADED OR N&I a.EGTRIGAL ~ F~LmES flRE DEPARTMENT GONNEC.TION ASSB-6...15, 5"5 METERS AND a.EGTRIC.AL ME'JcRS ARE TO BE LOGAlcO ON SITE AND 5GREENEO FROVIB't.
1 nlE TOP Of Fl~ LOCATED BEHIND rnE Rl6H!'-a=-wA1' AL.OHS MADISON STREET AAE TO 8E R.USH HIT}! TOP Of THE SIDEWALK.
• VERT/GAL GOLUMN ELEMENTS AI..ON6 THE MADISON STREET FRONTME SHALL SE
SETBAGK A MINIMJH TW1 FEET F1WH THE Rh5HT-af-WAY' BACK OF SIDE~
PARCEL 1
PM 3339
"' --SCALI::: 1" = El'
SITE PLAN
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
NORTH
Lars 'I AND 10 Bl.OGK 4b OF CARLE.BAD, IN lHE Cl1'Y OF GARI..SBAD, G0JNTY OF
SAA DIEiSO, STATE OF GALIFORHIA, AC.GOROIN6 TO MAP TlfREa"' NO. 5:35 AND
715, FILED IN 11iE OFF/GE OF THE GO..Nn' RECORDER OF SAN 01550 cctNT'( MA1'
2, I~ AND FEBls!JAR'!' 15, IM4, RE5PEC/TIVEL1'.
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:
8
7
21
................. 2.0'. ... .
· ...... JO' ..... · _to: .. .
'.•) """-'"'•~nuol',rk
(1)5-16-:2016 ~1-0S-20/1!,
l,J ,_;i
,_;i
Vl N QJ .... .... 'II: t .. "' QJ "' i:i.. .1:1 0 Vl
i... ,:: Q.. e<l "' V'l =... ~ 0 .... co 0 ... ....
Cl)
i... ~
'l'll'I'
t-,
M 0 N
O'\ < u
cu 1
e<l ...i
SITE PLAN
A-01
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 37 of 59
G);!,'::~~ FLOOR PLAN UNIT 1~-----
0 ~!~,~)1.00R PLAN UNITS 2 & '
A-A
LEGEND
f>~::x:;:"~I
A-A
OPEN SP.AGE
f'RJVATEOEGK
GOMMONDEGK
<>'ENSFACE
ROOF METAL STANDING SLOPES/l:2
IHuaD<lt.a,
"1-I0-:;1015
"-'""•-1"1..,l,ig,
(1)5-16-2016
(:JJ,'"°5-::20116
R.tvl•IDr1ilSulld'ng,
""""
tira.mP.,~.:.lcad,
Gon!ulOQ'lt,
~o""<:.t~
:2013-015
it.-15-16/Ga'IH"I
u ....;i
....;i
vi N cu '"" [-. .... ~ ... M -..... 0 (IJ cu (IJ N
~ ... a. ..... ~ 0 "' -.: i:i.. "' "'" Vl (IJ 1 i:i.. ~ 0
~ '"" "' 0 ... ... '"" Cll -.... i;..
0.0 = ..... .... (IJ > ... (IJ • .... .b "' -z "''-: e,~ ="' 0"' = ... "'.c :i< i:i:: -~"' '0-=~ "' ...
....;i < :;: '5
0 'l"'1 Lil + 0
'<:!' M
'l'll'l'
,~/
!;fi .... tTIUo,
2ND &3RD
FLOOR PLAN
UNITS 1-2-3
~t,.,,.,...,.,
A-02
~NO., -Of'-s-rrs
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 38 of 59
i
!
f
I
i i
I
i l
t I n 8
A-A
A-A
,------
' I
I
I
I_ ___ _ I
------------'
NOre,
1<101 !:IF. Fi.AT ROOt= 1614 5.f. IS SLOPE Rad=
~ SLOPE ROOF
THIROFI...OCR!OMS.P SLOPE ROOF '
~[:L"OR 119 SP. SLOPE
A-A
A-A
LEGEND
~ OPEN5P,cf
PRIVATE DEGK
m COMMON DEGK
OPEHSPAGE -"" ·--,o, ' 1'.'"!S-l6}Gt)l"JH1
I.I ,-;j ,-;j
vi N (lJ ... r-. .... =II: ... M 1-c ... 0 QI (lJ QI N
~ .. a, ... 0 tll 5 1-c ,:: ~ "' ~ 1:/l QI
Q.. :::;: o· .2.
c;Q ... "' 0 .. ... ...
tr.I 1-c .... ...
'l'Jl'J' ,1,,,,,, ... .,.,.1{.,./ ~
~1:m1 .. ,
FOURTH FLOOR
PLAN UNIT 4&
ROOF PLAN
A-03
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 39 of 59
8~~-a~LEVATION
I
--El STUCCO BODY COLOR
EXPO STUCCO COLOR
SED0NA(BASE1}
--0 STUCCO BODY COLOR
EXPOSTUCCOCOLOR
OESERTTRAll(BASE4)
---El STUCCO BODY COLORW
EXPOSTUCCOCOLOR
EGGSHELL(BASE1)
---El ACCENT/ PRODMA
HORIZONTALCOMPOSITEWOODPANEL!NG PRODEMAPROOEXDARKBROWN
---El RAILING BY PEENEY
CABELRAILINGOREQ.
----0 ATAS INTERNATIONAL OR EQ.
PRODUCT:METALSTAND!NGSEAM 1~"FIELD-LOK COLOR: FOREST GREEN
--0 ELDORADO STONE /OR EQ.
YUKON MOUNTAIN LEDGE/ OR EQ.
--0 CMU/RCP
CMU REGAL STONE BLOCK OR EQUAL
--0 OUTDOOR LIGHTING
H!NKLEYLIGHTING257HARBORLED0UTDOOR
SCONCE
COLORANCHORBRONZE
D!MENS10N16.25XX11.75X11
--El OUTDOOR LIGHTING
HINK!.EYLIGHTING2572HARBORLED
OUTDOOR PENDANT
COLORANCHORBRONZE
DIMENS10N16.25XX11.75Xi1
--0 GLAZING
GREENTINTEDGLAZINGTYPICAL
--0 WINDOW STOREFRONT
GREEN GLAZING
--0 WALL SIGN
1.0 SQUARE FOOT OF S1GNA6E
FOR EACH LINEAL FOOT OF BUILDIN6 FRONTAGE.
I 0C::."' ,~-
!~~~~~~~~~
1 .. ,,..0.:.t:.o,
<t-lo-..:1015
"°"'·-~1 .... 1..g,
(i}!;-16-2016
(2),..a.-:2016
R4"1•....,,. 61!11.cfr,g,
""""
t;,rc:iwn Btl/Gha~lcad,
G<:insullalt,
!9r,:,1M.ctlb,h,r
.:;zo1s-.a?1
IV'l!!-16!Gt"'I~
c.J ,-a ,-a
rJ; N Q.I .... r-. .... '* ... .... M ... cu Q
Q.I cu N
Q. .. a, .... j 0 ti) ... .: Q., ~ oi'
v:i cu ! i:i... ::;: Q
i:;Q .... ~ Q ... ... ....
tll ... .... ...
b.O = .... .... cu ,> E-cu • .... .. ~ -z ""'U c~ ti) -="' 0 ~ =~ "'.c ·~"' >< < "0-~ .. = i:i... :;:j ,-a< Q ~ Lil + Q
-.:I' M
'l'Jl'J'
'""'6"'"""'"/(.,,,1 ~
~tTitle,
WEST &SOUTH
ELEVATIONS
fih .. tturbor,
A-04
5HTNO., ·Of'-~
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 40 of 59
i I
I
i I
I
f
ij • I
-0 STUCCO BODY COLOR
DUNN EDWARDS
SPICEOHOTCHOCOlATEDET691
---0 STUCCO BODY COLOR
DUNN EDWARDS
WHITEPICKETFENCEFENCEDET64B
-El STUCCO BODY COLORW
DUNN EDWARDS
S0RRELFELTDETS24
-El ACCENT
HORlZONTALCOMPOSITEWOOOPANELING
(PRODEMA)
---0 RAILING BY PEENEY
CABELRAILINGOREO.
-0 ATAS INTERNATIONAL OR EQ.
PRODUCT:METALSTAND1NGSEAM1.WF1ELD-LOK
COLOR: FOREST GREEN
-El STONE/CORONADO
SAND CANYON FLAGSTONE· AMBER GLOW
-0 CMU
CMU WALL SPLIT FACE OR EQUAL
---0 OUTDOOR LIGHTING
H!NKLEYLIGHTING257HAR80RLEOOUTD00R SCONCE
COLORANCHORBRONZE
D!MENS10N1~.25XX11.75X11
---El OUTDOOR LIGHTING
HINK1.EYL!GHTING2572HARB0RLE0 OUTDOOR PENDANT
COLOR ANCHOR BRONZE
DIMENS10N16.25XX11.75Xt1
-0 GLAZING
GREENTINTEOGLAZINGTYP!CAL
-0 WINDOW STOREFRONT
GREEN GLAZING
I C'l="-" IL_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
(l)S-16-:20lb (:1}"1-0S-:1016
l'J"l!Hb/Gl:f"~
u ~ ~
c,i N Cl) '"" .... =II: t:: ... CIJ Cl) CIJ Q. .. ... 0 "' -'t: i:i... cu CIJ Vl ~ ~ 0
'"" CQ 0 .... '"" Ul -.... '-
'l'Jl'l'
·~'
r-. M 0 N "' ~ cu· ~ cu ...
EAST & NORTH
ELEVATIONS
A-05
$HTt,IO.' •Cl!'• 9Hr.!i
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 41 of 59
i
j
I
f I
ij
g
PLANTER.
PR.OPER.rr LINE
J-FROFER.TY 1L LINE
I
OJ~-16-::tol6 (:J},-o5-::tOl6
-...,..
""' ' ltl" IS-16,'GL?IH'T
u
-l -l
<ll N (lJ "" r,... .... 'lie ..... ... M -~ 0 (lJ ~ N
Q. .. a, ... 0 tll ~ -,:: C. Ol d' ~ Vl i:i... i :;;: 0
i:rl "" Ol 0 ... ..... "" r.l) -.... ~
~ = ... .... ~ . ::: .... ~ . .. Ol -z ... u ~; tll • ="" O Ol = ii; .,,.c ·-"' >< < "O-= i:i... Ol ..
-l < ::;:J
0 ,-( in + 0
~ M
'1'11'1'
~~I
SECTIONS
A-6
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 42 of 59
5'
l!
\
\
\
\
~ EX EX.
R/W 10' 't, 10' R/W ,J~J~tJ~~J=NG PCC
TYPICAL Al LEY SECTION NO SCALE
·H lo ~
TYPICAL SlREET SECTION
MADISON SlREET
ND SCALE
!
I
I
I
I
I
L._ -I
-i.········ ---_J 7_J
~-···---... -[ -~
--,1_ ___ _J
I
+-
I
I
I
··-·· ·-----............ ...J
r--,
I L
·····~·------·-!
BMP NOTES:
M'ERVIOU8 AREA " 11818 SF
--i-
__ _J
X .04 .. 277 8F REQURED
GRADING NOTES:
1.) b(:ROJTHEf 5~POSES GFW:JIHG too PERCENT OF
2.) PROJECT PROPOSES TO DRAlN ROOF DRAINS TO LANDSCAPED AREAS AND PLANTERS. THEN THROUGH A SIDEWALK UNDERDRAlN 0-27,
3.) EXCAVATION-il.L.Qj'. FlU. .fil...Q.t. EXPORTflhlf"6Rf: 11Q._Q,Y.
7
--··-t' i
I-··-----'
6 I ~
BENCH MARK
CLSB-IJO
SET 2.5" OISK IN SOUTHEAST CORNER OF DRAINAGE BOX 1Nl£T AT THE ENO OF
CURB RETURN IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GRANO A VENUE ANO WASHINGTON ST.
NG\/029 ELEv.: 40.91
'--------------------------------····----·----··-·-··
~{;
o· SC
--\.=-=-! ~--~ --
·-._
D:.IG'H~/i>.'0
---j·=-~ -, -----
I I
I
I
I
-I
-\ I 1-~ol
26
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
LOTS 9 AND 10 &LOCK 48 OF CAA!Sa,\,O, IN THE CITY OF CARLSB.4J), COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP lHEREOF NO. 535 AHO 775, FILED IN THE
OFFICE OF lHE COUN'JY RECORDER OF ~ O!EGO COUITTY MAY 2, 1808 .AND FEBRUARY 15, 1894, RESPECTIVELY,
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER:
PRELIMINARY GRADING ANO DRAINAGE PLAN FOR:
3050 MADISON STREET
Carlsbad, CA
PREPARED FOR:
FIRST RM PROPERTIES 1010 PEARL STREET #12 l.A Joli.A, CA 92037
L LAND~~i:.~~RJNG E &«a Cambto Del Rio South
C San n~:!: ~4 9210&
(619) 260-0420
Sht 1 at 1 Dttl:.e:B/OS/16 D1'11. MC Apr. l.fC Ihrg. No. 2-403-PGP-1
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 43 of 59
ROOT BARRIER NOlE:
1. 'ffiEE ROOT BARRIERS "DEEP ROOT UB-24• SHAll. BE INSTAUID 'i'!HERE 'ffiEES
ARE PLACED 'MTHIN 5' Of PUBLIC IMPRO\'EMENTS, INCLUDING WALKS, CURBS,
SlREET PAVEMENT, OR 'MiERE NEW PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE PLACED ADJACENT TO EXISTING 'ffiEES. DO NOT \ffiAP ROOT BARRIER AROUND ROOTBAU.
MAINTENANCE NOlE:
All REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS SliAll BE MAINTAINED BY
TI-IE D~ER / HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION. TI-IE LANDSCAPE AREAS SHAU. BE MAINTAINED FREE OF DEBRIS AND UTTER AND All. PLANT MATERIAL SHAU. BE MAINTAINED IN A HEALTI-IY, GROWING CONDITION. DISEASED OR DEAD PLANT MATERIAL SHAU. BE SATISFACTORILY TREATED OR REPLACED PER THE CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT
PLANT LEGEND
STREETTREE
SYM80t. BOTANK;ALNAM: •"a';'l.0 oot.&!OONAAE If;;~~-'_.-:~ i-CASSIALEPTG'HYUA V' GOLO~ED.IJ.1JONTFIE.E
ACCENTTREES
0 8AU1NNIABLA1<EANA
HONGKONG ORCHID TREE
ACCENT PlANTS
~ STRELITZIANICOLAI ~ G~TBIROOFPAAAOISE
CASCADING VINES
2.('BOX B'x.f
24'B0X ll'x4'
15GAL. 6'X3'
(CASCADE OOWN SOUTH WALL)
SGAL. 1B"X18"
N55"32'09"E139.-49'
iii ..J ..J <
LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN
o 4' e· 111· OPEtlil SPACE REQIJFE~1
NORTH ----: 20:l ~ SPACE FEOWED .. LOT N'EA Cl,810 a= X .20 .. \Ml_. SCALE: 1/B• • 1'-0" L..AN:>8CAPENEA<m78P)+~ATIONEA(3,emF>• ....... fP
CONCEPTUAL WATER CONSERVATION PLAN
THE PLANT PAL£TTE HAS BEEN SELECTED IN ORDER TO STRESS THE IMPORTANCE OF WATER-WISE LANDSCAPING, AS WELL AS
PROVIDING AN AESTHETICALLY PLEASING LANDSCAPE FDR THE . COMMUNITY. PlANlS SUECTED ARE CONSISTENT Willi THE
CARLSBAD VILLAGE MASTER PLAN DESIGN MANUAL AS WELL "5
CARLSBAD VILLAGE CENTER DESIGN MANUAL / DISTRICT 1. ALL PLANTED AREAS SHALL RECEIVE A 3• LAYER OF BARK MULCH TO REDUCE IRRIGATION ANO MAINTENANCE NEEDS.
IRRIGATION SYSTEM DESIGN: THE SYSTEM SHAU. BE DESIGNED TO REDUCE OVERALL WATER REQUIRED FOR SUPPLEMENTAL IRRIGATION. A FLOW SENSOR, RAIN SENSOR ANO ET-BASED CONTROLLER SHALL BE UTILIZED TO ACHIM THIS GOAL THE OEUVERY METHOD WILL BE
DRIP IRRIGATION. HYDROZONES WILL BE SEPARATED BASED ON PLANT REQUIREMENTS AND SOLAR EXPOSURE. IRRIGATION DESIGN SHALL COMPLY WITH THE AB 1881 ANO CARLSBAD LANDSCAPE MANUAL
NOTE: 50% OF THE SHRUBS (EXCEPT ON SLOPES 3:1 OR STEEPER) SHAll. BEA MINIMUM 5 GALLON SIZE
LARGE ACCENT SHRUBS
SYt-.m.. BOTANICAL NAM:
0 G
CCU:Ol'EMA PU..CI-ERUM PINK!IREATliOFHEAVEH
LEU::OPHYLLUM FRIJTESCENS
TEXASRAHGER
LIGUSTR~ TEXAJ\IJM
RHAPHa..EPIS INDICA
V~LMTNJS 'SpringBo\qler
LMJFWSTii.lS
MfOlUM ACCENT SHRUBS
SYMBOt.
0
8)
0
BOTANICAL NAME --ANZIGOZANTHOS FLAVIOUS
CAUISTEMON CIT. 'LITTLE JOHN' CWAAF80TTI.E!IRUSH
MYRTUS COMMUNIS COMPACTA
:r~~~~RA.SSIFOI.ILM'NANA'
PHORMIUM TENAX 'ATROP\JRPUREUM'
PUllfl.EHEWZEAI.AHOFLAX
Sl1E
SGAL.
SGAL.
5GAL
SGAL.
5GAL
SIZE
5GAL
5GAL
\GAL
SGAL.
SGAL.
HTXSPO
18"x18"
1B"x1B"
1B"x1B"
16"x16"
16"x16"
HTXSPO
1B"x1B'
18"x1B'
B'x8'
2-4'x24'
24'1124'
SMALL ACCENT SHRUBS
SYM80t.
8 0
FESTLCAOVlflL.\ \GAL
ll.UEFfSCUE
LAVENOOLAANGUSTIFOl.l.' 'Moo&!ead" 5 GAL.
NAN DINA OOMESTICA 'f-LA.RBOLR DWARF' 1 GAL
HEAVENLV8"MIIOOHYBAID
LEYMUSCONOENSATUS 1 GAL.
CMiYONPIIINCEW\UlRVE
TULBAGHIA VIOi.ACEA \GAL.
GROUNO COVER
~ ~
VINES
SYMBOt.
MYOPORW PARVF<XJJM
PR06TRAT'EMYOPORUM 1&"0.C.SPN:NG
BACC1-VIRISPILlA..AR/S COYOT'EeAIJSH 24·0.c.SPACI.G
ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS TRAIUNSROSEMNIV 36'0.C.SPACJNG
RATS
1 GAL
\GAL
FLATS
~ SOLANUM JASMINOIDES 5GAL. POTATOVN
NOTE: MIN. OF 3' LAYER OF BARI< MULCH
FOR ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS rTYPICAL)
NO lAWN IS BEING PROPOSED FOR THIS PROJECT.
,.,..
B"xB'
s,s· ,.,..
STATEMENT:
Hutter Designs, Inc.
Landscape Architects
3645 Ruffin Road, Ste. 235 San Diego, Ca 92123 T: (619) 337·4044
F: (619)342-8528
•1 AM FAMILIAR WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSCAPE ANO
IRRIGATION PLANS CONTAJNEO IN THE CITY Of CARlSBAO'S LANDSCAPE MANUAL AND WATER EFFlCIENT REGULATIONS. I HAVE PREPARED 11-IIS PLAN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE REGUlATIONS AND THE LANDSCAPE MANUAL ANO AGREE TO COMPLY Willi ALL
REQUIREMENTS WHEN SUBMITTlNG CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. I CERTIFY THAT THE PLAN IMPLEMENTS THOSE REGULATIONS TO
PROVIDE EFFICIENT USE Of WATER.•
\ ~.
1 • .lll.Y 12, 20\t
Draffl By/Chldo:ld By.
Pro,19ct Numbw
I.J
..J ..J
vi N ~ ,..... I'-... # t: ... M
a., 0 ~ a., N
0.. ... "' ... ~ 0 "' l-c ;:: C. "' .i a., V, Q., :§. :;: 0 ,..... "' i:Q 0 ,-l .... ,.....
tll l-c ... i:..
e.o = ... ... a., .::: ... a., • ... "' -z ... I.)
~~ V) ' =-= C «I :s ... <n.C >< i:.:: ·-<I) -o-:s -i: "' ... ..J ~ :;:~
0 .-I LI')
+ 0
'<:I' M
LANDSCAPE
CONCEPT
PLAN
L-1
5"TNO.: OF SHlS
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 44 of 59
NORTH
SCALE: NTS
HYDRO ZONE
~ NORlHERN ZONE
~ WESTERN ZONE
Im SOVTHERN ZONE
~RO.W.ZONE
.,..,1tr
N55'J2'09"E 139.49'
WATER USE IRR. TYPE
LOW USE DRIP IRR.
LOW USE DRIP IRR.
LOW USE DRIP IRR.
LOW USE DRIP IRR.
SQUARE FT.
7080.FT.
4280.FT.
60080.FT.
22680.FT.
937 SO. FT. (TOTAL>!
IRRIGATION HYDROZONES EXHIBIT
3050 MADISON STREET
>-w ...J s ...J
i; <(
Hutter Designs, Inc.
Landscape Architects
3645 Ruffin Road, Ste. 235
San Diego, Ca 92123
T: (619) 337-4044
F: (619) 342-8528
DATE: JUNE 28, 2016
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 45 of 59
NORTH
SCALE• NTS
tllf'-17/r
N55'32'09"E 139.49'
~ RECYCLED IRRIGATION WATER (F\JTIJRE)
RECYCLED IRRIGATION EXHIBIT
3050 MADISON STREET
[jj
...J ...J <(
Hutter Designs, Inc.
Landscape Architects
3645 Ruffin Road, Ste. 235
San Diego, Ca 92123
T: (619) 337-4044
F: (619) 342-8528
DATE: JUNE 28, 2016
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 46 of 59
SOUTHWEST
SOUTHEAST
4+1 Luxury living Apartment 3050 Madison Street Carlsbad, Ca
THT ~~ rro+-858-349-5543
P-4 Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 47 of 59
NORTHWEST
SOUTHEAST
4+1 Luxury living Apartment 3050 Madison Street Carlsbad, Ca
THT ~~ ~-858-349-5543
P-3
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 48 of 59
THT d~.j"m/eot~ -7/' rr,o,ufi,. 858-349-5543 BIRD EYE PREPECTIVE P-5
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 49 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes
Minutes of:
Time of Meeting:
Date of Meeting:
Place of Meeting:
CALL TO ORDER
November 16, 2016
PLANNING COMMISSION
6:00 p.m.
November 16, 2016
COUNCIL CHAMBER
Chairperson Anderson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Commissioner Segall led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ROLL CALL
Exhibit 6
Page 1
Present: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioners Black, L'Heureux, Goyarts, Montgomery, Segall
and Siekmann
Absent: None
STAFF PRESENT
Don Neu, City Planner
Ron Kemp, Assistant City Attorney
Farah Nisan, Senior Office Specialist
Chris Garcia, Associate Planner
Austin Silva, Associate Planner
Shannon Werneke, Associate Planner
Jason Geldert, Engineering Manager
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Kemp commented that there are three types of minutes that the clerks keep such as action minutes,
summary minutes, and verbatim minutes. He noted that the summary minutes would capture the questions
that the Commission asks of staff and the answers, questions the Commission may ask of the applicant
and the answers and the decisions that were made afterwards. He stated that the verbatim minutes are
not what we aspire to because there is a video tape taken of the meeting that can be watched. Mr. Kemp
clarified that the City Council would like to see the summary format of the Planning Commission minutes
and stated that they watch the video if they would like to hear any other discussions. Mr. Kemp stated that
the minutes are prepared by the minutes clerk, presented to the Commission for approval, and then any
changes that are made to the minutes should be voted on by the entire Commission.
Chairperson Anderson asked for clarification if questions and responses would be summarized and not any
comments from the Commission. Mr. Kemp stated that the comments would come at the end of the
decision making process.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting of
September 7, 2016.
Commissioner Montgomery referred to page 2, line 9 of his comments and stated that he would like to
make a change from June to July.
Commissioner Segall referred to page 10 and stated that he would like to clarify that he said if any future
growth would necessitate bringing on a second hotel property.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 50 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 2016 Page2
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded by Commissioner L'Heureux to
approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 7, 2016 as amended.
VOTE: 5-0-2
AYES:
NOES:
Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner L'Heureux,
Commissioner Montgomery, and Commissioner Segall
None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioners Black and Siekmann
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any corrections or revisions to the minutes of the meeting of
October 19, 2016.
Commissioner L'Heureux referred to the second paragraph on page 6 and stated that he would like to make
a change from transit to transect.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner L'Heureux and duly seconded by Commissioner Siekmann
to approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 19, 2016 as amended.
VOTE: 6-0-1
AYES: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner
L'Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery and Commissioner Siekmann
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Segall
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA
None.
PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING
Chairperson Anderson asked Mr. Neu to introduce the first item and opened the public hearing on Agenda
Item 1.
Commissioner Siekmann stated that she would like to recuse herself.
1. CDP 16-40/NCP 16-03 -DOW ADDITION -Request for approval of a Coastal
Development Permit and Nonconforming Construction Permit to allow the remodel of an
existing single family residence and replace the 253 square foot second story with a 1,583
square foot second story addition on a .15 acre lot within the R-1 Zone and the Mello II
Segment of the city's Coastal Zone located at 5080 Carlsbad Boulevard within Local
Facilities Management Zone 3. The project site is not within the appealable area of the
California Coastal Commission. 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 Section 15303(a),
construction of a single family residence, of the state CEQA Guidelines.
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 1 and stated Associate Planner Chris Garcia would make the staff
presentation.
Mr. Garcia gave a brief presentation and stated he would be available to answer any questions.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 51 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 2016 Page 3
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any questions of staff.
Chairperson Anderson stated that there is currently a retaining wall within that easement that is made out
of old railroad ties and asked if the timing would facilitate the future road improvements. Engineering
Manager Jason Geldert stated that the issue would be addressed in time with Public Works, and stated that
he anticipates the wall may be removed. Chairperson Anderson asked if there was a timeframe of when a
decision might be made. Mr. Geldert stated at least 1 to 2 years.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any further questions of staff. Seeing none, she asked if the
applicant wished to make a presentation.
Lars Gullberg, Suite 234, 2400 Kettner Boulevard, San Diego, stated that he would be available to answer
any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if it was the intent to leave the wall the way it is. Mr. Gullberg stated yes, it
is as of now.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any further questions of the applicant. Seeing none, she asked
if any person in the audience wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, Chairperson Anderson opened
and closed the public testimony on Agenda Item 1.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Montgomery stated that he can approve the non-conforming setback and can approve the
project.
Commissioner Black concurs with Commissioner Montgomery and stated that he can support the project.
Commissioner Goyarts stated that he can also support the project.
Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he can support the project.
Commissioner Segall concurs with his fellow Commissioners and stated that he can support the project.
Chairperson Anderson commented that she could also support the project.
MOTION
ACTION:
VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded by Commissioner L'Heureux that
the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 7208
approving Coastal Development Permit CDP 16-40 and Nonconforming
Construction Permit NCP 16-03, based upon the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein.
6-0-1
Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner
L'Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery and Commissioner Segall
None
None
ABSTAIN: Commissioner Siekmann
Chairperson Anderson closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 1, asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next
item and opened the public hearing on Agenda Item 2.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 52 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 2016 Page 4
2. RP 15-16/CDP 15-37 - 4 PLUS 1 LUXURY LIVING -Request for a recommendation of
approval of a Major Review Permit and Coastal Development Permit to allow for the
demolition of a one-story, two-unit residential building and the construction of a mixed-use
building consisting of 1,105 square feet of retail space and four apartment units located at
3050 Madison Street in Land Use District 1 of the Village Review zone, the Village Segment
of the Local Coastal Program, and within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The City
Planner has determined that this 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 is therefore categorically exempt from the requirement for the preparation of
environmental documents pursuant to section 15332 (In-fill Development Projects) of the
State CEQA guidelines.
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 2 and stated Associate Planner Austin Silva would make the staff
presentation.
Mr. Silva gave a brief presentation and stated that an errata has been provided to the Commission to clarify
that the Recommendation on page one of the staff report to also recommend approval of the Coastal
Development Permit (CDP 15-37) as well as to revise Planning Commission Resolution No. 7210, page 4,
Finding 3C to add "2016" after May on the fifth line of the paragraph. Mr. Silva stated that staff is
recommending to remove condition No. 41 as it is not applicable to the project and concluded that he would
be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if the parking study from May 2016 is the parking study that is ongoing. Mr.
Silva stated yes, it is the parking study that was recently completed. Mr. Neu clarified that it refers to the
first phase of the data that was presented on the field data collection of parking availability.
Chairperson Anderson stated that several comment letters have been submitted from the public and
wondered if Mr. Neu would respond to the purpose of the parking in lieu. Mr. Neu stated that the Village
Plan initially was approved as a redevelopment plan and when the state eliminated redevelopment, the city
converted it into a Master Plan so that it could be used to regulate development in the Village. Mr. Neu
stated that parking has always been a challenge and as part of the Village Plan years ago, the program
was created to allow the option for some land uses to buy parking credits and the city would have common
facilities that could be used by everyone.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Black asked where the drive thru at Taco Bell next to the property empties out into. Mr.
Silva stated Carlsbad Village Drive. Commissioner Black asked if the drive thru goes around the back of
the building. Mr. Silva stated yes. Commissioner Black asked if it is by the alley way. Mr. Silva replied that
it is adjacent to the alley way. Commissioner Black asked if a traffic study has been done to see how many
cars use the alley way. Mr. Silva stated no, a traffic study is not required of a project unless it meets a
certain threshold of 500 average daily trips.
Commissioner Siekmann asked if Mr. Silva would talk about the density and how the project meets the
density. Mr. Silva stated that the Village Master Plan designates density for certain properties as the density
requirements for districts one through four is 28 to 35 units per acre. Mr. Silva commented that the project
meets the density requirements of 25 units per acre.
Commissioner Segall asked if the project would fit within the design guidelines and what the public input
has said. Mr. Silva stated that the draft Village and Barrio Master Plan meets the current standards. Mr.
Silva added that the height requirement in the draft Village and Barrio Master Plan is 45 feet and the
proposed project's building height is also 45 feet. Commissioner Segall inquired about parking. Mr. Neu
stated that staff does not know what the parking recommendations will be as of yet since the last phase of
the parking study has not been completed.
Commissioner L'Heureux inquired about the city's requirements for the removal of above ground utility
poles for projects. Mr. Geldert stated that the municipal code pertains to subdivisions that are developing
with street frontage of 600 feet or more. Commissioner L'Heureux asked if there are not any requirements
for projects such as this. Mr. Geldert replied stating no, the development of a single lot does not require
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 53 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 2016 Page 5
underground utilities. Commissioner L'Heureux asked if there are any requirements for any developers to
participate in future improvement agreement for underground utilities. Mr. Geldert stated no.
Commissioner Montgomery asked if the drive thru lane is adjacent to the alley. Mr. Geldert stated that
there has not been any traffic issues in that area.
Chairperson Anderson inquired about shrubbery and if there will be room for planting on Taco Bell's side
of the wall after development. Mr. Silva stated that there is a small strip for landscaping opportunities on
the other property. Chairperson Anderson stated that the wall is attractive for tagging and if that is any
concern of Mr. Silva's. Mr. Silva stated no.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any other questions of staff. Seeing none, she asked if the
applicant wished to make a presentation.
Tone Tonekaboni, 2652 Escala Circle, San Diego, made a brief presentation and stated that he would be
available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Chairperson Anderson asked if the landscaping is maintained by the Homeowner's Association (HOA) or
the homeowner. Mr. Tonekaboni stated that there is not an HOA for an apartment building and that the
property owner would maintain landscaping. Chairperson Anderson asked if the units are owned by one
person. Mr. Tonekaboni stated yes.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any further questions of the applicant. Seeing none, she asked
if any members of the audience wished to speak on the item.
Sheila McNulty, 3091 Jefferson Street, submitted a letter to the Commission, stated her concerns with
parking overflow and the density in the alley.
Barbara Boutelle, 3062 & 3070 Madison Street, stated her concerns with parking spaces.
Deedee Trejo, 2442 Roosevelt Street, stated her concerns with parking and the project's feel in the Village.
Robert Wilkinson, 2911 State Street, Suite I, stated that the project is the representative model of mixed
use projects and thanked the Commissioner's for their comments regarding underground utilities.
James Vitale, 3037 Jefferson Street, stated his concerns with density, the height of the building and the
character of the neighborhood.
Josh Hash, 946 Laguna Drive, stated that he would like the Commission to consider the project as a whole
and stated his concerns with density and the building's height.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any other members of the audience who wished to speak on the
item. Seeing none, she asked if applicant could respond to the issues raised.
Mr. Tonekaboni submitted a photo of the driveway to the Commission clarifying issues regarding the
driveway.
Commissioner L'Heureux asked what type of commercial tenants would occupy the building. Mr.
Tonekaboni stated small businesses that would attract one to two cars per day.
Chairperson Anderson asked if staff would like to respond to the issues raised. Mr. Silva stated that the
Village and Barrio Master plan allows for building height of 45 feet. He stated that the applicant has provided
a proposal that includes stepping back of the upper floors and on the sides of the building and complies
with the design guidelines.
Commissioner Montgomery asked what the City Planner considers the core of the Village. Mr. Neu stated
that staff is evaluating that issue against the approved Master Plan which consists of nine land use districts.
He stated that district one, the Carlsbad Village Center, is considered the core for the purposes of the
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 54 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 2016 Page 6
current plan that includes the project site and goes as far south as Oak Avenue. Mr. Neu concluded that
staff is reevaluating what the core should be with the new Village and Barrio Master Plan that will support
a certain amount of residential that will help support the commercial uses in the Village and help make
those uses successful.
Chairperson Anderson asked if district one requires mixed use. Mr. Neu stated yes, the goal in the
commercial areas is to have the ground floor designated for commercial land uses so that pedestrians are
encouraged to park in the Village and walk around for a more viable district.
Commissioner L'Heureux asked if staff has done any kind of analysis regarding the alley and the amount
of traffic that can be tolerated and handled. Mr. Geldert stated that mOst purposes of the alleys is to access
parking that will keep driveways and curb cuts off the main streets providing nice sidewalks and additional
street parking. He stated that the traffic load for the project is low enough that it does not require a specific
study however, the alley can handle the traffic from higher densities and that the proposed project would
generate less traffic than a medical office building that has continuance of clients.
Commissioner Goyarts asked if the city could require the restaurant property owner to extend the drive thru
to the street. Mr. Neu stated that there was desire to not add additional driveway cuts when the project
was considered since the alley is already connected to Carlsbad Village Drive.
Commissioner Black asked if there could be arrangements in utilizing the bank parking lot by a shared
parking agreement rather than paying the in lieu fee. Mr. Silva replied stating that there would have to be
a night and day time use of. the parking lot or if the bank had surplus parking. Mr. Silva stated that since
the bank hours of operation are during day time use, the shared parking agreement would not suffice.
Commissioner Black asked if the parking lot located at the bank were filled to capacity during the day time.
Mr. Silva stated no.
Chairperson Anderson asked if the alley is a two way street. Mr. Geldert stated yes. Chairperson Anderson
asked if there would be room for two cars to pass with parked cars on the side. Mr. Geldert stated that
there is no parking along the alley and that the vehicles parked on their property are outside the right of
way of the alley. Chairperson Anderson asked if the properties currently parking off the alley were
redeveloped would they be allowed to have parking accessed from the alley or if they would have to reorient
their property to face the main street. Mr. Geldert stated that it would preferred to have parking accessed
from the alley.
Commissioner Segall asked if the Commission had the right to legally hold off on making a decision on this
item knowing that there is a whole new plan coming forward. Mr. Neu stated that the mechanism by which
the city could hold up on considering new projects until the Master Plan were adopted would be to adopt a
moratorium, an area would be determined and specify some rationale as to why a moratorium was
necessary. He stated that ultimately that would be a decision for the City Council to make whether they felt
it was important enough to forgo any additional projects and post pone them until a new plan was
developed. Mr. Neu concluded that at this time, there is not a moratorium in place and staff is in a position
to evaluate the proposals against the current plan.
Mr. Kemp stated that the City Council is the body that makes the laws and the Planning Commission has
been appointed to carry out those laws and evaluate the project by the rules and ordinances that are on
the books. He stated that the City Council has not thought that there needs to be a moratorium, otherwise
there would be one.
Chairperson Anderson asked if the apartment manager would have some say so about how many cars are
allowed to residents. Mr. Silva stated yes, the residents should be designated two spaces per unit.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any other questions for staff. Seeing none, she closed public
testimony.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Montgomery stated that he could approve the project based on the findings.
Commissioner Black stated that he can approve the project.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 55 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 2016 Page 7
Commissioner Goyarts stated that he could also approve the project.
Commissioner Siekmann agrees that the project meets the findings and stated that she could support the
project.
Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he has a problem with the architecture feeling too massive in the way
that it is being portrayed and that he is having a difficult time in deciding that the project is compatible with
the neighborhood. Commissioner L'Heureux commented that he does not think the design maximizes the
use for the property owner is the best for the community. He stated that he cannot support the project.
Commissioner Segall stated that he will have to support the project.
Chairperson Anderson stated that she could support the project.
MOTION
ACTION: Motion by Commissioner Segall and duly seconded by Commissioner Siekmann that
the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 7210
recommending approval of Major Review Permit RP 15-16 and Coastal Development
Permit CDP 15-37 to the City Council based on the findings and subject to the
conditions contained therein including the errata sheet presented and deleting
condition No. 41.
VOTE: 6-1-0
AYES: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts,
Commissioner Montgomery, Commissioner Segall and Commissioner Siekmann
NOES: Commissioner L'Heureux
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
RECESS
Chairperson Anderson closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 2 and called for a 6 minute recess at 8:00
p.m.
MEETING CALLED TO ORDER
Chairperson Anderson called the meeting to order at 8:10 p.m. with all Commissioners present.
Chairperson Anderson asked Mr. Neu to introduce the next item and opened the public hearing on Agenda
Item 3.
3. MP 10-01(B)1CT 16-05/PUD 16-06 -QUARRY CREEK -PA R-4 (WEST) -Request for
a determination that the project is within the scope of the previously certified Quarry Creek
Master Plan EIR and that the EIR adequately describes the activity for the purposes of
CEQA; and a request for approval of a Master Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map and
Planned Development Permit for 56 single-family homes within Planning Area R-4 of the
Quarry Creek Master Plan, located on the north side of Marron Road and adjacent to the
western terminus of Adobe Springs Road, in Local Facilities Management Zone 25.
Mr. Neu introduced Agenda Item 3 and stated Associate Planner Shannon Werneke would make the staff
presentation.
Ms. Werneke gave a brief presentation and stated she would be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Segall asked if there are requirements regulating what kinds of curtailments could be on the
roof deck not specifying gas or coal burning and if there is an interest to restrict coal burning barbeques.
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 56 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 2016 Page 8
Ms. Werneke stated that she would defer the question to the applicant, stated that she does not think that
there are any concerns and that there is a gas stub out on the roof plan for a gas barbeque.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were further questions of staff. Seeing none, she asked if the
applicant wished to make a presentation.
Jack Robson, Suite 600, 4365 Executive Drive, San Diego, made the presentation and stated that he will
be available to answer any questions.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Goyarts asked if the 56 single family homes will have access to the recreation center. Mr.
Robson stated yes. Commissioner Goyarts asked why the pool would not be available for use while the
recreation center is open. Mr. Robson stated that there were certain criteria as to what areas would be
open by occupancy and added that the pool would be opened by the 75th or by the 1001h occupancy. Mr.
Robson stated that the rec center will need to be completed by the 55th occupancy.
Commissioner Siekmann asked if flags were allowed on the roof decks. Mr. Robson stated that since
umbrellas would be seen from the public street above the railing, there are private yard areas where
residents could post flags however, flag poles may be restricted from the roof decks.
Commissioner Montgomery asked if the roof decks are located towards the rear end of the houses. Mr.
Robson stated yes.
Chairperson Anderson asked if there were any further questions of the applicant. Seeing none, she asked
if any members of the audience wished to speak on the item. Seeing none, Chairperson Anderson opened
and closed public testimony.
DISCUSSION
Commissioner Montgomery stated that he could support the project.
Commissioner Black stated that he could approve the project.
Commissioner Goyarts stated that he could also approve the project.
Commissioner Siekmann stated that she could support the project.
Commissioner L'Heureux stated that he could approve the project.
Commissioner Segall stated that he could support the project.
Chairperson Anderson stated that she could 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. 7209
recommending approval of a Master Plan Amendment (MP 10-01 (B)), Tentative
Tract Map (CT 16-05) and Planned Development Permit (PUD 16-06) based on the
findings and subject to the conditions therein including an errata sheet.
VOTE: 7-0
AYES: Chairperson Anderson, Commissioner Black, Commissioner Goyarts, Commissioner
L'Heureux, Commissioner Montgomery, Commissioner Segall and Commissioner
Siekmann
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 57 of 59
Planning Commission Minutes November 16, 2016 Page 9
Chairperson Anderson closed the public hearing on Agenda Item 3.
COMMISSION COMMENTS
Chairperson Anderson wished the Commission a Happy Thanksgiving.
CITY PLANNER COMMENTS
None.
CITY ATTORNEY COMMENTS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
By proper motion, the Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission of November 16, 2016 was adjourned [p~
DON NEU
City Planner
Farah Nisan
Minutes Clerk
Item #11 January 10, 2017 Page 58 of 59