The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCP 94-01A; Poinsettia Shores PA B-1; Condo Permit (CP) (17)City of Carlsbad Planning Department July 14, 1997 Jonathan Weldy Watt Homes 27720 Jefferson Avenue, Suite 200 Temecula CA 92590 SUBJECT: CP 94-01 (A) - POINSETTIA SHORES PLANNING AREA B-1 Thank you for applying for Land Use Permits in the City of Carlsbad. The Planning Department has reviewed your Condominium Permit Amendment, no. CP 94-01 (A), as to its completeness for processing. The application is incomplete, as submitted. Attached are two lists. The first list is information which must be submitted to complete your application. This list of items must be submitted directly to your staff planner by appointment. All list items must be submitted simultaneously and a copy of this list must be included with your submittals. No processing of your application can occur until the application is determined to be complete. The second list is issues of concern to staff. When all required materials are submitted the City has 30 days to make a determination of completeness. If the application is determined to be complete, processing for a decision on the application will be initiated. In addition, please note that you have six months from the date the application was initially filed, June 13, 1997, to either resubmit the application or submit the required information. Failure to resubmit the application or to submit the materials necessary to determine your application complete shall be deemed to constitute withdrawal of the application. If an application is withdrawn or deemed withdrawn, a new application must be submitted. Please contact your staff planner, Eric Munoz, at (760) 438-1161, extension 4441, if you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting to discuss the application. Sincerely, MICHAEL. HObZMILLER Planning Director MJH:EM:kr c: Gary Wayne File Copy Robert Green Data Entry Clyde Wickham Planning Aide Bobbie Hoder Stan Weiler, HPA 2O75 Las Palmas Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92OO9-1576 - (619) 438-1161 • FAX (619) 438-O894 LIST OF ITEMS NEEDED TO COMPLETE THE APPLICATION Project No. CP 94-01 (A) 1. Based on the submittal and discussions with the applicant, it clearly appears that that the project proposes development phasing. Specifically, it appears that the financial subdivision lines which are currently in place for the subject property are intended to be the basis for phasing requests. Any phasing proposal for B-1 must include a tentative map amendment to CT 94-08. To make this application (CP 94-01 (A)) complete, one of the following must be submitted: (1) a tentative map amendment application (which must also be deemed complete); or, (2) a letter signed by all B-1 property owners (Watt, Concordia and Kaiza) stating that no phasing will be pursued or proposed with this project thus eliminating the need for a tentative map amendment. ISSUES OF CONCERN Planning: 1. Based on the submitted proposal, it is hereby determined that this application constitutes a MAJOR Condominium Permit Amendment since the 10% change in certain lot coverage and building separation areas is exceeded on a lot by lot basis. The zoning ordinance defines a PUD lot (Section 21.04.256) as a designated portion of, or division of, land, air space or combination thereof. Therefore, the single lot of Planning Area B-1 as created by CT 94-01 (Lot 5) does not become the basis for the 10% rule. Planning established a policy (attached) which clarifies the lot by lot assessment of 10% changes for determining major vs. minor amendments. Two examples of specific elements of the proposal which exceed the lot by lot 10% criteria include: (1) the introduction of the single story floor plan which exceeds lot coverage and then also impacts building separation beyond 10%; and (2) typical clusters where the end units have a separation of 19 feet reduced to 10 feet. 2. Remove all references to Parcels A-D or address phasing via the tentative map amendment process. 3. In this proposed Condominium Permit amendment, plan, disclose and account for the construction and location of model units/sales areas if any are desired. 4. Renumber the proposed floor plan types #1-7 and clearly relate their proposed locations to the exhibits. 5. Remove all TV/media niche areas from the allowed fireplace projections as shown on the floorplans. Only fireplaces are allowed in these projection areas as shown on the approved project exhibits. 6. Remove all references and project numbers to a tentative map amendment on the project exhibits. Replace the title of "Tentative Map" with "Condominium Permit Amendment" on the cover sheet. 7. Given the definition of a PUD lot, please indicate all lot sizes for all 158 units as well as an average, minimum and maximum lot size. Also provide the approved lot sizes for comparison purposes. 8. Indicate the total square footage of the approved 158 unit project and the proposed 158 unit project. 9. Staff supports the basic proposal involved with the condo permit amendment. While some units have decreased building separation, others gain more building separation. In addition, architectural quality in general is improved from the existing approved project, the occurrence of 10x30 yards appears to be reduced and replaced with large yards (15x15 minimum) and more architectural interest and diversity is proposed. Engineering: 10. The applicant should be aware that the Parcel Map lines shown are for financial purposes only and do not constitute approval of Phase or development approvals. A note has been added to the condo permit cover sheet which indicates that multiple phases may be proposed. 11. Grade elevations and other design parameters of the approved tentative map appear to be the same or in substantial conformance with the proposed project. To assist Engineering staff with this level of review, indicate all spot elevations and noted dimensions on the proposed condo permit exhibits as found currently on the approved project/tentative map exhibits. 12. Use a Key Map that reflects the proposed project. Clarify the Watt/Concordia product type locations on the Key Map. Also provide an index of matchlines. PLANNING DEPARTMENT _ PROCbJURES, POLICIES AND INTERPRETATIONS INTERPRETATION NO: 0001 EFFECTIVE: 3L-2& ~ f ? SUBJECT: Planned Development Amendments SUPERSEDES: DESCRIPTION OF ISSUE: ((Include all relevant information i.e., reference, code section, etc.) Section 21.45.160 CMC establishes the procedure for processing amendments and the criteria for differentiating between major and minor amendments. In order to generate a consistent determination of whether a proposal should be processed as a major or a minor amendment, the following interpretation is provided: INTERPRETATION: Section 21.45.160 (a) (3), a proposal can be considered minor if it meets the following criteria: 1. It doesn't change densities (i.e., There is no addition of units. For a minor deletion of approved units, the planner must get Planning Director approval prior to determining the application complete.). 2. It doesn't change the boundary of the PUD. For minor changes to the boundaries of an approved planning area, the planner must get Planning Director approval prior to determining the application complete. 3. There's no addition of a new use (e.g., adding commercial to a residential PUD, attaching units to create multi-family units in an approved single-family PUD, vice versa for each example, etc.) 4. It doesn't rearrange uses (e.g., it doesn't exchange locations of single-family units with multi- family units) 5. It doesn't create changes of more than 10% and reductions can't be less than the minimums required for the following:* • yards-determined on a lot by lot basis • coverage-determined on a lot by lot basis • height-determined on a lot by lot basis • open space-may be determined on an aggregate basis • landscaping-may be determined on ah aggregate basis • Note, This section was intended to primarily deal with the potential negative impact of increases in the size of approved structure on light, air and open space. Therefore, reductions in structural sizes could be considered minor under certain circumstances because they could increase light, air and open space. For increases in yards, open space and landscaping as well as decreases in coverage and heights that exceed 10%, the Planning Director must determine that the proposal qualifies as a minor amendment prior to determining that the application is complete. When evaluating reductions in structural sizes, the key criteria will be whether the proposed units are compatible with the neighborhood and essentially target a similar buying market. Initiated By:Approved By: """ PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROCEUURES, POLICIES AND INTERPRETATIONS INTERPRETATION NO: 0001 EFFECTIVE: SUBJECT: Planned Development Amendments SUPERSEDES: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND/OR EXPLANATION: Note: The code does not address changes in design, architecture, addition or deletion of an approved model or floor plan, and square footage changes. Changes in only design and/or architecture are generally a substantial conformance issue which will be addressed in a separate interpretation. Changes in square footage can be dealt with indirectly under changes in yards, coverage and height. If the only proposal is to add or delete a model (i.e., one of several models), then it may be processed as a minor amendment. Initiated By:Approved By: