HomeMy WebLinkAboutCUP 196Bx1; Montessori School; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) (2)DATE : OCTOBER 23, 1985
APPLICP-TON SUBMITTAL DATE :
JUNE 5, 1985
STAFF REPORT
TO : PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: LAND USE PLANNING OFFICE
SUBJECT: CUP-l96(B) - PARKER - Request for an amendment to an existing conditional use permit to allow a residence at the Montessori School on the east side of Madison Street between Elm Avenue and Oak Avenue in the VR zone.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission APPROVE the Prior Compliance issued
by the Land Use Planning Manager and' ADOPT Resolution No. 2504,
DENYING CUP-l96(B) based on the findings contained therein.
11. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The applicants are requesting an amendment to an existing conditional use permit which approved the development of a
Montessori School at the above location. One of the conditions of this permit stipulated that no other uses would be permitted on the site without an amendment to the conditional use permit.
The applicants would now like to amend this permit to allow one of the structures to be used as a residence.
In March, 1985, CUP-l96(A) was approved to permit development of a Montessori School on two parcels with a combined area of -32 acres at the above location. One of the lots is occupied by an
older duplex, utilized for classroom purposes. The other parcel is occupied by a small single-family dwelling which was to be utilized as an office for the school. The applicants are
requesting that the structure, designated as office space for the
preschool, be allowed to be used as a residence by their
daughter. The required playground area for the school is located
behind the office and to the north side of the classroom
building. Four employee parking spaces are designated off the
alley at the rear portion of the lot.
111. ANALYSIS
Planning Issues
1) Can the four findings required for the granting of CUP-
196(A) still be made? These findings area as follows:
a) That the requested use is necessary or desirable for
the development of the community, is essentially in
harmony with the various elements and objectives of
the General Plan, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed use is to be located;
b) That the site for the intended use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use;
c) That all of the yards, setbacks, walls, fences,
landscaping, and other features necessary to ad just the requested use to existing or permitted future uses in the neighborhood will be provided and maintained ;
d) That the street system serving the proposed use is
adequate to properly handle all traffic generated by
the proposed use.
2) Will the proposed change have any adverse impacts on surrounding uses?
3) Are the two uses, preschool and single-family residence, compatible with each other?
Discussion
Staff'believes the four findings required for a conditional use
permit can still be made since the basic proposal remains the
same. As mentioned earlier, the previous approval specifically stated that other uses would not be permitted on the site unless
an amendment was approved. This is the sole reason for the
requested amendment. This condition was placed on the original
amendment because the Planning Commission and staff felt it was
important to review any change in the operation of a preschool.
Also, staff does not believe the use of the accessory structure as a residence will adversely impact surrounding properties
because the subject site has residences on either side already. However, for a number of reasons staff does not feel the two uses, residence and preschool, are compatible on one lot. These
reasons are as follows:
1 ) The proposed residence and required preschool playground are located on one lot which poses inherent problems
regarding noise and privacy.
2) It would be difficult to regulate the type of people
living in the residence and staff feels the close
proximity of the house to the preschool creates the potential for adverse impacts on the preschool.
3) The circular driveway used as a drop-off and pick-up
point for the preschool is located immediately in front of the residence which increases the potential for traffic conflicts.
-2-
4) The required parking for the residence backs out into
the front driveway.
5) The storage building for the school is located in the
residential area.
Staff is aware that the previous preschool operator used the
residence as a real estate office and rented the garage to a
building contractor. Neither of these uses were approved by the
City but based on this fact, the property owners believed there
would be no problem using the structure as a residence for their
daughter. The Planning Commission might want to consider the
option of permitting the daughter to live in the residence as a
caretaker for the preschool. Due to the enforcement problems
this presents, however, staff cannot support any use other than an office.
For the reasons stated above, staff does not believe the two uses, residence and preschool, are compatible on one lot and,
therefore, recommends denial of this amendment.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Land Use Planning Manager has determined that the
environmental effects of the project described above have already been considered in con junction with previously certified
environmental documents and, therefore, no additional environmental review will be required. A Notice of Prior
Environmental Compliance was issued October 5, 1985.
ATTACHMENTS
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2504
Background Data Sheet
Location Map
Disclosure Form Reduced Exhibit "X", dated October 1, 1985 Letter from Parkers, dated June 5, 1985 Environmental Document Exhibit "A", dated
AML : bn 10/1/85
-3-
CASE No: CUP-l96(B)
APPLICANT: PARKER
RnQuEsT AND m10N: ReqW st to allow a residence at a Montessori school on
the east side of Madison Street between Elm Avenue and Oak Avenue.
LBGAL DESCRIPTION: I& 7 and 8 in Block 48 of Carlsbad according to Map 535
filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, May 2, 1888.
J
APN: 203-351-4 and 5
Acres -96 Proposed &IO. of Lots/Units N/A
Land Use Designation W/O
Density Allowed N/A Density Proposed N/A
Existing Zone VR Proposed Zone N/A
Surrounding Zoning and Larad Use:
Zonina Land use
Site VR
North VR
Montessori School
SED
south VR
East VR
Duplex
SFD
Wst VR Vacant
PUBLIC FACILITIES
School District Carlsbad Wter Carlsbad Sewer Carlsbad EDU's N/A
Public Facilities Fee Agreement,
ENVIRo"F% IMPACT ASS-
_I Negative Declaration, issued
dated N/A (Prior agreement August 15, 1984)
- E.I.R. Certified, dated
Other , Prior Comp liane, dated October 5, 1985
L-3CATlON MAF
FRED PARKER
APPLICANT : * Mk 3f (individual,.partnership, joint venture, corpration, syndication) IC
Telephone Numbu
Name AGENT :
.. -
.. Business Address
Telephone Number .
MEMBERS:
Name *(individual, partner, joint . Erne Address
venture, coqoration, syndication)
Bisineos Address
Telephone Nmhr Telephone Xumber
:i=zIe Home Address
3isiness Address
TtSeghorxt NcslSer Telephone Xunber
(Attach more sheets if necessary)
I/We dsc1zQ uzder Penalty Of perjury that the infomation contained in this dis-
closure is true and correct and that it will remain true and correct and may be’
relied upon as being true and correct until snended.
Applicant
IO-
Y
1’ 9s
BIT X
1-85
I A
-
%4. 99/-40CO
Fred J. Parker 14088 Rue Monaco Del Mar, CA 92014