Loading...
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