Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPUD 92-01B; Costa do Sol; Planned Unit Development - Non-Residential (PUD) (2)City of Carlsbad Planning Department PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION November 30, 1995 Christopher B. Young Greystone Homes, Inc. Suite 115 495 East Rincon Corona, CA 91719 RE: PUD 92-01 (B) - COSTA DO SOL MINOR AMENDMENT At the Planning Commission meeting of November 15, 1995, your application was considered. The Commission voted 6-0 (Nielsen absent) to APPROVE your request. Some decisions are final at Planning Commission, and others automatically go forward to City Council. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please call the Planning Department at (619) 438-1161. Sincerely, MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER Planning Director MJH:JG:kr Enclosed: Planning Commission Resolution No. 3832 2O75 Las Palmas Drive • Carlsbad, California 92OO9-1576 - (619)438-1161 Hofman Planning Associates Planning Project Management Fiscal Analysis October 10' 1995 OCT 1 0 1895 Jeff Gibson 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, Ca. 92009 RE: MINOR REVISION TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR COSTA DO SOL Dear Jeff: This letter accompanies Greystone Homes Inc's. application for a Planning Commission Determination to review the proposed changes to the architecture for Costa Do Sol and determine that they are a Minor Amendment to the previously approved Planned Unit Development for this project. We believe that the information below provides the justification to classify the proposed architectural revisions as a Minor Amendment to the previously approved Planned Development Permit for this project. Subsection 21.45.160(3) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (attached) discusses Minor Amendments and provides the criteria for a minor amendment. Greystone's requested amendment has been addressed below per these criteria: Change in Densities The proposed amendment to the architecture will not change the density of the project. Change in the Boundaries of the Project The proposed amendment to the architecture will not change the boundaries of the project. Addition of a New Use or Group of Uses not shown on the Original Plan The proposed amendment to the architecture will not involve an addition of a new use or group of uses. Rearrangement of Uses within the Development Shown on the Original Plan The proposed change to the architecture will not result in a rearrangement to uses shown on the original plan. 2386 Faraday Avenue <> Suite 120 ° Carlsbad <= CA 92008 « (619)438-1465 •> Fax: (619)438-2443 Changes of Greater than 10% in approved: Yards The attached review of the sizes of the previously approved yards vs the size of the proposed yards with the new product type shows that the average size of the front, rear and side yards will be increased by the proposed architectural revisions. The increase to the average size of the front and side yards will be within 10% of the average size of the previously approved yards. The average depth of the rear yards will be increased approximately five feet from an average of 25.39 feet to 30.20 feet. This represents an approximately 19% increase in the size of the rear yards. We believe that this will have an overall beneficial impact on the project and would not be noticeable to someone driving through the project. The increased rear yards would only be noticeable to the individual homeowners. Coverage The previously approved aggregate lot coverage was 221,168 square feet, the proposed aggregate lot coverage is 220,264 square feet. This represents an approximately 1 % reduction in the aggregate lot coverage. If the individual lot coverage of the previously approved individual floor plans is compared to the lot coverage of the proposed floor plans, three of the four units are within 10% of the previously approved models. Height The attached review of the building heights of the previously approved units and the proposed units shows that the previously approved units had an aggregate height of 22.05 feet, while the proposed units have an aggregate height of 23.28 feet. This is a 5.6% change between the aggregate height of the old vs the new units. Open Space Open Space will not be impacted by the proposed revision to the architecture. The slopes of the project will remain the same. The revision to the architecture will not impact the size or configuration of the common recreation area in the center of the project or the natural open space area in the northwest corner of the project. In regards to open space on individual lots, the comparison of yards shown above indicates that this change is also less than 10%. Landscaping The proposed changes to the architecture will result in a less than 10% change to the landscaping of the project. This finding can be made because the change to the amount of open space and lot coverage will be less than 10%, therefore the change to the landscaping would also be less than 10%. This comparison was completed per the text of Subsection 21.45.160(3) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. As shown by the discussion above and the attachments to this letter when the proposed revisions to the architecture are compared to the requirements of the ordinance for a Minor Amendment they meet the requirements to be classified as a Minor Amendment. We believe that this letter and attachments along with the elevations of the new units provide adequate justification to present the proposed architectural revisions to the Planning Commission as a Minor Amendment. As we have mentioned to you previously, Greystone Homes Inc. plans to start the grading of this project this week. It is their goal to start the construction of their models by the first week of November. However, Greystone realizes that the earliest that this item could be scheduled for a Planning Commission hearing would be November 15, this is a week behind their schedule for obtaining building permits for the models, but it would be acceptable. If you need any additional information or have any questions please feel free to contact me. Your cooperation in having this request scheduled for the November 15th Planning commission hearing will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Mike Howes cc Michael Holzmiller Don MacDougall attachments 21.45.160 an amendment to the corresponding tentative map or tentative parcel map; (2) If the planning commission considers the amendment minor in nature, the additional graphics, statement or other information may be approved by the planning commission resolution and made part of the original city council approval without the necessity of a public hearing; (3) A minor amendment shall not change the densities or the boundaries of the subject property, or involve an addition of a new use or group of uses not shown on the original permit, or the rearrange- ment of uses within the development, or changes of greater than ten percent in approved yards, coverage, height, open space or landscaping, provided no changes shall be less than required by this chapter. If the planning commission determines that the amendment is not minor or that a hearing is other- wise necessary, it shall set the matter for public hearing; (4) If a public hearing is required, the applicant shall submit a completed application with graphics, statements, or other information as may be required to support the proposed modification; (5) A fee as specified by city council resolution is required for all property within the portion of the planned development to be amended; (6) An application for an amendment of a planned development permit for which a hearing is required shall be processed, heard and determined in accordance with the provisions of this chapter applicable to the adoption of a planned development permit. (b) The city council may by motion initiate an amendment to a planned development permit Such amendment shall be processed, beard and deter- mined in accordance with the terms of this chapter applicable to the adoption of a planned development permit. (Ord. 1256 § 13 (part), 1982; Ord. 9631 § 2 (part), 1982) 21.45.170 Final man. Building permits for construction within the pro- posed planned development shall not be issued until a final subdivision man has been recorded for the project. A final map which deviates from the condi- tions imposed by the permit qhali not be approved. A maT-jTmtm of six model-home 'wiits may be con- structed in a complex if approved as a part of the planned development permit prior to recordation of the final map, provided that adequate provisions acceptable to the planning director and city attorney are made guaranteeing removal of such complex if the final map is not recorded. (Ord. 1256 § 7 (part), 1982; Ord. 9631 § 2 (part), 1982) 2L45.180 Final planned development plan. (a) Building permits for construction within the proposed planned development shall not be issued until the applicant has filed and secured approval of a final planned development plan; (b) The final planned development plan shall be submitted to the planning director prior to the expi- ration of the tentative map or tentative parcel map including within the period of time of any exten- sions on the map. The plan shall reflect all required revisions and refinements. The final planned devel- opment plan shall include: (1) Improvement plans for private streets, water, sewerage and drainage systems, walkways, fire hydrants, parking areas and storage areas. The plan shall include any off-site work necessary for proper access, or for the proper operation of water, sewer- age or drainage system; (2) A final grading plan; (3) Final elevation plans; (4) A final landscaping plan including methods of soil preparation, plant types, sizes and location; irrigation system plans showing location, dimensions and types; and (5) A plan for lighting of streets, driveways, parking areas and common recreation areas. (c) Where a planned development contains any land or improvements proposed to be held in com- mon ownership, the applicant shall submit a decla- ration of covenants, conditions and restrictions wilh the final planned development plan. Such declara- tion shall set forth provisions for maintenance of ail common areas, payment of taxes and all other privi- leges and responsibilities of the common ownership, 719 21.45.150 21.45.150 Cancellation of a planned development permit. A planned development permit may be cancelled at any time prior to the commencement of construc- tion. Cancellation may be initiated by the owner of the property covered by the permit by means of a written communication, signed by all interested parties, directed to the planning director in the office of the land use planning office. Said correspondence shall also include a request to cancel the tentative map affecting the property. The planning director shall inform the city council of all such communica- tions. The permit shall become void one hundred twenty days after receipt of the communication in the office of the land use planning office. (Ord. NS- 176 § 8 (part), 1991; Ord. 1256 §§ 7 (part) and 13 (pan), 1982; Ord. 9631 § 2 (part). 1982; Ord. 9459 § 25(part), 1976) 21.45.160 Amendments. (a) Amendments to a planned development per- mit may be initiated by the property owner or au- thorized agent as follows: (1) A request for an amendment shall be submit- ted to the land use planning office in written form and shall be accompanied by such additional graph- ics, statements, or other information as may be required to support the proposed amendment. When necessary, the amendment shall be accompanied bv (Carishia i-« COSTA DO SOL BUILDING HEIGHTS October 10, 1995 Previously Approved Plan A B C D E TOTAL Quantity 37 36 26 5 8 112 Height 22 22 22 20 24 Total Plan Height 814 792 572 100 192 2470 Proposed | Plan 1 2 3 4 TOTAL Quantity 27 27 27 31 112 Height 17 25 25.4 25.4 Total Plan Height 459 675 685.8 787.4 2607.2 AVERAGE HEIGHT (AGGREGATE)22.05 AVERAGE HEIGHT (AGGREGATE) 23.28 THE AGGREGATE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS A 5.6% DIFFERENCE FROM THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECT Hofman Planning Associates