The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZCA 52; REVISIONS TO RESIDENTIAL ZONES; Zone Code Amendment (ZCA)• TO: ( • SUBJECT: Proposed Revision of the City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance with regard to all the Residential Zone District. Dear Sir: The City of Carlsbad Planning Commission i~ proposing to submit a revision of the Residential Zone Districts of the City's Zoning Ordinance to the City Council. A copy of the proposed revision is attached. This office is forwarding copies of this revision to various organizations who develop under such ordinances to obtain their input. The Planning Commission proposes to discuss this revision at their regularly scheduled meetings of October 9 and 23, 1973, and to hold a public hearing on the matter on November 13, 1973. You are invited to attend these meetings or to submit written recommendations to the Planning Commission prior to any of these meetings. The Planning Commission meetings are held at 7:30 P.M. in the City Council Chambers at 1200 Elm Avenue,Carlsbad. If you have any questions regarding the attached materials, please con- tact the Planning Department of the City of Carlsbad. EWD:le En c 1 . ommission , , .. (' .' . • ENGINEERING FIRMS Rick Engineering Rancho Santa Fe Engineering E. Brian Smith Engineering Roy Klema Engineers 5620 F ria r s R oa d San Diego, CA 92110 509 Elm Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 POBox 783 Rancho Santa Fe, 92067 2656 State St. Carlsbad, CA 92008 415 Hale Ave. Escondido, CA 92025 Sam Gaines Jack Ra i nes Dick Doane Ha rry Truax Arland Wiberg South Bay Engineering 304 Tejon Pl. Steve Maloney DEVELOPERS Occidental Petroleum Land Co. Ka ma r Con s t r . La Costa Land Co. Pacesetter Homes, Inc. Marvin Kratter Dona I dB. Ay res Palos Verdes,Estates CA 90274 . 4201 Birch St. Ken Wassman Newport Beach, CA 92660 325 Elm Ave. Jerry Rombotis Carlsbad Costa Del Mar Road Irv Roston Rancho La Costa, CA 92008 4540 Campus Drive Terry Crowther Newport Beach, CA 92660 7100 Arenal Lane Carl sbad, CA D rawer A Huntington Beach, CA 92648 'i~ f .\' (213) 375-2556 FROM L. A. 772-1555 '. RAYMOND L;OUIGLEY DONALD'E_ DAWSON, CONSULTING ,ENGINEERS October 17,1973 SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION , 304 TE.JON PLACE PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CALIFORNIA 90274 E.W. Dominguez, Chairman' Carlsbad City Planning Commission 1200 [1m Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Subject: Proposed Revision of Zoning Ordinance Dear Mr. Dominguez: Thank you for your invitation to submit comments on the proposed revision to the residential zoning ordinance. Our comments are as follows: --I 1. Section 21.16.020.01 (P-C Planned Community) , , The sentence: "On lots having a minimum area of 50 acres" is unclear especia11y when considered with respect to the tttle which says "Lot area minimum less than 50 acresll~ 2. Section 21.16.020.02 Commercial uses are proposed to be' permitted in the planned community only when they are on an acreage greater than 49 acres. This seems to run counter to the philosophy that P-C zone needs to include small neighborhood shopping areas to serve the residents. Does this mean the shopping area must be 49 acres. After land is divided the piece for commercial may well be only 5 acres. Is commercial then prohibited? 3 • Sec t ion 21. 1 6 .070 . 0 1 f#' .. ~. ('i#l'<I'" This says that all lots must be 7500 square feet~ This defeats ·the P-C concept where a smaller fee lot might be surrounded by a large commonly owned recreation or community area. This forces the design into having "gerrymanderad land". In connection wi th the open space paragraphs how c'an one h.ave 7500 square foot, lots yet have half of the land public open space? r.:=:=--"":,_,:,,:,,,._ '::':,_,_::::-._--:-. ::"":,. _::-:-:.~o::::_:_:: __ ::_:. -:-,~-~::--:--,--"--,---,,,--=,'=----. --:-:---:'-=-,.::--=.--=-=,.-:;::-,,=---=---=-:::;.-:--=::-, =. =--.=--=--,=-=~= --------------------------.--.-----._--------, 'J. '., SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING ctaPORATION CIVIl. & CONSUI.TING ENGINEERS ., October-17,1973 . Re: Proposed Revision of Zoning Ordinance Page 2 4. Section 21.16.070.07 (Open Space Requirement) This section creates an impossibility. It requires th~t at 1 east hal f the 1 an d be 1 eve 1 (1 e sst h an 1 3 1 / 2% g r a de ). ,In much of southern Carlsbad about 60% of the land now has slope greater than 13 1/2%. Our measurements on one central 560 acre parcel,~near B~tiqtiitos lagoon showed the following: 0-5% slope 5-10% slope 10-15%,slope 15+ % slope 5.0% ,1 3. 1 % -31.1%, 50.8% This land is now zoned P-C. In the above calculations about 60.1% of the land is steeper than 13.5% slope. Thus this land would not be usabl~ for any"'P-C purpose. The 50% common open space requirement is therefore not only unrealistic but a physical impossibility unless Carlsbad is proposing mass grading and leveling of all hills. , Furthe r, we do no t un de rs tan d why common open space s h ou HI'-· b.e 1 eve 1 • The m,o s t be aut i f u 1 an:cr a est h e t i.c po r t ion s () f cit i e s are usually hills with views, vistas, and topographical variety; ~.g. Malibu, Laguna, La Jolla, Palos Verdes, and San Clemen,te. Further, it is not even possible to design a conventional residential subdivision in a P-C zone because of the 75% "common area requirement"; e~g. privately owned yards are not common open space. We, somehow, feel that the P-C zone which we were advised was designed to encourage originality, beauty and functi~nal utilization, especially of hillside land, is now being rigidized and its purpose and benefits have been lost. 5. Section 21.16.080.02, 21.16.080.03 These paragraphs stipulate one year review by the Planning commission of all P-C zonin~ and plans. This increases the planning Commission burdens. It further accelerates development or burdens the landowner to defend his inactivity. Accelerating deve,lopment w~u1d seem to be the opposite of what is desired. I . _____ . ____ .... _, ._.>L-<.~._~ _____ ~_" .. ~ .. __ .. __ ~ __ ... ___ ~ __________ . __ .. ~ ~== _.~. __ ... _~~_-:o--";:;--_---=-==-_~~,"--_~_ .. __ • ____ _ ,.' t i" '. .". SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING <AlPORATION CIVIL. & CONSUI.TING ENGINEERS October 17, 1973 R~: Proposed Revisi~n of Zoning Ordinance Page 3 We hope the above comments are helpful; we would be plea.sed to. discuss the matter in detail with the staff or before the P1anni~g Commission if so requested. You are to be commended for your' effort to improve the zoning ordinance and for ynur consultation with the community and public in so doing. Very truly yours, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATioN .. lJ "n Q ,r· I~~' c: /I.> ct.t. • ./d;5-.. Donald E. Dawson Vi ce Pres i den t DEDI11 cc: Director of Planning, City of Carsbad Director of Public Works, City of Carlsbad' Mayor Dunn, City of Carlsbad ..... __ .....---____ ~ ....... ....-_~ __ • ___ ~_,~..,.. ...... __ ~._ ... _~, r---, (213) 375-2556 FROM L..A.772-1555 • e· SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION , 304 TE..JON PLAC E PALOS VERDES ESTATES, CALIFORNIA 90274 RAYMON!;> L.Ot:lIGLEY DONALD--E._DAWSON CON5UL.TlNG EN'GI N EERS October 18, 1973 E.W. Dominguez, Chairman Carlsbad City Planning CQmmission 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Subject: Preliminary Draft of Proposed Development PDlicies (Second Dra{t) Dear Mr. Dominguez: Thank you for your letter of September 28, 191~ in which you suggested input from organizations having concerns relative to the -new policies. Y~u are to be congratul~ted for endeavoring to improve development in Carlsbad and for the democratic approach of soliciting opinion from affected parties. Our comments follow: - 1. -Par~graph IV A (page 2-3] Content of Development Plans. In_ general the proposed -t6nt~nts-of plans are s~tisfactory but it is not understobd by whom such plans must be prepared? Every individual homebuilder? Every apartment builder? Only subdivision builders? !t is also noted that specific standards are creepin-g into the statement as to what "pl ans contain". For example: 116 11 curb ll , "an adequate irrigation system".- 2. Paragraph IV B2 (page 14-161 Climate-Control Whereas we recognize that these par~graphs are suggestions, it would appear that in many-cases -the "basic rules" are really an imposition of -tast~ -~~d -~ref~re~ce and are not design or policy standards whicK a.city should impose .. e.g. (a) Do all citizens want summer sun protettion or l~ts of sun in winter. (b) Must all citizens orient their houses to North and South facing. (c) Must all homeowners have trees whether they want them or not. (See exhibit, page 15) I --; ----.--------------,---.-------~--=--",-,--__.-....... -..;.;.,--_____ ........... ___ ......... ~_ ................... _____ iIioiiooi __ IIIIioiiioi ...... _ ...... _ ..... _lllliiiliiiiiliillllllliillliiiiilililliliiiiiiill • SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING cePORATION CIVIL & C;:0NSULTING ENGINEERS October 18, 1973 Re: Preliminary D~aft of Proposed Development Policies, Page 2 (d) Do all people like the same type of outdoor ,livjng? Some people don't like outdoor living at all. Some ~e~ple choose apartment living to avoid in~olvement with outdoor p'rcb le'ms . 3. Paragraph IV 83 (page 16) Efficient use of Site T his par a 9 rap h s tat e s II U r ban 1 and i s too val u a b 1 e tow a s te, this way, (as open space) and all parts of th~ lot should be planned for efficient use". T his i sin 'v i ole n t con f 1 i c t wit h the r e c e n t 1 y pro p 0 s·e d z 0 n i n 9 ordinance which requires 66 2/3% open space, 75% of which must be c~mmon open space. -_I It would appear that there are a number of confl'icti~g ideologies which need to be resolved. 4. Par~praph IV 84 (page 16) , 'P~iV~cy Taste 'and preference appear to hav~ crept into this paragraph. "--a yard which is wide open to public view is a waste of land as far as outdoor living is concerned" expres'sesone point of view but one which is not universally shared. This ~ays that no front yard can De used for any outdoor livi~g purposes? 5. General comment ori Paragraph,IV Matters of personal taste and prefer~nce should not be imposed as fundamental policy. Many cities have ~rchitectural review bo~rds, but such boards are able to examin a project as an entity. 6. Par~graph V B (page 33) L~ndscaping Standards This paragraph excepts R~A, R~l and R-2 zones. But it does "not except P-C and RD-M which may well have si~gle family dWelli~gs or duplexes., Many of the landscaping standards proposed are odious and an invasion of privacy when applied to residential areas especially single family or duplex designs. r-----~-----,---~-'~-----.l'---.-----' --,----" -------:--:,-- , , ! . e SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION • CIVIl. & CONSUI.TING ENGINEERS October 18, 1973 R~: Preliminary Draft of Proposed Development Policies Page 3 For example: (a) Must every planter in a private home have a 6" concrete curb? A veritable concrete jungle. Must parks have 6" concrete curbs everywhere? (b) Must all landscaping over 10 feet in.depth have earth mounding? (c) Except in rare instances 15 gallon trees cannot be justified over 5 gallon. Nurserymen have advised us that a 15 gallon tree c.osts $65-85 in.stal1ed as compare,d with $21-28 for a 5 gallon size. This is three times as muct. They have further advised us that becausa of .the moving shock that little benefit in growth rate is accrued and mortality ·;s often higher with larger trees. ( d) . Sub par a 9 rap h 1 0 -C p age 3 4 ) s p. e c i fie s to the possibility of a performance bond -in· perpetuity (?) t hat 1 and s cap i n 9 will bern a i n t a i ned. 1st his ask i n·g a de ve lop e r to guarantee that each homeowner will water his lawn? (e) Paragraph 15 (page 35) specifies that. "all areas not covered by buildings or structures --shall be completely landscaped ~nd shall include a permanent irrigation system approved by the. Parks and Recreation Director and Planning Director". This in essence stipulates that th~re will be. no natural hillsides, no natural terrain, and that every ·square foo~ of unpaved area must have landscaping prrrvisions including permanent sprinklers. ·(f) Paragraph 17 (page 35) implies a contra- diction to paragraph 15 when it stipulates that lithe ap·proving authority may require landscaping in excess of the minimum area specified for a proposed development. -:..-.provided that the landscaping shall not exceed 25% of the non-building area~ " . ---. . (g) Paragraph l8(a) (paga 36) refers to "twelve gallon" trees. This is an extremely uncommon size, unknown to several nurserymen. See our comments on tree costs and mortality elsewhere. . . . 7. Paragraph IV C16 (page 39) Subdivision Standards . "l~. All facilities provided to adequately contrb1 drainage on subject property shall be maintained by the property own e r (5) i¥1. per pet u i t y • II r-------.,--.-::.-, --..,.------.'~-.,.------.-_ -, -, -~---------____ ~_. . J .•. _~_ . __ . ____ ~. ______ • A ••• ""--.................. ~ .... -.... -----. ._--"--..... -- CIVIL & CONSULTING ENGINEERS Oc·tober 18,. 1973 Re: Preliminary Draft of Proposed Development Policies P!ige 4 Does this mean that an individual homeowner must somehow assume responsibility for a 6011 storm drain or channel. Normally drainage facilities are accepted by governing agencies, such as County Flood Control, since such facilities affect many property owners both upstream and downstream. 8. Par!igraph IV 020 (page 40) 9. A one year period for expiration of a tentative is not an adequate time considering the increased detailed approvals and coastal commission requirements which apply. This does not appear to conform to the state Subdivision Map Act, paragraph 11554 which stipulates 18 months. Paragraph IV 0 Hillside Development , ~-\ The desire apparently exists to create.beauty in the hilliide areas but a' number of contradictions exist. C~l Parapgaph 16 C~age 47) requires standard concrete curbs and gutters. This' is hardly a special treatment for htllsides. C~l Paragraph 17 (page 47) talks of increasad traffic and speed, neither of which may be desirable. eel Paragraph 21 ("page 48) says "all slopes". should be changed to read lI a11 cut or filled s10.pes Thi.s It --.----. 10. General comment on the policies. Ihereas guiding policies for development are urgently needed, this dr~ft appears to contain a 1i.tt1e philosophy and much detail regulation, neither of which are pol·icy. Specific standards in this instance are' 'n'ot .policy' and 'prevent intelligent and beneficial municipal design. Policies should not contain details such as the rate of applyi~g grass seed, ' or how deep. to water trees or the curve radi us on harrow - h.il1side streets. These are techntcal detail·s to be administerad a sap pro p ria t e by i n tel 1 i g e n tad min i s t rat 0 r s, not 1 0 c k.e d i. n as law. They should be incorporated in such already excellent documents as the IIStandard Design Criteria for the 'Design of Public Works Inpr.ovements in:·the City of Carlsbad, OctoQer, 19701 ,". --_ ..... _; --~ t' "..; ----. ---- CIVIL & CONSULTING ENGINEERS October 18, 1973 Re: Preliminary D~aft of Proposed Development Policies Page 5 o the r de par t men t s co u 1 d 1 ike w i s e pre par e s u c h c r i t e ria han d-- books which are the starting basis of detail design. ' It is our b~lief that the goal is excellent and the effo~t is commendable but the document needs extensive editing to remove personal taste, individual preference and technical detail from a document purporting to be a general policy. You have our best wishes for-success in this very important undertaking. Very truly yours, SOUTH BAY ENGINEERING CORPORATION Donald E. Dawson Vice President DED/ll _ cc: Director of Planning, City of Carlsbad Director of Public Works, City of Carlsbad -~ay6r Dunn, City of Carlsbad -"' "!.,.,........li. • I S CITY PLANNING OEPARTMENT. SAN OIEGO, CALIF. 92101. MULTI-FAMILY ZONE FLOOR AREA RATIO REVISIONS During recent public hearings on rezoning actions under the,AB 1301 Implementation Progra~, numerous comments have been made concerning problems inherent in the existing multi-family Floor Area Ratio regulations. As a result of these comments, the Planning ~ommission directed the Department to re-evaluate the multi-family Floor Area Ratios and present proposals for possible revision.at a future workshop. That the proposed multi-family Floor Area Ratio regulations be distributed for publ ic comment and a second workshop be held to review the respons~. ANALYS I ~ The objective of the Department1s study of multi-family zone Floor Area Ratio' regulations was to relate the concept of Floor Area Ratios to an obtainable density, with reasonably sized dwelling units for each of the multi-fami;ly zones. In addition, an attempt was made to provide incentives for decreasing coverage as a trade-off for additional Floor Area Ratios. In its research, the Department reviewed recent trends in residential construc- tion and requests for Floor Area Ratio exemptions. It appears that when the origi.nal Floor Area Ra~io regulations were formulated, much of the tonstruction in the multi-family zone was for rental type apartments. At this time, it is evident -I -3/14/74 that an increasing number of units are being constructed as condominiums and, as such, generally tend to be larger in floor area than apartment units. Conseq~ently,. it has been apparent that the density of most of the zones cannot be achieved with -reasonably sized units under the existing Floor Area Ratio regLJI<;lt·ions. The following is a general ized description of the proposed ch~nges i.n the Floor Area Ratio regulations (a detailed description is attached): - 1. The Floor Area Ratio was increased in each of the mu 1 t i-fain i I Y zones. increase (excluding par~ing) is as follows: R-2 .40 to .50 R-2A .60 to .80 R-3 .90 to 1.20 R-3A 1. 20 to 1.80 R-4 1.90. to 2.40 R-4c 3 . .60 to 4.80 2. In addition to the increase in the basic Floor Area Ratio, a parking The Floor Area Ratio was added which would be approximately equivalent to an additional 50% of the basic Floor Area Ratio. (1, 2 and 3 story parking exemptions from the Floor Area Ratio under the existing regulations would be deleted). 3. In all zones that permit buildings exceeding a specified number of stories in height, an incremental Floor Area Ratio bonus of.05 per story is provided in conjunction with a sliding scale of reduced lot average. 4. Under the proposed revisions if the parking is placed ~nderground~ an equivalent portion of the area in the parking Floor Area RatiQ can be used for dwelling unit purposes. 5. If a building has Iisee-through" areas underneath, that portion that remains an open landscaped area can be added to the Floor Area Ratio of the building together with an equivalent area as a bonus. - 2 - 3/14/74 In summary, an attempt has been made to increase the permitted Floor Area Ratios in conjunction with encQu'raging interior and underground paT,king and providing incentives to reduce the bulk of the building through compliance with reduced coverage provisions. In order to accommodate the revisions, several proposed new definitions will be required. These' are currently being formulated and will be of a clarification nature and be presented to the Planning Commission at the next workshop. Existing (1 ) Zone F .A.R. Coverage (6) R-2 0.40 40-50% -(6 ) R-2A 0.60 40-50% e Floor Area Ratios/Mu1ti-Eami1y Residential Zones Proposed (2) (3) Ave. p.F.A./D.U. I D.U./F.A,R, (4) (5) Parkinq/F,A.R. TOTA~ Stories 1,200 sq. ft. 0.50 0.25 0.75 1-3 (7) 0.75 1-3 900 sq. ft. 0.80 0.40 1.20 1-3 (5) 1.25 4 1. 30 5 (7) ( 10) 1.35 6 (11) I .. ~ ,,. Maximum Coverage 40-50% 40-5010 40-50% 3210 26% 23% P. (2) ·Ave. G.F.A./D.U. (8) 1,500 sq. ft. (9) 2,250 sq. ft. (8 ) 1,200 sq. ft. (9) 2,025 sq. ft. 3/14/74 P. 4 Existin9. Proposed (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (2) Zone F.A.R. Coverage Ave. G.F,A,/O.U. O.U./F,A,R. Parkin9/F.A,R, TOTAL Stories Maximum Coverage Ave, G,F,A./O.U. (12) (6) (8) R-3 0.90 50-60% 900 sq, ft. 1. 20 0.60 1.80 1-4 50-60% 1,200 sq, ft. • (5), 1.85 5 37% (10) 1.90 6 32% 1.95 7 ·28% 2.00 8 25% 2.05 9 23% -(7) (9) 2.10 10 21% 2,100 sq. ft. (11) (6) 720 sq. ft, I (10) (8) R-3A 1.20 50-60'X, 1.80 0.90 2,70 1-6 50-60% 1,080 sq, 'ft. (5) 2,75 7 40% 2.80 8 35% 2.85 9 32% 2.90 10 2910 2,95 11 27% e (7) 1 ,800 sq. ft. (9) 3.00 12 25% (11 ) 3/14/74 I .,.Ji' F . "~ .-. -'-- Existing Proposed (I) (2) (3) (4) (5) Zone F.A.R. Coverage Ave. G.F.A./o.u. I O.U./F.A.R. Parking/F.A.R. XOTAL Stories (6 ) ( 10) R-4 1.90 50-60'Yo 760 sq. ft. 2.40 1.20 3.60 1-8 3.65 9 3.70 10 -3.75 II 3.80 12 3.85 13 (7) 3.90 14 (II) (6) (10) R';4c 3.50 50-60Y., 700 sq. ft. 4.80 2.40 7.20 1-15 (5) 7.25. 16 7.30 17 7.35 18 e 7.40 19 7.45 20 (7) 7.50 21 (Ii) '. .. ~ , P. 3 (2) Maximum Coverage Ave. G.F.A./o.u. 50-60% 41% 37'10 ' 35% 32% 30% 28% . 50-60% 46% 43% 41% 39% 38% 36% '." (8) 960 sq. ft. (9) 1,560 sq. ft. (8) 960 sq. ft • (9) 1,500 sq. ft. 3/14/74 >, - 'e P. 4 F.A.R. Footnotes (I) Excepted Parkinq/F.A.R. Present Provisions (a) The R-2 and R-2A zones presently except one enclosed parking level utilized for required off-street parking at up to 40% coverage for interior lots and 50% coverage for corner lots. . (b) The R-3 zone presently except one enclosed parking level utilized for required off-street parking at up to 50% coverage for interior lots and 60% coverage for corner lots. (c) The R-3A and R-4'zones presently except two e~closed parking levels utilized fo~ re~uired off-street parking at up to 50Ya coverage for interior lots and 6a~ coverage for corner lots. (d) The R-4C zone presently except three enclosed parking levels utilized for required off-street parking at up to 50% coverage for interior lots and 60% coverage for corner lots. (2) Based upon parcel sizes that permit a non-fractional number of units; i.e., 7.0 rather than 6.8 or 7.2 at maximum density. (3) F.A.R. used for determining G.F.A. for dwelling units, storage areas, recreation rooms, etc. may also be used for parking areas. (4) F.A.R. used for parking area only except when parking is placed underground. (5) Bonus F.A.R. of 0.05 increments may only be used when all 'parking is within the structure or underground. Application to parking (#4) or other areas, (#3) is discretionary on the part of the developer. (6) That provision in the yard regulations of all multi-family zones excluding parking levels (see #1) from the computations for the incremental required yards is also proposed for deletion. (7) Pertains to the maximum permitted F.A.R. with the exception of #11 below. 3/14/74 , ., .... " .. ~ '~.' - e . ' .. •• ,:-W :';<" .. -P. 5 (8) Assuming al1,exterior parking. (9) Assuming all parking is. placed underground. (See #4 above.) (10) On any premises having a bui lding of six stories or more; parking shall be prohibited in interior si'de y'ards. For the purposes of thi·s section, interior side yard shall be defined as that required interior yard and any other non-required side yard lying between the required front yard and the required rear yard and between the side yard property line and any building or buildings or the premises. (11) Where, at ground level, a portion of the "tower coverage" is given over to "see-through" I.andscaped open space, that portion ,shall not be counted as part of the permitted F.A.R. and may be used, together with an additional bonus amount of equivalent area, as additional gross floor area to the same structure. There shall be. a minimum of 10 feet between grade and the ceiling of the first floor. (Note: At present, any surface area at ground floor level lying beneath the main structural portion of a building but not enclosed by exterior walls is not calculated as part of the Floor Area Ratio.) (12) The proposed revisions to the R-3 ZOne are also proposed for the RV zone. For "guest units or rooms" in the RV zone, the average unit G.F.A. will be decreased by one-half, based upon two such units per 1,000 square feet of parcel area rather than one standard dwelling unit per 1,000 square ft. of parcel area. (See #8and #9 above.) 3/14/74 ., .;11,. ~ . - 'e ,0 " .., Selected Examples/F .A.R. Proposal, R-2 ZONE 12,000'sq. ft. parcel (4 D.U./maximum) 0.75 F.A.R. Selected (0.75 Actual/With Parking) (0.50 Without Parking) (0.25 Parking Only) 40% Coverage/4,800 sq. ft. 12,000 x 0.75 = 9,000 sq. ft. 9,000 + 4,800 = 1.875 stores @ 40% coverage 9,000 + 3 = 3,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. per story @ 25% coverage 9,000 + 2 = 4,500 sq. ft. G.F.A. per story @ 37.5% coverage P. 6 R-2A 15,000 sq. ft. parcel (16 D.U./maximum) 1.20 F.A.R. Selected (1.20 Actual/With Parking) (0.80 Without Parking) (0.40 Parking Only) 40% Maximum Co~erage/6,000 sq. ft. 15,000 x 1.20 = t8,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. 18,000 + 6,000 = 3.0 stories @ 40% coverage 18,000 + 3 = 6,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. per story @.40% coverage Stories F.A.R. 4 5 6 1.25 1.30 1.35 .;j, #4\ ~ Ave. Per Story 18,750 19,500 20,250 4,688 3,900 3,375 . -(~~),,:,\ :~~~y-:,,;, Coverage 31.3% (32) 26.0% (26) 22.5% (23) 3/14/74 1 -I I I 'e ;, B.:1 14,000 sq. ft. parcel (14 D.U./maximum) 1.80 F.A.R. Selected (1.80 Actual/With Parking) (1.20 Without Parking) (0.60 For Parking Only) 50"10 Maximum Coverage/7,000 sq. ft. 14,000 x 1.80 = 25,200 sq. ft. G.F.A. 25,200 + 7,000 = 3.6 stories @ 50% coverage 25,200 + 4 = 6,300 sq. ft. G.F.A. per story @ 45.0"10 coverage Stories ~ G.F.A. Ave. Per Stor:z: Coverage 5 1.85 25,900 5,185 37 .r1'10 (~7) 6 1.90 26,600 4,433 31. 7"10 (32) 7 1.95 27,300 3,900 27.9% (28) 8 2.00 28,000 3,500 25.0"10 (25) 9 2.05 28,700 3,189 22.8% (23) 10 2.10 29,400 2,940 21.0"10 (21) -R-3A 24,000 sq. ft. parcel (40 D.U./maximum) 2.70 F.A.R. Selected (2.70 Actual/With Parking) (1.80 Without Parking) (0.90 P<!rking Only) 50"10 Maximum Coverage/12,OOO sq. ft. 24,000 x 2.76 = 64,800 sq. ft. G.F.A. P. 7 64,800 + 12,000 = 5.4 Stories @ 50"10 coverage 64,800 +6 = 10,800 sq. ft. G.F.A. per story @ 45.0"10 coverage Stories .E:b..!i. G.F.A • Ave. Per Stor:z: Coverage 7 2.75 66,000 9,429 39.3% (40) 8 2.80 67,200. 8,400 35.0% (35) 9 2.85 68,400 7,600 31.7"10 (32) 10 2.90 69,600 6,960 29.0"10 (29) 11 2.95 70,800 6,436 26.8% (27) 12 3.00 72,000 6,000 25.0"10 (25) 3/14/74 # _,II "- R-4 40,000 sq. ft. parcel (100 D'.U./maximum) ,3.60 F.A.R. Selected (3.60 Actual/With Parking) (2.40 Without Parking) (1.20 Parking Only) 50% Maximum Cove'rage/20,OOO sq. ft. 40,000 x 3.60 = 144,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. 144,000 + 20,000 = 7.2 stories @ 50% Coverage 144,000 + 8 = 18,000 sq. ft. G.F.A. per story @ 45.0% coverage _ Stories F.A·1h !,!..F.A. Ave. Pe r Stor:i Coverage 9 3.65 146,000 16,222 40.6% (41) 10 3.70 148,000 14,800 37.0% (37) 11 3.75 150,000 13,636 34.1% (35) 12 3'.80 152,000. 12",667 31. 7% (32) \3 3.85 154',000 11,846 29.6% (30) 14 3.90 156,000 11,143 27.90 (28) - \' R-4C 7.20 F.A.R. Selected (7.20 Actual/With Parking) (4.80 Without Parking) (2.40 Parking Only) 64,000 sq. ft. par~el (320 D.U.lmaximum) 50Yo Maximum Cqverage = 32,000 sq. ft. 64,000 x 7.20 = 460,800 sq. ft. G.F.A. 460,800 + 32,000 = 14.4 stories @ 50% coverage P. 8 460,80p + 15 = 32,720 sq. ft. G.F.A. per story @ 48% coverage Stories .E..AJL.. G.F.A • Ave. Per Stor~ Coverage 16 7.25 464,000 29,000 45.3'% (46) 17 7.30 467,200 27,482 42.9% (43) 18 7.35 470,400 26,133 40.8% (41) 19 7.40 473,600 24,926 39.0% (39) 20 7.45 476,800 23,840 37.3% (38) 21 7.50 480,000 22,857 35.7% (36) 3/14/74 .... ~ ., -1 ~, . • PO I <,-S CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 92101 March 15, 1974 SUBJECT:' FLOOR AREA RATIOS IN THE SINGLE-FAMILY ZONES BACKGROUND The Zoning Division is experiencing repeated difficulties in some of the -j property owners' wish to construct two-story dwelling, I R-I zones as a result of !Jnits. Floor Area Ratios were 6riginal Iy includeq in the R-l zones in 1967. I They were established by using the average gross floor area in each single- I , fam·ily residence (by individual,R-l zone) completed in 1967. In May, 1973, the figures ~ere reviewed in light of present land costs and I development trends and were fouhd to be inappropriate. In several zones (R-I-IO, R-I-15, R-I-20, R-I-40) the existing Floor Area Ratios do not permit a lot to be developed to meet the maximum coverage provisions. RECOMMENDATION The Department recommends that the proposed revision of Floor Area Ratio regulations for the R-l zones to be distributed for public comment. ANALYSIS Several of the present Floor Area Ratios do not allow lots to be developed to meet maximum coverage. For example, in the R-I-IO zone the permitted lot coverage is 40 percent. However, the permitted Floor Area Ratio is only 0.35:; which means that on a 10,000 square-foot lot a one-story building cou'lI;1 only cover 35 percent of the lot, or 500 square feet less than permitted by the maximum coverage provision. -I - • • The problem can be solved by allowing the Floor Area Ratlos to exceed the maximum coverage by 50 percent to permit a pot~ntial ·of 1-1/2 stories for each ,new single-family residence, as illustrated in t.he following table: Maximum Coverage Percent of Lot Area Floor Area Rat~os Minimum Lot Area Zone in 59. Ft. Interior Lot Corner Lot Existing proposed ---.- R-1-5 5,000 40 50 .60 .60 R-1-6 6,000 40 40 .50 .60 R-1-8 8,000 .40 40 .40 .60 R':'1-10 10,000 40 40 .35 .60 R-1-15 15,000 40 40 .,30 .60 R-1-20 20,000 40 40· .25 •. 60 R-:-1-40 40,000 30 30 .20 .45. - 2 -3/15/74 OFFICE OF PLANNING DEPARTMENT 236·6450 • THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO CITY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING • 20~ C STREET. SAN DIEGO, CALIF.\92101 " -\ ,;,-if' 0::.::, .... '" , \~ ,_",'L ~ r~.,~ Q" ' i ~r \ ' March 21, 1974 , .\~ , R E eEl v:r:;' D'~ \~~f ~,\6\ MAR? 6 1974 Dea r Cit i zen: CII.'l .OE CARLSBAD flannJIlI DeRartment' Attached are copies of planning reports and' -- plroposed revisions to the floor a'rea rat,ios (F.A.R.s) in the multiple'family and single family zones. On March 20, 1974'the Planning Commission'<:<on~ . ducted a workshop on'the proposed revisions. Attne conclusion of that workshop session, the Commission directed that the proposed revisions be distributed fo r commen t • We would appreciate receiving your comments by April 12, 1974. A workshop meeting wi 11 be scheduled' as soon as possible after the public input has been received. You will wi 11 be n'otified of that me~ting. If you have any questions regarding the proposed revisions, please call Gene Lathrop or me at 236-6460. LO:sh Attachments (2) Sincerely, ~~/H' • -(L. ' Lee Okeson, AIPt;;..: Principal Planner' , 4\', >II _ \: ~\\0'" , ' -. Chapter 21 .24 RD-M RESIDENTIAL DENSITY-MULTIPLE ZONE Sections: 21.24.010 21.24.020 21.24.030 21.24.050 21.24.060 21.24.070 Intent and Purpose. Principal Uses & Structures Permitted Accessory Uses and Structures Permitted Use and Structures Permitted by a C.U.P. Subject to Approval of Planning Commission Uses and Structures Permitted by C.U.P. subject to Approval of Planning Commission Development Standards 21.24.010 Intent and Purpose The intent and purpose of the RD-M Zone District shall be: To provide for the establish- ment expansion of multiple family development utilizing the densitjes in the low -medium density through the high density areas delineated in the adopted General Plan. 21.24.020 Principal Uses and Structures Permitted: In the R D -M Z 0 neD i s t ric t, the f 01 low i n gus e san d s t r u c t u res" are only permitted as hereafter specifically provided and allowed, subject to the provisions of Chapter 21.40 and Chapter 21.44 governing development standards: (1) Dw~llings, group (2) Dwellings, multiple (3) DWellings, single family (4) Dwellings, single family townhouse (5) Dwellings, two family (6) Dwellings, two family townhouse 21.24.030 Accessory Uses and Structures Permitted: In the RD-M Zone District, the following accessory uses and structures are permitted: (1) Accessory structures, non-habitable including garages or carports, recreation rooms, greenhouses, bathouses or private stables, : Animals, domestic consisting of no more than three mammals over four months of age (not including horses) shall be kept in each dwelling unit. (2) Child care proved that a maximum of unrelated children shall not exceed three. (3) Home Occupations (4) Parking and Loading Facilities . . . ) ~ '} " , •• (2) Golf courses (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) , Greenhouses Health facilities, long term H 0 s pit a 1 s, fro n tin g 0 n rri aj 0 r Q r sec 0 n d ar y s t r e'? t s Nurseries, plant o.vernight campsites Par kin 9 fa c i 1 i tie s, 0 f f -sit e a: c c e s s Q r Y , and p u b,l i c ' Radio, television and,microwav~ st'ation's and tow.ers, . . -. . 21.24.0.70. Development Standards:, Subject'to 'the, general development standards of Chapter 21.40. and 21.44; no lot,s'hall,' be created or structures constructed in'the RD-M 'Zone District that does not conform to the following'specific ,standards: ' , " (1) Lot area minimum. The minimum req:uired ar,ea of ' the lot shall be as follows: ' '( 2) (3) (4) Densities Low -medium density Medium density Through high density ' ' " 7,50.0. sq.-feet 10.' ,0.0.0. sq. feet , , , Lot area per Dwelling. The minimum ldt area per ~ dwell ing unit shall, in .conforma,nce with 'the, den-' sities specified o'n the 'adopted Genera'l 'Plan, excepting hotels and motels, as'approved by~ a, C.U.P., shall have a maximum numter of ronms on the basis of,the general plan ~ommitment m~ltiplied ' by two. . ' Lot width mlnlmum. Every lot hereafter cr~~ted in the RD-M Zone District shall maintain'a minimum' lot width at the rear line of the requJred: front' yard setback of not more'than 60.' feet; Front Yard. Every lot in the RD-M Zone Di~~ric~ shall have a ,front yard of not less than' twehty' . " feet in depth with exce~tionS as fQllows~' ' May be reduced to fifteen feet pro~idin~ no parkihg faces upon th.e front yard and 1 andscapl'ng as appro'ved, by the Planning Department ,is installed within the front yard p~io~.to .. bu'l~tng. oc~~panGY~~'" (5) Side Yard. In the RD-M Zon'e Distric,t~ every rot shall have side yards as follows: 1. Interior lots sh.all have' side yards ,th'at have a width of five feet. , , . , -.~ ...... ~ .. " .... _---.. ~~~ .. ~.-,..~,,-~-, .. -.. ~ ... _-.- ,e. e" . . '.' 2. Corner lots shall have a ten foot side yard on the ~treet side and a five foot$~d~ yard adjacent to the interior lot line. The req~ired street side yard maybe reduced to five feetp'r.ovic\ing that no ~arking opens dire~tly onto the sideyard,and t the reduted side is fully landscaped and mai~tainad in a,manner acceptable to the Plarining Department. 3. One interior side yard may, be' reduc"ed to , ,,' ' zero feet provi,ded that the owners of both lots commo,n, ," ,,", to the proposed zero side yard agree with th~ toncept, ,'" ., a precise plan is approved by,the Planning Department, ' and the remaining side'yard shall be increasedtQ not, ' less than twenty-five percent of the total lot width. (6) Rear yard. In ,the RD-M Zone District', every lot shall :,: ,;:-,--;-':' j' ),,',;,hav'ei'a rear .:·far.~,.: of .not~,less than,. ten:'fee~, in d,epth. " . t . __ _ (7~ Separation of buildings. In addition to the re4uired, ,yards, buildings shall be set as follows: ' (8) (9) (1.0 ) Distance between habitable buildings ~:10 feet Dis tan c 'e bet wee n h a bit a b 1 e b u 11 din gs and accessory structures -10 feet ' Distance between accessory b~ildin~s and sida lot lines adjacent to a street - 5 feet, , Except for a ~ingle storyacoessorj butldi~g 'covering up to 50% of the required rear, no b~ilding shall be located in any of the:required yardi~ : ' , , . '- No yards shall be required for subterranean parking provided that the required yards are :~rovided for all structures above ground level and said yards " are fully landscaped and maintained in,a'manneracceptable, to the 'Planning Department. ' - He'ight Limits. In the RD-M Zone District, nO'.buildlng shall exceed a he i 9 h t 0 f thirty-five fee tun less a C ". U • P .. has been consider~d and approved by th~ Planning Depart- men t • All b u i1 din 9 s wit hap r 0 po sed he i g ht tn: ex ce s s of 35, feet shall have increased 'yards on the'b~~is of 1.5 feet of additional yard width f~r each eight faot of building height. . ,,. . ,,', . ' , ' lot coverage, in the RD-M Zone District,'~11 buildings shall not cover more than as follows: ' 1. Low-medium density 5~%', 2. Medium den~ity ,thro~g~ hJgh density' 60% Parking, off-street. In the RD-M Zone District,' , the required off-street par-king shall be proviQ'ed as required in Chapter 21.44. Required parking spaces ,shall only be'in tandems and located' in 'the, front yard on eX-' isting substandard frontage lots with,~ width,of farty~ five feet or less and provided that a minimum of one of the required parking spaces for each dwalling unit ...... _____________________________ ------c--- 1 .... • ~. ~ ... within the buildable area and a minimum of' a 20 foot front'yard-is prbvid~d. In ~ll other cases, required parking shall not ·be ill tan~:l:em. , . J,. I_ ," . (5) -.. . .. -•... Swimming pools with the following s~icificatfons: Pool shall b~ completely enclosed with a. fence, wall orb u i 1 din g • He i g h t 1 i mit s 0 f non - b u i 1 d i ~ g en t 10 sur e -' 4 1/2 to 6 feet. A c c e s s' s hall be by a s elf -1 a t chi n 9 gat e cap a b le.o· f b ai n 9 locked beyond the reach of small children. (6) Subdivision' sales complex 21.24.050 Use and Structures Permitted by a C.U.P. $ubJe'ct to Approval of Planning CommisSio~: Stibject to' the provlsl0ns of Chapter 21.50, the followi'ng uses .and structures shall only be permitted by aC.U.P. ap~roved by the·Planning· Commission: .(1 r: .. Boardi.i:!··g and Lodging houses . B u i 1 d fil'g s, pub 1 i c (2) (3) Child care centers, with more than three unrelated childre~ Colleges, Universities Hotels and motels with the ~ollowin~ ·specifications:. On a major 6r s~condary highwaj fr6ntage (4) Mobile Home Parks {5) Parks, public, play~rounds and beaches Recreation facilities, publiG and 'private (6) Rest homes (7) Schools, public and private' (8) Utility facilities . . . ~ ',' ' 2l.24'.060·Uses and Structures Permitted' by ·.C".U~·.P: ·SubJ.ect to· .. Approval of Planning Department: . Subject to'the : . provisions of Chapter 21.50; the followi~g uses'and structures shall.only be permitted by: a .C.U.P.approved bythe:·Plahning· Departmen.t. (1 ) Building height.in exces~ of 3~ feet Church~s,' t~mples and other places for ~elJgious. .' .. -:'services including appurtenant uses subject ·.to th.e: -.... f 1 1 . • . '. ... ~,.." .. -.. .', ,.., . '.. . . ,.; > • o oWl~g. i,'I. :,·.r·-.'lII:I"I:;,,·· "I.,·I.· . .i(·'··I· Lot·) area mi n i mum.,;~ one':-:ha 1 f~l::ac'r'e;':-f:! Loca t ion is norma 11 y res t'ri cted' to . fots. on· maj or ·.or 'secondary streets 'and restricted to: ·c·orner. lot·s 'wh'an . possibl.e. Clubs. and l.o~ges,· private n6n-pr01it '" -Circuses and carnivals country Clubs '--" '·~"-·~---------tMt--r---------~--... ~------·----~~ ZOI\TES PRESENT OIC=~_NCE ~POSED ORDINAW':;E Summary R"-P Zone 1." Intent and Purpose 2. Pri-D.cipal Uses 3. Accessory Uses 4. Prohibited Uses 5. Uses Permitted by CUP 6. Development Standards P -U and L -C Zones 21. 18 None Included None None Located oth~ section of c:~~ ance Included 21 • 18 Included Expcmded Appurten~~t or incidental Included Included Virtually u-"r1changed Other than L:'ent CL71d Purpose CL"r1d Restructuri."r1g these zones =em~;n the same. SECTIONS: - -CHAPTER 211.18 R-P RESIDENTIAL PRO~ESSIONAL ZONE 21.18.010 21.18.020 21.18.060 21.18.070 21.18.080 " i . j t,: ( Inte~t and Purpose Prin:ipal Uses and Structures Permitted Uses and Structures Permitted by C.U.P. approved by the Planning Department Development Standards Spec]al Conditions and Standards 21.18.010 Intent and Pu~oose: The intent and purpose of the R-P Zone District is to prov~de areas for the development of certain low intensity business a~d professional offices and re- lated uses in locations in conjunct:on with or adjacent to residential areas, and To provide transitional~ light traffic generating commercial areas between establishec residential areas and nearby commercial or industrial developmen:. 21~18.020 Principal Us~s and Structures Permitted: In an R-P Zone District the following ~ses and structures only are permitted as hereinafter specifical~y provided and allowed, subject to provisions of Chapters 21.40 and 21.44 governing development standards: \. " , , (1) Administrative and executive offices Accountants Attorneys (2) Clinic, medical ani dental including incidental laboratories and p~armacies. (3) Engineers, architects and planners (4) Insurance agencies and services Investment agencies and services including financial institut10ns Labor Union offices ; Libraries (5) Medical Offices an! Clinics including incidental Mortuaries (6) Offices, businesses, and professional, including incidental commerc~al facilities such as blueprint and photocopy shops, business machine sales, com- puter 'and data pro:essing centers, news stores, printing establishrrents or mimeographing services, tobacco shops. ' • • (7) Parking lots and parking buildings, Public buildings other than schools, Publishing house and newspaper, providing no printing is conducted on the premises. (8) Real estate and related services. (9) Schools, business, vocational and professional including art, barber, beauty, dance, drama 3 music and swimming. (10) (11 ) Subdivision sales complex Any uses permitted in the R-3 Zone District --~ Other similar uses which the Planning Commission may determine fall within the intent and purposes of this zone district, are of a comparable nature to the uses enumerated in this chapter, and will not be detrimental to property in the vicinity. 21.18.030 Accessory Uses and Uses Permitted: Accessory uses and buildings customarily appurtenant to a permitted use, such as incidental storage facilities, are permitted in the R-P Zone District. 21~18.040 Uses and Str~ctures Prohibited: The following uses are specifically prohibited in the R-P Zone District (1 )', Manufacturi ng (2) Commercial uses not .s-pecifically permitted in this Chapter (3) Signs, off-site (4) Utilities, public or private, major structures 21.18.60 Uses and Structures Permitted by C.U.P. approved by the Planning Department: (1) Circuses and carnivals C 1 u bs, p r i vat e (2) Health facilities, long term (3) Radio, television and microwave stations or towers 21.18.070 Development Standards: Subject to 'the general development standards of Chapter 21.40 and 21.44, no lot shall be created or structure constructed in the R-P Zone District that does not conform to the following specific standards: (1) Lot area minimum. In the R-P Zone District, the minimum area of all lots hereafter created shall be 7,500 square feet. r ' < I ...... ' (2) Lot area minimum pe~ dwelling. In the R-P Zone District, the minim~~ lot area per dwelling shall be eight hundred sq~are feet. Rooms used for sleeping purposes s~all be provided on the basis of at least one per each four hundred and fifty square feet of lot ~rea. However, the precise density is established by the General Plan. (3) Lot width minimum. Every lot hereafter created in the R-P Zone District shall maintain a minimum (4) (5) lot width at the re~r line of the required front yard on the basis of the following: Lot Area Less than 10,000 sq. ft. Less than 20 5 000 sq. ft. More than 20,000 sq. ft. Reguired Width 60 feet 75 feet 80 feet Front Yard. Every lot in the R-P Zone District shall have a front yard of not less than 20 feet in depth, except on key lots which side upon commercially or industrially zoned property, shall maintain a front yard of not less than 15 feet. Side Yard. On the R-P Zone District, every lot shall have $ide yards ~s follows: 1. Interior lots shall have side yards that have width equal to 10% of the lot width, provided that such side yard shall not be less than five feet in width and need not exceed ten feet in width. . 2. Corner lots shall have a side yard on the side lot line adjacen~ to another lot of a width within the limitations for an interior lot above and a side yard adjacent to the street of ten feet. (6) Rear Yard. In the R-P Zone District, every lot shall have a rear yard of a depth equal to 20% of the lot width provided that such rear ya~d need not exc~ed 20 feet. (7) Separation of BuildiGgs. In addition to the re- quired yards, buildi~gs shall be set as follows: Distance between hab;table buildings -ten feet Distance between habftable buildings and accessory structures -ten fee: Distance between accessory buildings and rear or side lot lines -0 feet Except for an acceSSJry building covering up to 50% of the required rear yard, no building shall be located in any of the requir=d yards. • • F . ., ~,., , .. ~ht Limits. In the R-P flit District, maximum building height shall be: (8) Habitable buildings -35 feet Accessory buildings ~ 18 feet the (9) Lot coverage. In the R-P Zone District, all buildings shall not cover more than 60% of the total lot area. (10) Parking, off-street. Parking shall be provided in the required front or side yards. (11) Signs. Reserved pending sign ordinance amendment. 21.20.080 Special Conditions and Standards: In addition to the established development standards, when applicable the following conditions shall be met: (1) Outside display and storage. No outdoor display of products or storage shall be permitted. (2) Residential Structure Conversion. All existing residential structures converted to commercial purposes shall be brought into conformance with all the requirements to this Title and Title 18. (3) Walls. Any lot proposed for non-residential development which adjoins a lot located in a residential zone district shall have a solid masonry wall of 6 feet in height installed along the common lot line, except in the front yard· area, said wall shall be reduced to 42H in height. (4) Enclosure of activities. All non-residential uses shall be located in a completely enclosed building. r--.......... -----:-----------------------~~~--------~-~ • -!Ir' .,1--_.,~ __ ~.-• DEVELOPMENT UNDER NEW P-C OPTION 1 10 acres -\ 28 lots 28 d. u. 's 2'.8 d.u. per acre density 1600 sq. ft. d.u. single story (12.85%) 7.82 ac. Total Open Space (78.15%). 5.8 ac. common open space (58%). One Public Street (9%) 7,500 sq. ft. lots average OPTION 2. 10 acres -28 lots ' 58 d.u's (duplexes) 5.8 d.u. per acre (l00%) 800 sq. ft. per d.u. single story (15.42%) 1600 sq. ft. per d.u. two story 7.56 ac. Total Open Space (75.6%) 5.8 ac. Common Ope~ Space (58%) One Public Street (9%) -OPTION 3. 10 acres 14 Lots 112 d.u.'s 11.2 d.u. per acre density (100%) 1,000 sq. ft. per d.u. -two story (19.-6%) 7.14 Aco Total Open Space (71.4%) 5.8 ac.' Commom Open Space (58%) One Public Street (9%) • . '~ ...... ,. 1 t ~ . . , .. ~; -~.~ ... --- I \, I i I i I j I 1 I .' I .... _.,.,( 07/7.7'/10;/, ,.O-e.::'..J../:. S;..°ACE. ..... , !' . '" ',~Bf..~'4c I I i I I 1 f i ,I ) ....... f ~I ~! ~! ~ ! .' : . _'I '_ --,_O'r-:.!4~~~:!'j-.-___ ,---- 1 I I ! p I, J I 1 I T l::iT ~:~ 1 0 P, (. . I<"l"A';L <o'J. 3, 1\ c... \l.~, D.?, f.>/...Jj >it;.. 1 \. ~ + "'.' ' ~, l' :. I ./~ol G'J, ' ! '", . :;,- Cl N , .::J , a:- ~, C ~ ~ S' I;:s, ..:... "CQ, \ -;'0 ,.' -.... ' " .".'- , .' . ·I--·~- i , f-l --.,----:-! '1 , <""-" .~ '.-' +-.,...,.-;-,-=-..:.--'-,:j, -~. _,:,,-,, : --.:;. ", .~.:. ~ ,', .,' ", .. ~ ........ ~ ...... ~. -.' : ... :.--...... :.:.. .. " , ~... • ... < ",: '. ': ... :..':-:.:..;;: , ::.-'::, ',~ ~ :~~ ~~=-~~~' ~~l, :: ~:.' ~.~ -j --~ ~ .. -.-, -.-:;-':""~ ;.:-':--, ~ . -;:--... - , ., ... ' ._ .. :.--. . ' ...... -..~-.. -~-~-.. • ~ ."~.w 4 ..... _ .... _ ... _ ..... ·n ... "', . ',- ~" , ' :' " ,